Carnegie Endowment

The United Kingdom, France, and Germany triggered the United Nations’ crippling 'snapback' sanctions.

“Now that the E3 have formally launched the snapback process, the steps are straightforward. Within ten days, the Security Council must consider a resolution to preserve sanctions relief and vote in thirty days. If the resolution fails—because of a UK or French veto—the pre-JCPOA sanctions on Iran return.”

The United Nations Security Council reimposed harsh sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program.

“As a result, within the next thirty days, all prior UN sanctions will be reimposed on Iran—known as the snapback mechanism—unless an agreement that satisfies all five veto-wielding Security Council members can be reached.”

If the snapback provision expires on Termination Day without sanctions being reimposed, the Security Council will lose its last viable mechanism to penalize Iran for nuclear violations.

“On the other hand, if the snapback provision expires on Termination Day without sanctions being reimposed, the Security Council will lose its last viable mechanism to penalize Iran for nuclear violations.”

The United States should lead efforts to extend the snapback mechanism for six months.

“With military action offering significant risks of escalation, the United States should lead efforts to extend the snapback mechanism for six months.”

Iran retaliated by limiting inspections conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

“Iran retaliated by limiting inspections conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).”

The United States should seize the initiative and press both its European allies and Iran to extend the snapback mechanism.

“The United States should seize the initiative and press both its European allies and Iran to extend the snapback mechanism.”

Snapback itself emerged as a unique innovation of the JCPOA, as a way to automatically bring back old UN sanctions if Iran was found to be violating its commitments.

“Snapback itself emerged as a unique innovation of the JCPOA, as a way to automatically bring back old UN sanctions if Iran was found to be violating its commitments.”

On August 28, Britain, France, and Germany (the E3) formally declared Iran in 'significant non-performance' of its nuclear obligations under the Iran nuclear deal.

“On August 28, Britain, France, and Germany (the E3) formally declared Iran in “significant non-performance” of its nuclear obligations under the Iran nuclear deal.”

Within the next thirty days, all prior UN sanctions will be reimposed on Iran—known as the snapback mechanism—unless an agreement that satisfies all five veto-wielding Security Council members can be reached.

“As a result, within the next thirty days, all prior UN sanctions will be reimposed on Iran—known as the snapback mechanism—unless an agreement that satisfies all five veto-wielding Security Council members can be reached.”

The E3’s timing is deliberate for two reasons.

“The E3’s timing is deliberate for two reasons.”

Resolution 2231, which codified the 2015 JCPOA, allows any participant state to declare Iran in “significant non-performance.”

“First is the approach of the so-called Termination Day on October 18, when the snapback mechanism and other key provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorsed the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), will expire. This extraordinary provision allows any JCPOA participant to unilaterally restore pre-2015 UN sanctions unless the Security Council affirmatively votes to block the move.”

The E3 offered a one-time six-month extension of the snapback deadline if Iran met conditions such as restoring IAEA monitoring and accounting for enriched uranium stockpiles.

“As an alternative, the E3 have reportedly floated a bridging arrangement: The snapback mechanism would be extended for six months but not triggered, conditional on Iran resuming negotiations with the United States, restoring full IAEA access to its facilities, and accounting for approximately 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium, much of which almost certainly survived airstrikes.”

On Oct. 18, the E3’s legal capacity to trigger snapback unilaterally will expire.

“First is the approach of the so-called Termination Day on October 18, when the snapback mechanism and other key provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorsed the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), will expire. This extraordinary provision allows any JCPOA participant to unilaterally restore pre-2015 UN sanctions unless the Security Council affirmatively votes to block the move.”

The three European governments have warned that they will reinstate wide-reaching sanctions on Iran by the end of August if they do not see a path toward renegotiating a landmark deal.

“At the same time, however, European officials publicly signaled their patience was running out and warned that, absent progress by the end of the month, they were prepared to trigger the snapback process.”

Iran halted cooperation with the agency last month.

“Iran retaliated by limiting inspections conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).”

Climate Clarity: On the Future of Climate Action in the United States | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

“We call our approach Climate Clarity, and it’s based on four foundational ideas that stem from our research and that of our peers. These ideas may be controversial in some quarters, but we are convinced they will lead to a more constructive, reality-aligned public debate about the future of climate policy and action at a key historical juncture in the United States: Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.”

Building a lasting coalition to fight global warming will require taking on the New Denialism and integrating affordability, health, and climate.

“Building a fresh, durable consensus for climate action will require not just confronting the New Denialism but also setting forth a new approach that takes an objective, fact-based view of the promise and limitations of the global energy transition and of what the United States needs to do to adapt to climate impacts. But even more important is building a narrative that relates climate action to two other things that Americans are urgently demanding of their political leadership: an affordable way of life and better health for themselves and their loved ones.”