Trump, Iran, and the ‘snapback’ countdown
US President Donald Trump says Iran is signaling a willingness to return to nuclear talks. In response, he is sending special envoy Steve Witcoff, marking the first formal US diplomatic outreach since Washington joined Israel in striking Iran’s underground nuclear facilities last month.
Tehran, long adept at delaying diplomacy while advancing its nuclear program, had assumed 2025 would play out like previous rounds, with Western leaders chasing negotiations while the Islamic regime crept closer to the nuclear threshold. But this time, the Islamic Republic misjudged. After it crossed multiple US red lines, Trump lost his patience and authorized US strikes that significantly damaged Iran’s underground nuclear infrastructure.
Now, facing setbacks, Iran is seeking negotiations, not as a change of course, but to buy time.
The real reason for Iran’s sudden willingness
Iran’s diplomatic pivot is not rooted in compromise – it’s about timing. The “snapback” mechanism under United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231, which enforces the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, is set to expire in October 2025.
Until then, any participant in the deal, regardless of JCPOA status, can unilaterally reimpose all pre-2015 UN sanctions if Iran is found in “significant noncompliance.” That threshold long been crossed.
In the days leading up to Israel’s June strikes, an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)report declared Iran in violation of its nuclear nonproliferation obligations. The report detailed serious breaches, including covert “nuclear detonation test” consistent with weapons research, enrichment well beyond 60%, and credible evidence of ongoing efforts to develop nuclear explosive devices.
Following the American and Israeli attacks, Iran responded by formally suspending cooperation with the IAEA, further obscuring international oversight.
Beyond uranium enrichment, the IAEA confirmed that Iran has significantly advanced its nuclear weapons infrastructure, including:
- Construction of new hardened
- Underground enrichment tunnels
- Production of uranium metal and
- Modeling of high explosives
- Integration of missile systems compatible with nuclear warhead delivery.
These developments signal not just non-compliance, but a steady march toward full nuclear weapons capability, especially after the June 2025 American and Israeli attacks.
China and Europe signal resistance
Meanwhile, China has reportedly begun bartering missile components in exchange for heavily discounted Iranian oil, according to leaked customs data cited by intelligence services. These transactions not only violate current US sanctions but also demonstrate Beijing’s determination to deepen its strategic partnership with Tehran, despite nonproliferation concerns.
At the same time, the European Union has initiated quiet diplomatic efforts urging the US to hold off on triggering snapback, citing Iran’s recent outreach and a desire to preserve diplomatic “momentum.” European envoys argue that snapback would“collapse the space for dialogue” and push Iran closer to Russia and China.
In reality, this European position repeats a familiar pattern: Respond to Iranian nuclear escalation with warnings against escalation by the West. One mildly encouraging note, according to The Guardian, is that the UK foreign secretary said European nations will act to impose “dramatic sanctions” on Iran if it does not end the uncertainty about its nuclear program, including by allowing the return of UN inspectors.
Can the US legally trigger snapback? Yes. While the US withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, it remains a named participant in UNSCR 2231, which codified the deal in international law. This means that Washington retains the legal right to trigger snapback.
Once invoked, all UN sanctions automatically return, unless the Security Council passes a resolution to continue sanctions relief, which the US can veto. The mechanism was designed to prevent precisely the kind of paralysis now being encouraged by Iran’s backers.
Opponents – mainly in Europe, Moscow, and Beijing – claim that US withdrawal from the JCPOA voids its snapback authority. But this is a political argument, not a legal one. The plain language of the resolution supports the US position.
What if other countries refuse to comply?
If China, Russia, or European firms ignore reinstated UN sanctions, the US still has a powerful tool: secondary sanctions. These allow the Treasury Department to penalize foreign companies involved in prohibited trade with Iran. Chinese firms exporting missile components or refining Iranian oil could face:
• Removal from the US financial system
• Loss of access to SWIFT and dollar clearing
• Asset freezes, blacklisting, and trade restrictions.
These consequences would have global implications. But for secondary sanctions to work, the US must be clear and consistent, particularly after Trump’s recent comment suggesting that Iran should be allowed to sell oil to China. That messaging must be corrected if snapback is to be taken seriously.
What would snapback sanctions restore?
Triggering snapback would reinstate comprehensive UN restrictions:
• Arms embargo on Iran
• Prohibition on ballistic missile development and transfers
• Strict limits on uranium enrichment
• Bans on nuclear research related to weapons
• International investment bans in Iran’s energy and defense sectors.
These measures would constrain Iran’s nuclear rebuilding, restrict its proxy support networks, and increase internal economic pressure, destabilizing the regime.
What comes next?
President Trump moment
He can leverage the current US-Israel momentum and the damning IAEA report to trigger snap-back and reassert American leadership.
Or he can allow the October deadline to expire, forfeiting the last available multilateral enforcement tool. That would leave future administrations with only bilateral sanctions or military options to constrain Iran’s nuclear program.
Snapback isn’t a perfect solution – but it remains a legal, available, and impactful tool. It sends a clear message of American resolve: Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapons program. At the same time, it buys critical time – time that could allow the Iranian people, someday,to bring an end to a regime defined by repression at home and aggression abroad.
Iran’s new diplomatic posture is no breakthrough; it’s a stalling tactic. The regime wants time, not peace. With the IAEA sounding alarms, China trading missiles for oil, and Europe stalled, snapback sanctions remain one of the last legal tools to halt Iran’s advance.
If President Trump acts decisively, he can restrain Iran and reassert US leadership. If he delays, the world may face a nuclear Iran with no peaceful options left.
This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post Daily Digital on July 11, 2025.
The writer is the director of the Middle East Political Information Network (MEPIN), senior security editor for The Jerusalem and a contributor to The Hill other policy publications.