E3 Lacks Legal and Moral Authority to Activate Snapback Mechanism: Implications Explored

In a recent interview with Press TV, a senior Russian diplomat has made significant claims regarding the snapback mechanism against Iran, emphasizing that Britain, France, and Germany, collectively known as the E3, lack both legal and moral authority. This assertion comes in light of their failure to uphold obligations under the 2015 nuclear deal following the United States’ withdrawal from the accord.

Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia’s Permanent Representative to International Organizations in Vienna, shared his insights ahead of the upcoming IAEA Board of Governors meeting, which will focus on Iran’s nuclear program and the recent snapback sanctions triggered by the E3.

Ulyanov stated, “It was not occasional that the snapback mechanism was launched by three European states who formally still remain participants in the JCPOA. They don’t have a legal, procedural, or even moral right to do that because they are violators.”

He elaborated on the violations by the E3, noting that they have significantly breached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) as well as Resolution 2231. According to him, the legal opinion from the International Court of Justice in 1971 asserts that if a party violates an agreement, it cannot invoke that same agreement to blame another party.

Ulyanov highlighted the ongoing politicization of the IAEA’s activities, specifically regarding Iran. He pointed out that discussions between the IAEA Secretariat and Iran were progressing, yet the E3 abruptly triggered the snapback mechanism. This interruption has been described as “irrational and inexplicable,” reflecting a troubling pattern in the handling of Iran’s nuclear dossier.

“The Europeans time and again create problems in the sphere that relates to the nuclear dossier of Iran. It’s very irrational. It’s very strange. It has no plausible explanation, but this is a matter of fact,” he remarked.

In Ulyanov’s view, the discussions within the IAEA’s Board of Governors have shifted from technical matters to increasingly politicized debates, particularly concerning Iran. He emphasized that the United States’ role in the snapback process has been non-existent since President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA and President Joe Biden’s decision not to rejoin.

Ulyanov reiterated that the E3 do not possess the “legal, procedural, or even moral right” to initiate the snapback mechanism, as they are considered violators. He expressed that significant violations of the JCPOA and Resolution 2231 by the E3 undermine their claims against Iran.

Ulyanov also raised alarms regarding the West’s exit strategy following the re-imposition of all UN Security Council sanctions by the end of September. He emphasized Russia’s preference for diplomatic solutions and collective discussions involving all JCPOA participants, rather than unilateral actions.

In a bid to extend the diplomatic timeline, Ulyanov mentioned that Russia and China have collaborated on a draft resolution aimed at prolonging Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA for an additional six months. This move seeks to provide more time for negotiations and to avoid the snapback mechanism.

He cautioned about the potential repercussions if Iran were to withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), noting that Iran is among the most inspected countries globally. Ulyanov highlighted that the extensive inspections in Iran underscore its commitment to transparency.

Furthermore, Ulyanov acknowledged a prevailing sentiment that the nuclear issue is being exploited as a geopolitical tool to contain Iran, Russia, and China. He commented on the escalating politicization and confrontational dynamics within international organizations such as the UN and the IAEA, lamenting the shift away from cooperative endeavors.

Expressing his concerns, Ulyanov pointed out that the erosion of the ‘Vienna spirit’—a tradition of consensus in international organizations—has been exacerbated by geopolitical tensions. He underscored Russia’s ongoing efforts to counterbalance Western dominance in multilateral forums.

As the IAEA Board of Governors meeting approaches, these discussions and the implications of the snapback mechanism continue to be pivotal in shaping the future of international relations regarding Iran’s nuclear program. The focus remains on finding a diplomatic resolution rather than escalating tensions further.

In conclusion, the ongoing discourse surrounding the snapback mechanism and Iran’s compliance with the JCPOA is emblematic of broader geopolitical struggles. The international community watches closely as events unfold, hoping for a peaceful resolution that upholds the foundational principles of diplomacy and cooperation.