As Iran faces the looming threat of renewed United Nations sanctions, the nation finds itself at the center of a diplomatic maelstrom that could reshape its international standing and further strain an economy already battered by decades of punitive measures. With France, the United Kingdom, and Germany—collectively known as the E3—invoking the so-called "snapback" mechanism last week, Tehran is now at risk of seeing a comprehensive suite of UN sanctions reimposed as soon as October 18, 2025, should it be deemed in violation of its 2015 nuclear deal commitments. The stakes are high, and the reverberations are being felt far beyond Iran's borders.
According to reporting from France 24 and corroborated by statements from Iranian officials, the snapback mechanism would not simply reinforce existing economic restrictions. Instead, it threatens to plunge Iran into deeper diplomatic isolation, a prospect that Tehran fears could embolden its adversaries and legitimize new attacks. The potential sanctions package includes an arms embargo, a ban on ballistic missile development and testing, freezing of financial assets, travel restrictions on senior Iranian officials, and a blanket ban on uranium enrichment or processing. Nuclear, maritime, and aeronautical cooperation projects would be suspended, and certain exports would be halted.
Yet, as analysts and diplomats point out, Iran is already one of the most heavily sanctioned countries in the world. Many of these measures date back to the aftermath of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, with significant tightening following the United States' unilateral withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal in 2018 under President Donald Trump. Since then, Washington has reimposed sweeping sanctions targeting Iran’s oil, aerospace, and mining sectors, while also banning the use of US dollars in Iranian commercial transactions. The European Union, too, has maintained and expanded its own sanctions, including those responding to alleged human rights violations and, more recently, Iran’s support for Russia’s war in Ukraine and the crackdown on domestic protests. These EU sanctions, which include bans on importing Iranian oil and natural gas, arms sales, and a range of financial restrictions, have been extended until at least April 2026.
What sets the UN sanctions apart, experts note, is their universal reach. As David Rigoulet-Roze, editor-in-chief of Orients Stratégiques, explained to France 24, “UN sanctions have an international law dimension that US sanctions do not have.” This is particularly significant for Iran’s key trading partners, such as China and Russia, who have sometimes skirted US and European restrictions. For example, China has been the main buyer of Iranian oil, often taking elaborate steps to conceal the oil’s origin. But if UN sanctions are restored—even if they don’t explicitly include an oil embargo—Beijing could find itself in a far more precarious position, forced to choose between its energy needs and compliance with international law.
Despite the extensive sanctions already in place, the impact of renewed UN measures may be less economic than diplomatic. The International Crisis Group has observed that while the financial effect “could pale in comparison to the extensive unilateral sanctions imposed by the US,” the symbolism and scope of UN sanctions, coupled with Western-led enforcement, are far from trivial. These measures, the group notes, are not easily reversed, given the challenge of forging consensus among the Security Council’s permanent members. For Iran, the prospect of being placed in the “international dock” under international law is particularly worrisome, as it could “legitimize a new Israeli attack,” according to Thierry Coville of the International and Strategic Relations Institute (IRIS).
The Iranian public, meanwhile, is feeling the pressure acutely. The country’s economy, already reeling from high inflation, currency devaluation, and chronic infrastructure woes, faces further uncertainty. Since the E3’s snapback announcement, Iran’s currency has fallen to historic lows, with the rial trading at 1.06 million against the US dollar. Daily life for ordinary Iranians has become increasingly challenging, with widespread shortages of water and electricity compounding the sense of instability. The fragile ceasefire with Israel following the brutal 12-Day-War remains a source of deep anxiety, and the specter of additional sanctions only heightens these fears. “If UN sanctions are added to all of these elements, the situation will continue to degrade—a possibility that is triggering widespread concern,” Coville warned in his analysis.
Tehran, for its part, has not remained silent. On Thursday night, September 11, 2025, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi sharply criticized the E3 for referring the nuclear dispute to the UN Security Council. In a phone call with UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, Araghchi declared, “The E3’s threatening to re-impose the repealed UN Security Council resolutions against Iran and their ignoring of the military aggressions of the United States and the Zionist regime are irresponsible and unjustifiable.” He added that the European approach “will only complicate the issue.”
Araghchi also highlighted Iran’s efforts to maintain constructive dialogue with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), despite the fraught circumstances following Israeli and US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites in June. In Cairo, Iran and the IAEA signed a framework agreement on September 9, 2025, to facilitate agency access to Iranian nuclear facilities—a cooperation that had been suspended after the June attacks. However, Araghchi was clear that this agreement’s validity is conditional: “Validity of the Cairo agreement is conditional on no hostile action against Iran, including re-imposition of UN sanctions, otherwise Tehran would regard the document as terminated.”
Iran has also rejected the E3’s demands, which include the resumption of full inspections, zero enrichment, and renewed talks with the US. Meanwhile, China and Russia have tabled a draft resolution seeking to extend the exemption of Iran’s nuclear sanctions, underscoring the geopolitical complexity of the situation.
As the international community debates the fate of Iran’s nuclear program, the country’s internal and external challenges are mounting. The G7 Rapid Response Mechanism, together with associate members Australia and New Zealand, issued a joint statement on September 12, 2025, condemning Iran for what they described as an escalating campaign of transnational repression. The statement accused Iranian intelligence services of attempting to kill, kidnap, and harass political opponents overseas, citing a “disturbing and unacceptable pattern of transnational repression.” The G7 also warned of Iranian efforts to obtain and publish journalists’ personal information and actions designed to “divide societies and intimidate Jewish communities.”
These concerns are echoed by UN human rights experts, who last month condemned Iran’s campaign of repression against journalists, particularly those working for Iran International, in the wake of the 12-Day-War with Israel. Reports include surveillance, car break-ins, and threats of death and sexual violence against journalists and their families. In July, British lawmakers warned that Iran was engaged in assassination plots, physical attacks, intimidation, and digital harassment on UK soil.
With the Security Council set to decide the fate of UN sanctions by the end of September, Iran’s future hangs in the balance. The potential return of comprehensive UN sanctions, combined with mounting diplomatic isolation and domestic hardship, is fueling a sense of crisis in Tehran. As the world watches, the question remains: will the threat of renewed sanctions force a diplomatic breakthrough, or push Iran further into isolation and instability?
For now, both the Iranian leadership and its people are bracing for impact, hoping for a resolution that will ease tensions rather than ignite new conflict.
