Summary of the Article: “Snapback” Sanctions and the JCPOA
This article details the looming possibility of “snapback” sanctions being reimposed on Iran under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal). Here’s a breakdown of the key points:
What’s happening?
The E3 (France, Germany, and the UK) are preparing to trigger the “snapback” mechanism within the JCPOA, due to Iran’s continued breaches of the agreement. This would reinstate UN sanctions that were lifted under the deal.
Iran disputes the E3’s legal authority to trigger the mechanism, arguing they are in violation of the JCPOA by demanding Iran halt uranium enrichment. They claim this invalidates the E3’s status as parties to the deal.
Experts disagree with Iran’s argument. Richard Nephew, a former US negotiator, states the E3 remain parties to the deal as they didn’t withdraw like the US, and there’s no mechanism to remove a participant.
Iran has threatened retaliation, including possibly withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
last-ditch talks are scheduled for August 28th between Iranian and European diplomats.
What is “Snapback”?
It’s a unique mechanism where sanctions automatically return unless the UN Security Council (UNSC) actively votes to continue sanctions relief.
It’s designed to be difficult to block. A veto from a permanent UNSC member (US, China, Russia, France, UK) prevents the resolution to continue sanctions relief, thus triggering the snapback.
China and Russia are attempting to “stop” the process,but experts say this is not legally possible.they coudl argue the deal is defunct, but proving that is difficult.
What sanctions would return?
Six UN Security Council resolutions from 2006-2010 would be reinstated.
This includes:
A UN conventional arms embargo
Restrictions on ballistic missile activities
Asset freezes and travel bans
Other proliferation-related rules
What would be the impact?
Iran downplays the impact, but experts believe it would be meaningful.
The biggest impact would be on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. It would become illegal to trade in related materials and technologies.
While the US already has extensive sanctions, UN sanctions carry more weight due to their international legal backing.
the article notes a contradiction in Iran’s stance: claiming the sanctions won’t hurt much while simultaneously threatening retaliation.
In essence, the article highlights a serious escalation in tensions surrounding the JCPOA, with the potential for significant consequences for Iran’s economy and nuclear program. The outcome hinges on the UNSC and whether the E3 successfully trigger the snapback mechanism.
