SAEDNEWS: A senior Iranian diplomat has slammed European efforts to revive UN sanctions via the JCPOA’s snapback mechanism as “utter audacity,” warning that such a move would destroy diplomatic space, prompt legally sanctioned countermeasures, and potentially trigger Iran’s withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
According to Saed News, Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs, issued a sharp warning Sunday against any European attempt to activate the UN snapback mechanism—describing it as a “hostile breach” of the 2015 nuclear accord (JCPOA) that would be met with proportionate legal and strategic reprisals.
Speaking in a nationally televised interview, Gharibabadi denounced the United Kingdom, France, and Germany—the E3—for even contemplating such a step, calling it “utter audacity” in light of their failure to uphold their own JCPOA obligations after the U.S. withdrawal in 2018. “They accuse Iran of noncompliance, yet they themselves broke every single promise,” he said.
He reiterated that activating the snapback process would nullify all diplomatic dialogue: “If they resort to snapback, they remove themselves from all diplomatic interaction with Iran.” Tehran, he noted, views the mechanism as an illegitimate coercive tool meant to revive sanctions Iran has already “neutralized through economic resilience.”
Tehran is reportedly preparing for such a move, which would be interpreted as a direct threat to its supreme national interests. In that case, Iran may invoke Article X of the NPT—permitting withdrawal if those interests are jeopardized—potentially suspending IAEA oversight and resuming uranium enrichment far beyond JCPOA limits.
Gharibabadi also criticized European bias during the recent Israeli aggression against Iran, noting that the E3’s open support for Tel Aviv had “deeply undermined their credibility.”
On the military front, the deputy minister described Israel’s 12-day offensive as a strategic miscalculation. “Their objective was more than nuclear facilities—it was regime change,” he said. While Iran suffered civilian losses, he emphasized the damage inflicted on Israeli infrastructure and morale. “We used minimal missiles. The Zionist regime, which once overwhelmed Arab states in six days, couldn’t defeat us in twelve,” he remarked.
He added that Iran withheld many advanced capabilities and still forced Israel into a ceasefire—brokered via the United States—which Tehran never requested. “Our resolve to defend was unwavering. We never sought a ceasefire. They did.”
On Washington’s backchannel messages seeking renewed negotiations, Gharibabadi revealed that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi received overtures from the U.S. early in the conflict. However, Tehran firmly rejected them. “Diplomacy under bombardment is meaningless,” he said, reaffirming Iran’s position that talks require sovereignty—not submission.
“Even in wartime, diplomacy is essential,” Gharibabadi conceded. “But it must be on sovereign terms. Our position was clear—resistance precedes negotiation.”
