The state-run daily Farhikhtegan, in an article about escalating tensions, warned of the possibility of military conflict and the formation of global consensus against Iran’s regime if the European countries potentially activate the so-called “snapback mechanism.”
On Monday, August 3, Farhikhtegan reported that if sanctions are reimposed, measures such as a ban on arms sales to Iran, freezing assets linked to sanctioned entities such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Iran Shipping Lines, mandatory inspections of suspicious cargo, and a ban on financial and insurance services in the nuclear field will be on the international community’s agenda.
European Troika: We Are Ready to Activate the Snapback Mechanism
The newspaper wrote: “Oil sales are not directly subject to UN Security Council sanctions. Although the scope of UN sanctions is narrower compared to the unilateral sanctions imposed by the U.S. and Europe, they carry greater psychological and diplomatic weight due to their multilateral nature. Moreover, because of the interpretability of the sanctions language, member states can implement these sanctions strictly or leniently based on their political will.”
According to Farhikhtegan, Russia’s refusal to deliver the S-300 missile system to the Iranian regime and Pakistan’s decision to halt the gas pipeline project from Iran to Pakistan and India—known as the “Peace Pipeline”—are examples of how political will shapes countries’ implementation of sanctions.
In recent days, speculation has intensified regarding the European troika’s decision to activate the snapback mechanism.
Officials of the Iranian regime, during a meeting in Istanbul with representatives from Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, threatened that if the snapback mechanism is activated, Tehran will withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Return of sanctions and “political legitimization of military actions”
Farhikhtegan continued its report by warning that the activation of the snapback mechanism, in addition to its economic and trade consequences, could lead to the formation of a “global consensus against Iran.” It wrote: “The return of UN Security Council resolutions imposes two risks on Iran: the economic consequences of the reinstated sanctions on Iran’s economy, and the groundwork for securitization and potential military action against Iran.”
Iran’s Regime Threatens to Cause Insecurity in the Region If Snapback Sanctions Are Enacted
The newspaper added: “Countries can use the sanctioning environment created by the UN Security Council to politically legitimize military actions, even if those actions lack legal legitimacy.”
According to this report, Tehran’s potential move to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in response to the European troika could escalate tensions both regionally and globally, and increase the likelihood of military confrontation.
Alaeddin Boroujerdi, a member of the National Security Commission in the Iranian regime’s parliament, stated on July 29 that during the Istanbul negotiations, European countries sought a six-month extension before using the trigger mechanism, but Iran’s regime rejected the proposal.
The “vital” role of China and the UAE
Farhikhtegan also addressed the “vital” role of China and the United Arab Emirates as Iran’s economic partners, warning that the return of international sanctions could affect Tehran’s economic ties with Beijing and Abu Dhabi.
The newspaper wrote: “In recent years, the UAE has become Iran’s main hub for financial and goods exchange, under tacit U.S. approval. A large portion of Iran’s imports of essential goods comes through the UAE. If sanctions return, the United States may invoke UN Security Council resolutions to demand that the UAE limit its economic ties with Iran.”
The newspaper added: “China is Iran’s main oil buyer and the second-largest exporter of goods to Iran. Past sanction experiences show that Beijing has taken a dual-track approach… What is certain is that China will not openly defend non-compliance with UN sanctions, but it may implement them in a limited and interpretive manner. Therefore, a gradual reduction in trade relations (rather than a complete cut-off) is likely.”
On August 3, The Jerusalem Post, citing Chinese researchers, reported that the “Ayatollah’s regime” in Iran is on the brink of collapse and no longer aligns with China’s strategic interests in the region.
Al-Hadath TV reported that the United States, as part of its efforts to achieve its objectives regarding Iran’s nuclear program, is consulting with China to stop it from continuing oil purchases from Iran.
According to the report, Beijing, in response to Washington’s pressure, has stated it would be willing to halt imports from Tehran—if it can receive oil at a lower price elsewhere.
