Key Points and Summary – The West is setting an August deadline for Iran to agree to a new nuclear deal, threatening to trigger “snapback” UN sanctions if Tehran fails to comply.
-This high-stakes diplomatic gambit comes after last month’s US and Israeli strikes, with Iran now threatening to enrich uranium to 90% weapons-grade levels if sanctions are reimposed.
-Adding to the complexity are conflicting reports about Russia’s role; President Putin has reportedly urged Iran to accept a “zero enrichment” deal to appease the U.S., a claim that both Moscow and Tehran have publicly and strongly denied.
Iran Has an Answer on Sanctions over Nuclear Program
After Israel and later the U.S. attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities last month, one of the key questions, beyond exactly how physically “obliterated” the facilities were, has been whether Iran will be able to take steps toward enriching uranium again.
If they did, it would open the door to another attack, possibly being necessary.
Now, it appears, Iran has threatened to do just that.
According to Newsweek, the Iranian regime is “threatening to raise uranium enrichment to weapons-grade levels and exit the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),” should the U.S. and its allies impose United Nations sanctions once again.
Axios reported Tuesday that Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the foreign ministers of France, Germany, and the U.K. had agreed in a phone call to make the end of August a “de facto deadline” for Iran to agree to a new nuclear deal.
Should there be no deal, the foreign ministers agreed to invoke the “snapback” provisions in the 2015 nuclear agreement, known as the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which would reimpose the UN Security Council sanctions on Iran that were lifted as part of that deal.
Per Newsweek, which cited the Tasnim news agency, “Iran has warned that triggering the snapback mechanism could prompt it to raise uranium enrichment from 60 percent to 90 percent—considered weapons-grade—and potentially redirect its enriched uranium stockpile for military uses not explicitly banned under international agreements.”
“Iran has given and will continue to give proportional responses to Western missteps,” Alaeddin Boroujerdi, a member of Iran’s Parliament National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, said this week, per Newsweek.
Two Deadlines
That deadline is in August, but there are two more deadlines in October: The “snapback” provision expires that month, and Russia is scheduled to assume the presidency of the Security Council at the same time.
“U.S. and European officials view snapback as both a negotiating tool to pressure Tehran and a fallback if diplomacy fails,” Axios reported. “But the Iranians argue there is no legal basis to reimpose the sanctions, and have threatened to withdraw from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in response.”
The View From Putin
Meanwhile, Axios also reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin has urged Iran to accept a “zero enrichment” deal with the U.S., while urging the same of President Donald Trump in recent discussions with him. The story described Russia as “ Iran’s main diplomatic backer on the nuclear issue for years.”
“Putin would support zero enrichment. He encouraged the Iranians to work towards that in order to make negotiations with the Americans more favorable. The Iranians said they won’t consider it,” a source described as “one European official with direct knowledge of the issue” told Axios.
The story added that Iran was “disappointed” that Russia didn’t give them much support when they were being attacked by the Israelis and Americans, “beyond press statements.”
Russia has also made clear that it would remove the enriched uranium itself.
The Jerusalem Post, however, reported earlier this week, citing Tasnim News, that Iran has denied the report about Russia accepting the non-enrichment provision.
The Iranian outlet claimed that “Zionist media” had spread the claim, and added that “Tehran has not received such a message from Putin in any way.”
“Putin’s last meeting with Iranian officials was with [Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas] Araghchi, and such an issue was not raised in that meeting. After that, no messages about zero enrichment were exchanged through communication channels between Russia and Tehran,” Tasmin said, per the Jerusalem Post.
“According to the Foreign Policy Group of the Tasnim News Agency, Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesman for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, announced that the illegal attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran in the middle of the diplomatic process was scandalous and that the enemy could not resist the logic of dialogue and engagement, saying: ‘Today, it is clear to everyone that the Islamic Republic is a proponent of dialogue and diplomacy,’” Tasmin had said.
About the Author: Stephen Silver
Stephen Silver is an award-winning journalist, essayist, and film critic, and contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Broad Street Review, and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. For over a decade, Stephen has authored thousands of articles that focus on politics, national security, technology, and the economy. Follow him on X (formerly Twitter) at @StephenSilver, and subscribe to his Substack newsletter.
Military Concepts
A 7th Generation Fighter Is Coming
Jim
July 17, 2025 at 11:47 am
This is a strategic mistake for Iran, in effect waving a red flag in the face of Israel & the United States.
It’s akin to the strategic mistake Iran’s leaders made by enrichment beyond 3.75% civilian needs to 60% enrichment (which allows quicker full enrichment to 90% plus military grade) which provided the rational for Israel’s attack… and the United States attack.
In a misguided attempt to gain leverage for negotiations to remove sanctions.
There has to be another way for Iran to negotiate because these enrichments beyond civilian use have not helped Iran get rid of sanctions.
Quite the contrary, it’s strengthened Netanyahu’s hand and his 20 year quest to take out the Mullahs.
Iran can’t afford to keep making strategic mistakes.
Of course, the United States keeps making strategic mistakes as well… so does Israel.
That’s a recipe for disaster in the Middle East and that’s not in Israel’s interest or the United States interest or Iran’s interest.
All parties should take a step back from the abyss and fully think out all the ramifications which might come from actions they could possibly take.