Triggering the “Snapback Mechanism” Brings Iran Closer to Russia and China
webangah News Agency, International Desk – Mahdieh Pakravan: The reactivation of the snapback mechanism by the European countries party to the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) has once again escalated tensions between Tehran and the West. The European trio-Britain, France, and Germany-have reinstated previously lifted sanctions on Iran under UN Security Council Resolution 2231, citing “concerns over Iran’s nuclear activities.” Tehran strongly rejects this move as illegal, political, and a clear violation of both the spirit and letter of the agreement.
Iran insists that this action is unilateral and baseless with no legal or practical effect.Iranian officials view it as evidence of Western double standards and their unwillingness to engage in genuine diplomacy-even years after the United States withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018.
Amid rising tensions, Tehran has deepened its cooperation with Moscow and Beijing while emphasizing a long-term shift toward strategic alliances with Eastern powers. Recently, Iran and Russia began implementing their complete strategic cooperation agreement-a new phase marking enhanced collaboration across various sectors.
in this context, webangah News Agency spoke with Christopher Hellaly, an American political analyst and Secretary-General of the Communist Party USA (ACP). He stresses that snapback sanctions reveal Western contradictions while only speeding up Iran’s ties with Russia and China. According to him, this move marks an end to Western diplomacy toward Iran-and ushers in a new strategic era centered on Eastern cooperation and self-reliance.
the full interview with Christopher Hellaly follows:
How do you assess the strategic and political impact of activating snapback sanctions on Iran’s international position?
My assessment is that activating snapback confirms what many have known for years: The West as a whole has never been interested in diplomatic solutions regarding Iran’s peaceful nuclear program. They have consistently pursued confrontation, maximum pressure tactics, or military actions aimed at regime change in Tehran. For years I have believed that Iran’s future is tied to the East-not to the West.
The first strategic impact is effectively ending JCPOA negotiations. While diplomacy continues nominally,trust built over past decades has weakened significantly. Secondly-the repercussions are shifting from diplomacy into economic and military spheres.The battlefield now includes economic warfare through sanctions as well as military preparedness. this follows recent experiences where Iran faced an imposed twelve-day war by Israel supported by America; thus Iranian defensive capabilities have increased amid continued fears of attacks.
The political impact is equally broad-it transforms domestic positions inside Iran along with external relations at diplomatic levels. Tehran must seriously plan for survival against renewed Western aggression. In my view, survival depends on following North Korea’s model based on self-reliance ideology (Juche) combined with prioritizing military strength (Songun policy).
What effect do you think snapback has had on diplomatic/economic convergence between Iran and Russia?
the snapback mechanism accelerated transformation in diplomatic-economic convergence between Tehran and Moscow. Both Russian government officials-as well as Chinese ones-in statements at UN forums among others declared they do not recognize reinstated UN sanctions triggered unilaterally by European countries through snapback procedures.
Thus Russia will continue all-round strategic relations with Iran without interruption.
I predict that over coming years we will see growing bilateral closeness diplomatically & economically supporting resistance against US hegemony & fostering a more just multipolar world order globally.
How do you evaluate Russia’s role in mitigating practical effects of restored sanctions?
I believe russia helps reduce practical impacts primarily through ongoing trade & multifaceted cooperation.
The recent $25 billion deal between Rosatom & iran for constructing small nuclear power plants underscores Moscow’s commitment to deepen its strategic partnership-including advancing civilian nuclear energy projects.
Moreover,I see Russia defending Iranian interests diplomatically within international institutions likethe United Nations while advocating peaceful political solutions addressing root causes such asWestern reluctance towards sincere negotiations.
Considering reactions from other major powers within UN membership states how effective do you judge snapback efforts at achieving goals?
Bearing inmind refusalbyRussiaandChinatorecognizesnapbacksanctions,IbelieveitsimpactwillbefarfromdevastatingasWesternpoliciesaimedatIraneconomyfaceddecadesofmaximumpressurealready.
Iran’s economic growth coupledwithintegrationintoBRICS+,China-ledBeltandRoadInitiative,andShanghaiCooperationOrganization(SCO)enabletehrantoovercomeeconomicwarfarewithoutdependenceonwesternfinancialorpoliticalassistance.
This reflects enduranceoftheIslamicRepublicdespiteearly predicti onsfromsomewestern analysts&Israeli Prime Minister anticipatingcollapsewithindaysasaresultillegalaggressionbyTelAvivinitiatedwarsagainstIran
What viable diplomatic alternatives exist beyond sanctions/pressure for reducing tensions & ensuring regional stability?
Appropriate alternatives require delivering real diplomaticproposalsmeetthedemandsboththestateandpeopleiniran – alongside fairnessacceptabletoallpartiesinvolved.Theseapproachesmustprioritizepeace,economicsuccess,anddevelopment.Inessenceapopulardrivenstrategyiscrucialbecausesanctionsmainlytargetordinarycitizensandthelaborclass.Giventhatdiplomaticchannelswiththewestremainclosedcurrently,diplomaticagreementsarisingthroughstrategicpartnerslikeRussia&china,internationalgroupsincludingBRICS+andinfluentialGlobalSouthcountriesarelikelypathwaysforward.
