This week, after the European powers initiated the process to reimpose sanctions, a senior Iranian official called the move an “existential threat.”

Dudi Kogan, Israel Hayom via JNS

More than two months have passed since the 12-day war erupted between Iran and Israel. Nuclear negotiations remain stalled after Iranian intransigence led to deadlock and ultimately to the military confrontation.

On Thursday, the European powers (the E3 countries) intensified the pressure, beginning the process of restoring major U.N. sanctions on Iran that were lifted under the 2015 nuclear deal.

The sanctions could return in 30 days.

A senior Iranian official called this move an “existential threat,” and given the current situation, the possibility of renewed military confrontation cannot be ruled out.

The foreign ministers of France, Germany and Britain had reiterated that they were prepared to activate the “snapback mechanism” by the end of the month—but left Iran the option to delay the deadline if it seriously returned to the negotiating table.

“We made clear that if Iran is not prepared to reach a diplomatic solution by the end of August, or doesn’t utilize the opportunity for extension, we will be prepared to activate the snapback mechanism,” they wrote in a letter sent to the U.N. secretary-general.

The ministers added that they had offered Iran a limited extension, enabling “direct negotiations between the U.S. and Iran,” but the offer remained unanswered by Tehran.

What is this “snapback” mechanism? It’s a mechanism inserted into the 2015 nuclear deal, allowing signatories to reimpose U.N. Security Council sanctions placed on Iran between 2006 and 2010.

The mechanism operates through the Security Council, but permanent committee members cannot block it with a veto— leaving Iran exposed, without the possibility of diplomatic cover from China or Russia.

Since the U.S. withdrew from the agreement, only France, Germany or Britain could activate it. But the timeline was short: the ability to do so expires on Oct. 18, 2025—10 years after the nuclear deal’s Adoption Day.

If the snapback mechanism is activated, all Security Council sanctions imposed on Iran from 2006 to 2010 would be reinstated.

These include a complete arms embargo, total prohibition on uranium enrichment, a ban on ballistic missile tests capable of carrying nuclear warheads, and a prohibition on transferring technology and technical assistance in the missile field.

Additionally, asset freezes and international flight bans would be imposed on Iranian officials and entities. Countries would also be authorized to search Iran’s cargo planes and national shipping company vessels to detect prohibited goods.

“Existential threat”—that’s what a senior Iranian official called the possibility of activating the snapback mechanism by the powers. “The Islamic Republic has no economic or military capacity to withstand the return of U.N. sanctions.

“This will cause the people to demonstrate again, and this time it might be different,” he told the U.K.’s Telegraph newspaper from Tehran.

“Sanctions are more harmful than war,” added another senior Iranian official. “The Supreme National Security Council asked the presidency to find a path to talks before it’s too late.”

President Masoud Pezeshkian gave public expression to Iranian helplessness on two issues: water and nuclear talks. In remarks to Iranian media executives on Aug. 6 in which he addressed the need to return to negotiations on the nuclear issue, Pezeshkian said, “You want to fight? Well, you fought, but they hit us. If we rebuild the nuclear facilities, they’re going to attack them again. What can we do if we don’t enter negotiations?”

Regarding the water crisis, he said, “We have no water, we have no water under our feet, and we have no water behind our dams, so tell me what will we do?”

Strategic distress

Danny Citrinowicz, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University and a former head of the Iran branch in the IDF Intelligence Research Division, said that Iran is in strategic distress, which could also lead to renewed confrontation.

“They’re really in strategic distress—it’s a combination of many things: the war, the continuing confrontation with Israel, and, on the other hand, also other issues like the water crisis and American involvement in the agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. It’s a sequence of complex blows for which they really have no solution.”

Regarding the likelihood of another confrontation, Citrinowicz said: “There’s a high probability they’ll attack if they assess Israel is about to attack them, but not to ‘punish [Israel] for the previous round.’

“The understanding there is they cannot repeat the events of the beginning of the previous war, it’s simply too great a danger to the regime,” he said.

Originally published by Israel Hayom.