Snapback Mechanism: Europe’s Trump Card or a Costly Decision for Iran?

Reports from Russian sources indicate that the meeting between Vladimir Putin, President of Russia, and Masoud Pezeshkian, President of Iran, on the sidelines of the SCO summit, was far from ceremonial. Behind this encounter lies a clear strategic message: Moscow and Beijing aim to create a new international bloc by synergizing their efforts, with the objective of reducing Western influence in Asia and the Middle East. For Tehran, the SCO summit represented a rare opportunity to redefine its regional and global position amid mounting European pressure over its nuclear program.

According to a senior Russian official and several diplomats close to the Kremlin, speaking to Arm News, Moscow views Iran as a cornerstone in countering the isolation strategy that the European Union is pursuing in the nuclear domain. Today, Russian and Chinese agendas converge on a critical point: providing practical support to nations under Western sanctions and creating new avenues for their international engagement.

In this context, the sources highlighted that Vladimir Putin emphasized during his meeting with Masoud Pezeshkian the importance of integrating Tehran into infrastructure projects under the Belt and Road Initiative, a bold plan that could open economic opportunities for Iran while serving as a strategic tool against increasing European pressure. From Moscow and Beijing’s perspective, Iran is not merely a regional partner but an integral component of the broader Eurasian roadmap. Active participation in the Belt and Road Initiative positions Tehran as a key link connecting East and West.

SCO Support for Iran Against External Pressure

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced on Wednesday that SCO member states have explicitly supported Tehran against external pressures. He emphasized that intensive consultations with Russia and China to counter European efforts to activate the “snapback” mechanism are ongoing.

Araghchi also responded to recent rumors regarding Iran’s potential suspension or withdrawal from the SCO, categorically rejecting such speculations. He stated: “There is no clause regarding the cancellation of Iran’s membership in this organization; on the contrary, SCO members have repeatedly expressed explicit support for Tehran against external pressures.” These statements come amid intensifying European pressure on Iran’s nuclear dossier, with Moscow and Beijing coordinating closely with Tehran to prevent diplomatic isolation.

Addressing Iran’s engagement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Araghchi indicated that the Agency itself recognizes “the need for a renewed framework of cooperation in line with recent developments.” He emphasized that any additional steps in cooperation will only commence upon finalizing this framework, adding: “Discussions to define the nature of this cooperation and its future form are ongoing.”

IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi has warned, however, that current negotiations cannot be prolonged for months, emphasizing to Reuters that Iran must reach an agreement on nuclear inspections “as soon as possible.” Grossi noted that Iran has accelerated production of 60% enriched uranium, heightening Western sensitivity, and stressed that delays in resuming inspections could undermine transparency regarding Iran’s nuclear activities.

Grossi further noted that since Israel’s first attacks on enrichment sites on June 13, the Agency has received no new information regarding Iran’s enriched uranium stockpiles. He also cited a domestic legal hurdle, where Iranian legislation conditioning cooperation with the Agency on Supreme National Security Council approval complicates reaching an agreement.

UNSC Resolution 2231 Extension on the Table

Following the European troika’s move to activate the snapback mechanism, Russia and China submitted a draft resolution to the UN Security Council proposing a six-month extension of Resolution 2231. According to the Wall Street Journal, the revised draft includes significant modifications, notably the removal of a clause that would have effectively blocked the snapback mechanism.

Reuters reported, citing a Russian diplomat, that Moscow’s goal in presenting this draft is to prevent the European troika from reinstating sanctions on Tehran. Lawrence Norman of the Wall Street Journal noted that the new draft calls for immediate resumption of nuclear talks by all original JCPOA participants, including the U.S., Russia, China, and the three European countries, yet it does not stipulate conditions for Iran in exchange for the six-month extension—an element directly at odds with Washington and the European troika’s stance. China has expressed support for Russia’s draft and intends to co-submit it to the Security Council, though the exact timeline for a vote remains uncertain. Norman concluded: “Ultimately, it depends on whether Russia genuinely seeks a viable resolution or merely wants to appear as though it tried to prevent a crisis while the U.S. and European troika opposed it.”

Europe on the Verge of a Strategic Deadlock with Iran

French analysts argue that the European troika’s move to reinstate UN sanctions reflects a dangerous diplomatic deadlock with wide-ranging consequences, potentially affecting not only Tehran but the broader Middle East. Dr. Jean-Pierre Millan, a researcher at the Paris Institute for International and Strategic Affairs, stated: “What we are witnessing today is a complete collapse of negotiation pathways. Failed dialogue reflects the absence of mutual trust between Tehran and European capitals.” He warned that the return of sanctions effectively closes Europe’s door to any short-term compromise, potentially pushing Iran to accelerate its nuclear program or deepen cooperation with Moscow and Beijing.

Senior international affairs expert Rahman Ghahremanpour noted that the Ukraine war and Europe’s support for Israel against Iran have intensified the existing mistrust. Highlighting recent negotiations, he said: “The Istanbul and Geneva talks showed that disagreements and distrust between the parties remain extensive. The Ukraine war and Israeli attacks on Iran have exacerbated this mistrust.”

Ghahremanpour also commented on the extension of Resolution 2231, explaining that Iran welcomes it due to concerns over sanctions, but remains cautious in its dealings with Europe. “From Tehran’s perspective, Europe is attempting coercion and is unwilling to make concessions. There is also a belief within Iran that Europe cannot act effectively without U.S. approval, and any promises ultimately require Washington’s endorsement,” he added. He stressed that achieving an agreement under these circumstances is difficult. Although Europe insists that activating the snapback mechanism will bring Iran to the negotiation table, even European officials acknowledge that this will not be straightforward.

Snapback Mechanism: Pressure Lever or Political Gamble?

Elie Granmaire, senior international affairs expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, asserted: “Activation of the snapback mechanism by France, Germany, and the UK represents a turning point in Iran’s nuclear crisis. This action will restore UN sanctions as well as independent European sanctions, serving both as a lever of pressure and a political gamble.” He explained that Europe aims to force Tehran and Washington into renewed dialogue, but the lack of effective diplomatic backing could escalate the process from crisis management to direct confrontation.

Granmaire emphasized: “Previous European efforts to encourage a broader agreement between Iran and the U.S. failed due to unrealistic European conditions regarding access and transparency, internal divisions within Iranian authorities, and Trump’s unwillingness to engage diplomatically. Israeli and U.S. attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities have further sidelined dialogue. Under these conditions, some factions in Tehran perceive the snapback mechanism not as a threat, but as a last leverage tool from Europe.”

He concluded: “Europe now faces a difficult choice: either allow full activation of the snapback mechanism and confront its multilayered consequences—from potential Iranian retaliation to increased international tensions—or turn this mechanism into a diplomatic opportunity to return to negotiations.”