SAEDNEWS: Former diplomat Ali Bahadori Jahromi has warned that U.S. military actions targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities could have triggered a catastrophic humanitarian crisis if Tehran had not implemented critical safeguards.
According to Saed News, Hamshahri conducted an interview with former diplomat Ali Bahadori Jahromi concerning the dangerous and direct involvement of the United States in Israel's 12-day war with Iran.
He stated that the direct military action by the U.S.—a country claiming to support global peace—constitutes a direct attack on the foundations of the existing international order. He added that U.S. aggression targeting Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities could have led to a crime against all humanity if the Islamic Republic had not taken precautionary measures to safeguard enriched uranium and other sensitive nuclear security elements.
Jahromi continued that, following these developments, former U.S. President Donald Trump officially declared the war to be a joint initiative between himself and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In retaliation, Iran launched a counterattack, invoking its right to self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. However, the Western bloc, instead of acknowledging Iran’s legal stance, chose to cooperate with Israel in intercepting missiles that were aimed at the occupying regime. Jahromi argued that such actions contradict key principles of international law and undermine the very spirit of the United Nations Charter, which was intended to prevent "power-seeking and warmongering under the mask of peace and law."
Sazandegi: In a commentary, Sazandegi analyzed remarks by the German foreign minister concerning the snapback mechanism and the diplomatic process with Iran. The article stated that the German foreign minister said that after negotiations, contact was made with Araghchi and it was agreed that both sides intended to continue the diplomatic path. Over recent days and weeks, the tone of the European troika’s foreign ministers has grown increasingly hardline, placing the snapback mechanism on the table as a tool to pressure Tehran.
The article emphasized that the Europeans now perceive the negotiations as being limited to Tehran and Washington, feeling excluded in the process. Consequently, while attempting to present themselves as influential and effective participants in any future talks, they remain subordinate to the United States. Their recourse to the snapback mechanism serves as an effort to regain leverage and compel Iran to return swiftly to the negotiating table.
Sobh-e-No: In an analysis, Sobh-e-No asserted that current circumstances indicate the snapback mechanism is already effectively in play. This view stems from the P5+1 countries’ failure to uphold commitments under the JCPOA and the United States’ withdrawal from the agreement in May 2018. The piece claimed that reimposing UN sanctions only damages the credibility of Western powers.
As a result, any serious dialogue concerning Iran's nuclear dossier should center on extending the snapback deadline. The analysis stated that Iran, having suffered betrayal during negotiations and attacks on its nuclear facilities, now approaches the issue from a new perspective. If Europe proceeds with activating the snapback mechanism, Iran’s most strategic response may involve adopting a posture of “nuclear ambiguity.” Having endured simultaneous confrontations with both the United States and Israel, along with enduring so-called “crippling” sanctions, Iran, the article argued, is no longer susceptible to retreat under threats of pressure or conflict. The piece concluded that the snapback process is already unfolding and that Iran has moved past the stage of intimidation by force.
Shargh: In a separate analysis, Shargh explored the potential regional and economic consequences of Iran’s possible withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). One of the less examined consequences, it said, is that such a move could trigger a regional nuclear arms race, particularly if nations such as Saudi Arabia or Turkey decide to pursue nuclear weapons. This scenario, according to the article, would jeopardize regional stability and heighten geopolitical tensions.
From an economic perspective, a withdrawal from the NPT and renewed sanctions under Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter would further strain Iran’s already fragile economy. Shargh noted that such a decision could have far-reaching consequences—either strengthening or isolating Iran’s position as an independent power on the global stage. The success of such a strategy would depend on Iran’s ability to manage international pressure, maintain support from its eastern allies, and avoid military confrontation. The article concluded by warning that without thorough examination, this action could escalate both regional and global crises.
