|
Iran is attempting to prevent snapback sanctions by offering an interim deal that secures concessions upfront from the United States and the E3 (the United Kingdom, France, and Germany), but avoids any meaningful commitments regarding its nuclear program and cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iranian and US officials have reportedly been in direct contact in recent days to discuss a new nuclear proposal. Iran‘s new proposal stipulates that Iran would resume talks with the United States over an interim deal while the E3 simultaneously halts the snapback process and extends UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2231 for several months to allow time for negotiations. UNSC Resolution 2231, which endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, prohibited Iran from engaging in “any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons…until the date eight years after the JCPOA Adoption Day.” Iran’s proposal said that the United States must also provide a guarantee that there will be no more strikes on Iran once an interim deal is reached. Iran would then begin retrieving its 60 percent highly enriched uranium stockpile.
The UNSC rejected a draft resolution on September 19 to permanently lift sanctions on Iran. South Korea, which is the UNSC’s current president, finalized a UNSC resolution on September 8 to extend sanctions relief for Iran. South Korea was required to hold the resolution for 10 days after the E3 triggered the snapback mechanism if no other UNSC member held the resolution. The E3 triggered the 30-day Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) snapback process on August 28. The UN Security Council will reimpose snapback sanctions on Iran when the 30-day process concludes on September 27 unless Iran meets the criteria laid out under the JCPOA. Snapback sanctions target Iran’s arms transfers and nuclear program more broadly, including its domestic enrichment activities.
Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a mutual defense pact on September 17, likely in response to multiple security concerns, including Iran. The agreement is a mutual defense guarantee under which an attack on one party would trigger a response by both countries. Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Mohammad Asif stated on September 18 that Pakistan’s nuclear program “will be made available” to Saudi Arabia if necessary. Asif added that Pakistan or Saudi Arabia has not specified a “country whose attack would automatically trigger a retaliatory response,” which demonstrates that the agreement aims to address multiple security concerns rather than a single security threat. Iranian media have portrayed the agreement as a response to Israel’s September 9 strikes in Doha, Qatar, that drew condemnation from Gulf states. Iranian outlets have also framed the agreement as a challenge to US influence in the region. An Iranian media outlet stated on September 19 that the agreement signals that “the era of unilateral dependence on America is over.” The outlet claimed that the agreement shows that Saudi Arabia is shifting away from the United States toward other “independent options.” Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have been losing faith in US security guarantees for several years, at least since Iran targeted Saudi oil facilities with multiple missiles and drones in 2019, and a separate Iranian-backed attack struck Abu Dhabi, UAE, in 2022. The timing of this agreement suggests that the recent Israeli strike in Doha factored in the Saudi decision to pursue and sign the agreement. But Iran has repeatedly targeted regional states, including Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, in the past, with much less precision and to a much greater effect than the Israeli strikes in Doha. The Iranian drone and missile attack in 2019 forced Saudi Arabia to dip into its oil reserves to support exports. Iran has backed hundreds of Houthis and Iraqi militia attacks targeting the Gulf states since 2015 as well. Iran similarly conducted missile and drone strikes in Pakistan in January 2024, claiming to target members of the Baloch, Salafi-jihadi militant group Jaish al Adl. Iran has also repeatedly accused Saudi Arabia of fomenting internal unrest in Iran and backing anti-regime groups in southeastern Iran. Saudi Arabia has historically supported US efforts to curb Iranian influence in the region, including by fighting Iran‘s regional proxies such as the Houthis in Yemen. CTP is considering the hypothesis that Iran may be more concerned about this development than Iranian media coverage would suggest, given Iran’s repeated attacks or support for attacks in both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
|
