Rubio’s remarks appear to reference the “snapback mechanism.” This provision, embedded in the nuclear agreement (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA), remains in effect until October 17, 2025. If activated, it would lead to the
automatic reinstatement of all United Nations sanctions on Iran.
Speaking on Friday, April 18, after meeting with European leaders in Paris, Rubio said: “The Europeans need to decide, because I believe we all should soon expect a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stating not only that Iran has failed to honor its commitments but that it has come dangerously close to developing a nuclear weapon—closer than ever before.”
The U.S. Secretary of State added that the United States government seeks a peaceful resolution with Iran but will never tolerate the country acquiring a nuclear weapon.
In response, Iran has threatened to withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), posing a significant challenge to the unipolar international system aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. Such a move carries regional and global consequences that could reshape the balance of power in the Middle East.
This threat is intertwined with several developments, including the snapback mechanism outlined in the JCPOA and UN Security Council Resolution 2231, the recent negotiations between Iran and the United States, and the critical need for a balanced agreement that respects Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear technology while ensuring no nuclear weapons are developed.
In this article, we will explore the regional impact of Iran’s threat, the role of the snapback mechanism, the progress of negotiations, and the importance of reaching a just resolution.
The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): Background and significance
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapons (NPT), which entered into force in 1970 and has been joined by 191 countries, including Iran, is the cornerstone of global efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. The treaty pursues three primary objectives:
* Preventing the Spread of nuclear weapons: Non-nuclear-weapon states, such as Iran, commit to neither developing nor possessing nuclear weapons.
* Promoting Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy: Member states are granted the right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes under the supervision of the IAEA.
* Nuclear Disarmament: Nuclear-weapon states pledge to work progressively toward eliminating their arsenals.
The NPT contributes to regional and international stability by reducing the risks of a nuclear arms race and fostering trust among nations. For Iran, adherence to the treaty entails allowing inspections of its nuclear facilities to ensure compliance, in exchange for the right to benefit from peaceful nuclear cooperation.
Iran’s Threat to Withdraw from the NPT
In recent years, Iran has raised the possibility of withdrawing from the NPT as a reaction to escalating international pressures, including U.S. economic sanctions imposed after Washington’s withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 and concerns over the potential activation of the snapback mechanism. This threat reflects Iran’s frustration with the failure to realize the anticipated economic benefits of the nuclear deal and its perception that its right to peaceful nuclear energy is being obstructed by international restrictions.
Possible Reasons for the Threat:
* Unilateral Sanctions: The United States imposed severe sanctions on Iran following its withdrawal from the JCPOA, significantly impacting the Iranian economy.
* Regional Tensions: Iran faces pressure from countries such as the Zionist regime and Saudi Arabia, which oppose its nuclear program.
* International Pressure: Western nations’ attempts to impose additional conditions on Iran during negotiations.
Regional impact of Iran’s threat to withdraw
If Iran follows through on its threat to exit the NPT, it could trigger a cascade of dangerous developments in the Middle East, threatening regional stability. Below is a detailed analysis of the potential consequences:
1. A nuclear arms race in the region
* Saudi Arabia: As Iran’s primary regional rival, Saudi Arabia may seek to develop its own nuclear program, leveraging its financial resources and ties with Western nations.
* Turkey: As a country with regional ambitions, Turkey might perceive Iran’s withdrawal as a threat, prompting it to pursue nuclear capabilities to maintain the balance of power.
* Egypt: Although currently focused on economic development, Egypt might consider nuclear options if tensions escalate.
Such a race could lead to the proliferation of nuclear weapons in a region already plagued by instability.
2. The Zionist regime’s response
The Zionist regime, which possesses undeclared nuclear weapons and adheres to a policy of “nuclear ambiguity,” might abandon this stance in response to Iran’s withdrawal or undertake preemptive military actions, such as striking Iran’s nuclear facilities, heightening the risk of a regional war.
3. Heightened tensions with Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Countries
Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, particularly Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, view Iran as a strategic threat. Iran’s withdrawal from the NPT could amplify their concerns, pushing them to strengthen military alliances with the United States and the Zionist regime or pursue their own nuclear weapons.
4. Impact on overall stability
Escalating tensions could lead to military confrontations, the collapse of regional economies due to sanctions or conflicts, and the exacerbation of humanitarian crises in countries like Yemen, Syria, and Iraq, which already suffer from regional interventions.
The snapback mechanism and its implications
What is the snapback mechanism?
The snapback mechanism is a provision within the JCPOA and UN Security Council Resolution 2231 that allows any signatory to the agreement (such as the United States or European countries) to file a complaint with the Security Council if it believes Iran is violating its commitments.
