“We are working with China and Russia to stop it,” Araghchi told national television late on Thursday. “If this does not work and they apply it, we have tools to respond. We will discuss them in due course.”
The snapback mechanism, embedded in the 2015 nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), allows the automatic reinstatement of UN Security Council sanctions that had been lifted under the agreement. Iran, however, disputes the legitimacy of the European powers’ efforts to trigger the provision.
Araghchi explained that although the term “snapback” does not explicitly appear in the JCPOA text, its mechanism is clearly established and has even been invoked by Iran itself in response to the US withdrawal from the deal in 2018.
“We used the snapback mechanism ourselves,” Araghchi said. “When the United States left the JCPOA and reimposed sanctions unilaterally, we started to reduce our commitments in phases, eventually returning to pre-agreement conditions.”
Iran’s return to higher levels of uranium enrichment — including to 20% and then 60% enrichment — was enabled by preserving its nuclear infrastructure intact during the JCPOA years.
“The infrastructure was maintained so that when we decided to restart enrichment at higher levels, it took less than 24 hours,” he noted.
Regarding the European powers’ attempt to reimpose sanctions, Araghchi emphasized that their legal authority to trigger snapback is highly questionable under international law.
He said the European countries’ recent statements demanding “zero enrichment” violate the terms of the JCPOA, effectively amounting to a rejection of the deal.
“When they say ‘zero enrichment,’ they no longer accept the JCPOA framework and therefore cannot claim the rights granted to members of the deal, including the right to activate snapback,” Araghchi said.
In a detailed letter to the UN Security Council, Iran has laid out its position, asserting that Britain, France, and Germany are no longer legitimate JCPOA participants with the authority to reinstate sanctions through snapback. This position is supported by China and Russia, who share Tehran’s view on the matter
China and Russia’s backing plays a critical role in Iran’s diplomatic efforts to counter the snapback threat. Both countries are permanent members of the UN Security Council and have veto power over resolutions, including those related to Iran’s nuclear program.
“We have been holding repeated technical and legal discussions with China and Russia over the years about the snapback mechanism,” Araghchi said. “Their support is crucial in this ongoing legal and political dispute with the European countries.”
He added that while the Security Council will ultimately decide on the snapback’s validity, Iran’s alliance with China and Russia strengthens its position to resist the move.
The UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorses the JCPOA and contains the snapback clause, is set to expire on October 18, 2025. Iran has warned that beyond this date, the snapback mechanism will no longer be available.
“Europeans have until the end of October to act,” Araghchi noted. “After that, the mechanism expires automatically.”
Economically, Araghchi downplayed fears about the potential impact of reinstated UN sanctions. He stressed that current unilateral US sanctions are far more broader than the Security Council measures that would return via snapback.
“People have exaggerated the impact of snapback,” he said. “UN sanctions do not include oil or banking embargoes; they mostly target specific individuals and companies. The US sanctions in place today are much broader.”
However, he acknowledged that the reimposition of the arms embargo and the possible reclassification of Iran as a “threat to international peace and security” under Chapter VII of the UN Charter would have political and legal consequences.
“That would be a significant damage and we must counter it,” he said. “We are prepared and have several tools to respond if snapback is triggered.”
Iran also urged the international community to recognize that it has upheld its nuclear commitments as far as possible under increasingly difficult circumstances and that Europe’s rigid stance undermines the deal’s framework.
“Europe’s insistence on zero enrichment is not compatible with the JCPOA, which allows enrichment up to 3.67 percent,” Araghchi pointed out. “This shows they do not accept the deal, which should disqualify them from enforcing its snapback provisions.”
Looking ahead, Tehran remains determined to use all diplomatic and legal channels to prevent the return of sanctions, leveraging its close ties with China and Russia to maintain support in the Security Council.
“This dispute will continue in the coming weeks,” Araghchi said. “We hope for a diplomatic solution, but if snapback happens, we have prepared responses that will be announced in due time.”
'Cooperation with IAEA requires new framework'
Araghchi also said the relationship between Tehran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has fundamentally changed following attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, and future cooperation must be based on a new framework.
“The reality is that after this attack, changes have occurred. Our nuclear facilities were attacked and suffered damage. The IAEA first needs to tell us what the inspection protocol is for a bombed nuclear site. There is no such protocol because there is no precedent," he said.
“When you want to inspect a bombed facility, you have to clarify who will clear the rubble, how to approach the site, and what the threats are. There are dangers from unexploded ordnance and radiation, and the IAEA must have a protocol for that.”
Araghchi also referred to a recent law passed by Iran’s parliament, which makes future cooperation and inspections conditional on approval by the Supreme National Security Council.
“Before granting access and renewed inspections, a new framework for cooperation between us and the IAEA must be clarified. We need to negotiate and design this framework. It will be based on parliamentary law and field realities. If we reach an understanding, cooperation will start accordingly.”
This understanding must take into account the parliamentary law, national security issues, and the approval of the Supreme National Security Council and the Council must grant permission, he said.
Araghchi mentioned a recent visit by an IAEA delegation, noting that an entire day was dedicated to joint negotiations with the Foreign Ministry and the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, during which initial ideas were exchanged.
"Our representatives have communicated these ideas to the IAEA for review, and negotiations are ongoing. I believe it was not a bad start, but it will take time to reach an agreement.”
Press TV