TEHRAN – When Iranian President Masudo Pezeshkian was competing for presidency last year, his willingness to give the West another chance was the key point of his distinction from his conservative rival, Saeed Jalili. Perhaps the Iranians voted for Pezeshkian because they believed a diplomatic solution with the West was still possible.
However, Western actions over the past 12 months have made it increasingly difficult for Pezeshkian to defend this diplomatic approach and believe that Iranians can trust the West.
President Pezeschkian took office in August 2024. This was a time when Iran was striving to revive the 2015 nuclear deal, which he signed with P5+1 countries (US, UK, France, China, Russia and Germany) for the past four years.
The US dismantled the agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) by withdrawing from IT in 2018. Believing the deal is “weak,” President Trump launched a “maximum pressure” campaign to tighten economic sanctions to force Iran to negotiate a new deal. After Trump resigned, Iran tried to revive the deal under the Biden administration. The US abandoned consultations in 2022. They reportedly concluded that the riots that were convulsing Iran at the time would lead to the downfall of the Islamic Republic.
Following this long saga, despite serious skepticism within Iran’s political ranks, Pezeshkian began indirect talks with the second Trump administration in 2025. “The Americans have proven they can’t be trusted. Why are we talking to them again?” one Tehran MP argued when consultations via Oman were first announced in late March.
The Pezeschkian administration attended five rounds of indirect talks with Washington in April and May. At a public meeting with journalists, Iranian diplomats said their position was simple. As a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran should be permitted to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. However, if sanctions were lifted, they were willing to provide the West with assurance that they would not pursue nuclear weapons.
However, on June 13, the 12-day US-Israel bombing campaign was unleashed, just as Iran was preparing to attend sixth round talks after he confirmed his time and place with the Americans. The attack caused major damage to three Iranian nuclear sites and killed more than 1,000 Iranians.
War changed reality on many, especially on the earth of ordinary people. After he negotiated the JCPOA in Vienna, those who once celebrated Javad Zarif’s return to Tehran were bitter and hopeless whenever a new topic of deal arose. “How can you attack the country in the middle of negotiations?” asked the Tehranian man who fled the city with his family during the war. “Does negotiations even mean anything to the West? I don’t think so.”
However, even after the war, the Pezeschkian government kept the door open for dialogue. Last month, Foreign Minister Abbas Araguchi said that returning to consultations would be “fully dependent on national interests.” Many interpreted this as a signal that Iran remains open to assure the West. It ensured that it would not pursue nuclear weapons. The state has maintained it for over 20 years, as long as the right to uranium enrichment is respected.
However, instead of seizing this opportunity to return to diplomacy after a war that did not bring victory, West chose a different path. This week we decided to take another blow to negotiations by activating the so-called “snapback” mechanism.
The JCPOA’s “snapback” mechanism allows signatories to restore UN sanctions lifted under the transaction if Iran is not non-compliant. Europe has been threatening to trigger this mechanism since last year in response to the abandonment of some Iranian commitments. However, Iran claimed its obligations had been reduced after the US left the deal and Europe failed to mitigate the impact of US sanctions. Following the US-Israel attacks at Iran’s nuclear facilities, Europe’s move to use mechanisms against current impaired sites seemed even more ridiculous.
Nevertheless, France, Germany and the UK wrote to the UN Security Council on Thursday to announce their decision to reimpose UN sanctions. While the notice does not mean that sanctions will soon be restored (there are 30-day periods to halt or extend the process), the move has already sparked rage in Tehran, deepening the distrust of diplomatic involvement with the West, both in the Pezeshkian regime and the Iranian people.
In a call with EU foreign policy director Kaja Kallas, Araghchi condemned the decision. “You have taken an illegal and unfair step. This move deepens doubts about the true intentions of Europe and adds further obstacles to diplomatic efforts,” he added that Tehran will act proportionally on a measure that is “provocative and inappropriate.”
It remains unclear how Iran will respond to a potential recovery in UN sanctions. Reported options include withdrawing from the NPT or suspending all cooperation with the IAEA. However, one outcome is guaranteed. It will forever end Europe’s role in Iran’s nuclear program, even if new sanctions have little practical impact
“The activation of the snapback mechanism will not destroy Iran’s economy or its internal unity,” an Iranian source with knowledge of the issue told the Tehran Times. “But that would certainly destroy negotiations.”