If a complaint is lodged, previous UN sanctions on Iran would be automatically reinstated within 30 days unless the Security Council issues a resolution to prevent it.
Western countries, thanks to their veto power, can easily ensure the reinstatement of sanctions.
Its impact on Iran
If the snapback mechanism is triggered, Iran would face severe economic and trade sanctions, including bans on oil exports and asset freezes, which could exacerbate its domestic economic crisis.
This pressure might push Iran to withdraw from the NPT as a retaliatory measure against what it perceives as “injustice” in the international system.
Connection to the threat
Iran’s threat to exit the NPT is part of a strategy to pressure Western countries into avoiding the activation of the snapback mechanism or to compel them to offer concessions in negotiations.
Recent negotiations between Iran and the United States
Negotiations between Iran and the United States have seen varied developments, with each side striving to achieve its strategic objectives:
Positions of the parties
* United States: Seeks to revive the JCPOA with additional conditions, such as restricting Iran’s missile program and curbing its regional influence.
* Iran: Demands the complete lifting of sanctions, guarantees against future U.S. withdrawals, and recognition of its right to peaceful nuclear technology.
Latest developments
* Iran’s Foreign Ministry has stressed the need to address “inconsistencies” in the U.S. position, hinting at the possibility of changing the venue for indirect negotiations.
* U.S. President Donald Trump has given Iran a two-month ultimatum to accept a new agreement, threatening to bolster the U.S. military presence in the region if talks fail.
Challenges
* Distrust: The U.S.’s previous withdrawal from the JCPOA has undermined Iran’s confidence in Western commitments.
* Domestic front: Despite media exaggerations about internal pressures, domestic cohesion has emerged as a priority in its own right, regardless of negotiation outcomes. This is because the decision to engage in talks was made collectively by the entire system’s institutions, based on legal and consultative mechanisms.
With continued trust in the negotiating team, particularly its leader, recognized as the “Supreme Representative of the Islamic Republic,” Tehran demonstrates clear seriousness in pursuing an agreement that safeguards its supreme interests based on the principles of “dignity, expediency, and wisdom.”
* External interference: Opposition from the Zionist regime and Saudi Arabia to any concessions for Iran may complicate diplomatic efforts, though Trump appears to be pursuing a diplomatic approach with Iran thus far.
Progress achieved
Despite slow progress, the continuation of indirect talks signals a shared desire to avoid military escalation.
The importance of reaching a just agreement
Why is an agreement essential?
* Iran’s Right to Peaceful Nuclear Technology: As a signatory to the NPT, Iran has the right, under IAEA oversight, to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, such as electricity generation, scientific research, agriculture, food, medicine, space exploration, and water desalination.
* Preventing nuclear proliferation: Ensuring Iran does not develop nuclear weapons protects the region from a catastrophic arms race.
* Enhancing stability: An agreement can reduce artificial tensions created by the West and the Zionist regime between Iran and its neighbors, opening avenues for economic and technological cooperation.
Conditions for a just agreement
* Transparency: Iran’s commitment to inspections of its nuclear facilities to alleviate international concerns.
* Sanctions relief: Providing economic incentives to Iran in exchange for adhering to nuclear limits.
* Balance: Respecting Iran’s rights while ensuring the security of other nations.
Benefits
* Reducing the risks of regional war.
* Strengthening trust between Iran and the so-called international community.
* Supporting economic development in Iran and the region.
Conclusion
Should negotiations fail and JCPOA signatories resort to activating the snapback mechanism, Iran’s threat to withdraw from the NPT would mark a turning point that could jeopardize regional and international stability. The regional impact of this threat includes the potential for a nuclear arms race, heightened tensions with regional countries and the Zionist regime, and destabilization of security in the Middle East.
The snapback mechanism places Iran under undue pressure, while recent negotiations with the United States suggest the possibility of a resolution. Reaching a just agreement that guarantees Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear technology while preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons is the optimal path to avoid escalation. This requires intensive diplomatic efforts from all parties to balance rights and obligations.
Finally, according to a report by Axios, there is a divide within Trump’s administration during his second term regarding Iran policy: one camp, led by Vice President Vance, advocates for diplomacy and negotiations, while a hardline camp, including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, insists on a tougher stance.
Let dialogue be the true trigger that opens a broader horizon of possibilities, strengthens diplomacy’s role in building mutual trust, prevents withdrawal, and lays the foundation for an agreement that encompasses all parties.
By Najah Mohammed Ali
NOURNEWS