The Snapback Sanctions That Terrify Tehran — and Why They May Be Triggered Soon

Speaking in Berlin Sunday night, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced his government’s intention to submit a formal request next week to activate the so-called snapback mechanism, a process that would reimpose all UN sanctions lifted under the original nuclear agreement. A senior French official later confirmed that Paris supports the move and considers it inevitable if Iran refuses to return to the negotiating table.

The response from Tehran was immediate. Ismail Baghaei, spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, warned that Iran would respond to any new sanctions. While his remarks were vague, they followed a familiar pattern of defiance that Western officials have come to expect: rhetorical threats paired with nuclear escalation or regional provocation.

At the heart of the crisis is the snapback clause, included in UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorsed the nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The clause allows any of the original signatories — the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia and China — to file a complaint of noncompliance against Iran. Once the complaint is submitted, a thirty day period begins. If no alternative resolution is passed, all prior UN sanctions are automatically reinstated.

Crucially, the process does not require a new Security Council vote to succeed. In fact, the only way to stop the snapback once triggered is for the Council to vote to prevent it — and any permanent member can veto that outcome. In practical terms, this means Iran cannot count on Russian or Chinese support to block the sanctions. The mechanism was designed to prevent diplomatic deadlock, and in this case, it may do exactly that.

The potential consequences for Iran are sweeping. If snapback sanctions are restored, Iran could again face a global arms embargo, severe financial restrictions, and bans on trade, oil exports and access to foreign investment. The Iranian economy, already battered by years of pressure, would likely face a new round of contraction, inflation and unrest.

Israeli officials, while refraining from public comment, are understood to support the move quietly and view it as a necessary step. In Jerusalem, senior figures believe the only way to deter the regime in Tehran is through sustained economic pressure backed by diplomatic unity. From their perspective, the time for persuasion has passed.

This is not the first time a snapback attempt has been made. In 2020, the Trump administration tried to trigger the mechanism after the United States had already withdrawn from the nuclear deal. European countries rejected the move, arguing that Washington had forfeited its legal standing. But today’s circumstances are different. Germany and France remain full parties to the agreement, and if they act now, their authority will be difficult to challenge.

Inside Iran, the regime appears determined to project strength. Yet its position is increasingly fragile. Enrichment levels are rising, inspections are being restricted, and rhetoric against the West is growing harsher. But Iran’s economy is deteriorating, its international credibility is weakening, and its political leadership is facing deepening domestic discontent.

According to German officials, the formal process is expected to begin early next week. That would initiate the thirty day countdown. If no resolution is adopted to block it — and there is no indication that one will be — the sanctions will return automatically by mid August.

As the clock begins to tick, Iran is confronting a choice it has long sought to avoid. It can return to compliance and reenter negotiations. Or it can continue on its current path and face a renewed campaign of economic isolation. For now, the regime is signaling defiance. But in the corridors of power in Berlin, Paris and beyond, patience is running out.