On September 28, 2025, Iran found itself at a crossroads as United Nations sanctions snapped back into place over its nuclear program, reigniting tensions with the West and sending ripples of anxiety through the Middle East. The sanctions, which had been dormant thanks to the 2015 nuclear agreement, returned with full force—freezing Iranian assets overseas, halting arms deals, and penalizing any development of Iran’s ballistic missile program. The move, as reported by the Associated Press, came through a mechanism known as “snapback,” specifically designed to be veto-proof and to take effect 30 days after parties to the deal declared Iran was not in compliance.
The trigger for these renewed sanctions was pulled by France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, who, on August 28, 2025, formally notified the United Nations Security Council that Iran was violating the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal. Their decision followed mounting concerns over Iran’s restriction of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring and a deadlock in negotiations with the United States. Efforts by Iranian officials—including President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi—alongside diplomatic pushes from China and Russia, failed to avert the sanctions during a tense week at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.
For ordinary Iranians, the return of sanctions has already made life harder. The country’s currency, the rial, plunged to a record low of 1.1 million to the dollar, driving up the prices of everyday staples like meat and rice. "The government must negotiate. This is a world of business," lamented Mohsen Rahaei, a 49-year-old resident of Tehran, in comments to the Associated Press. “One must get along with everyone, with all countries. Until when we want to fight? We won’t gain anything.”
But the government’s response was anything but conciliatory. Iran’s Parliament, after briefly denouncing the sanctions, entered a closed-door session to consider its options. Lawmaker Ismail Kowsari told the Young Journalists Club, an outlet affiliated with Iranian state television, that Parliament would discuss the possibility of withdrawing from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)—a move that would echo the path taken by North Korea before it developed nuclear weapons. Kowsari clarified, however, that such a withdrawal “does not mean that” Iran would immediately pursue nuclear arms, emphasizing that any shift toward weaponization would require the explicit approval of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf issued a stern warning: “We announce that if any country wants to take action against Iran based on these illegal resolutions, it will face serious reciprocal action from Iran, and the three European countries that are the initiators of this illegal action will also face our reaction,” he declared, as reported by the state-run IRNA news agency. The chamber, however, offered no formal announcement on what actions, if any, had been decided behind closed doors.
Military leaders also weighed in, with both Iran’s regular armed forces and its powerful Revolutionary Guard issuing statements on September 28, 2025, signaling that their forces were ready for any possible attack. These warnings came amid public fears of renewed conflict with Israel or even the United States, particularly as missile sites struck during a 12-day war in June were reportedly being rebuilt.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry, for its part, welcomed the reimposed sanctions, stating, “The goal is clear: prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. The world must use every tool to achieve this goal.” The European nations responsible for triggering the snapback said they had “continuously made every effort to avoid triggering snapback,” but insisted that Iran “has not authorized IAEA inspectors to regain access to Iran’s nuclear sites, nor has it produced and transmitted to the IAEA a report accounting for its stockpile of high-enriched uranium.” They also pointed out that Iran is enriching uranium at a level that no other peaceful nuclear program does.
According to the IAEA, Iran maintains a stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% purity—a technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%—and enough, in principle, to make several atomic bombs if it chose to rush toward weaponization. While Iran insists its nuclear program is peaceful, both the West and the IAEA have long maintained that Tehran had an organized weapons program up until 2003.
Iranian officials have pushed back hard against the narrative of isolation and escalation. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, speaking to Iranian state TV before the sanctions were imposed, said, “It will have some damages, some losses for us. However, they have presented it in their own media as something far greater and much bigger than it actually is, and they have tried to create a monster to frighten the Iranian people and then force our government and our foreign policy to give concessions and pay tribute in this regard.” In New York, Araghchi further argued that the sanctions would not deter the determination of the Iranian people to defend their rights, but he acknowledged, “The question is, what it impacts is diplomacy. It closed the way of diplomacy.”
Meanwhile, the United States, under Secretary of State Marco Rubio, praised the European nations for what he called “an act of decisive global leadership” and reiterated that “diplomacy is still an option.” Rubio added, “For that to happen, Iran must accept direct talks.” Yet, prospects for such talks remain dim. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who holds ultimate authority over the country’s foreign and nuclear policy, described diplomacy with the United States as a “sheer dead end” during the week of the U.N. General Assembly, effectively boxing in the efforts of Iran’s diplomats.
Tehran has repeatedly argued that the snapback mechanism should not have been available to the European powers, citing the United States’ unilateral withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear accord in 2018 under President Donald Trump. Since that withdrawal, Iran has steadily reduced its compliance with the deal, especially after the June 2025 conflict with Israel, which saw both U.S. and Israeli forces bomb key Iranian nuclear sites. Inspections by the IAEA have been severely restricted, leaving the international community in the dark about the true extent of Iran’s nuclear activities.
The snapback sanctions may also have broader geopolitical implications. China remains a major buyer of Iranian crude oil, and Russia has relied on Iranian drones in its war on Ukraine. Both countries tried, unsuccessfully, to prevent the sanctions from being reimposed. For now, the European powers’ decision to act before the snapback power’s expiration on October 18 means that Iran faces renewed isolation and economic hardship—at least until another diplomatic breakthrough, or confrontation, occurs.
Amid these high-stakes maneuvers, the Iranian public is left to grapple with soaring prices and the uncertainty of what comes next. As one Tehran resident, identified only as Najjari, warned, “If we continue to get into a fight with the outside world and become isolated like North Korea, good things won’t happen at all. We’re already seeing the impact of this, the dollar rate is going up.”
The coming weeks will reveal whether Iran chooses the path of confrontation or returns to the negotiating table. But for now, the shadow of sanctions—and the risk of escalation—hangs heavily over Tehran and the region.
