European Powers Tell UN They Are Ready To Reimpose Iran Sanctions
The letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and the UN Security Council says the three European powers are "committed to use all diplomatic tools at our disposal to ensure Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon" unless Tehran meets the deadline.
The foreign ministers from the so-called E3 group threaten to use a "snapback mechanism" that was part of a 2015 international deal with Iran that eased UN Security Council sanctions.
Under the deal, which terminates in October, any party to the accord can restore the sanctions.
All three have stepped up warnings to Iran about its suspension of cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.
That came after Israel launched a 12-day war with Iran in June, partly seeking to destroy its nuclear capability. The United States staged its own bombing raid during the war.
"We have made clear that if Iran is not willing to reach a diplomatic solution before the end of August 2025, or does not seize the opportunity of an extension, E3 are prepared to trigger the snapback mechanism," foreign ministers Jean-Noel Barrot of France, David Lammy of Britain and Johann Wadephul of Germany said in the letter.
All three countries were signatories to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with the United States, China and Russia that offered the carrot and stick deal for Iran to slow its enrichment of uranium needed for a nuclear weapon.
President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the accord in 2018 during his first term and ordered new sanctions.
The European countries said they would stick to the accord. But their letter sets out engagements that the ministers say Iran has breached, including building up a uranium stock more than 40 times the permitted level under the 2015 deal.
"The E3 remain fully committed to a diplomatic resolution to the crisis caused by Iran's nuclear programme and will continue to engage with a view to reaching a negotiated solution.
"We are equally ready, and have unambiguous legal grounds, to notify the significant non-performance of JCPOA commitments by Iran ... thereby triggering the snapback mechanism, should no satisfactory solution be reached by the end of August 2025," the ministers wrote in the letter first reported by the Financial Times.
The United States had already started contacts with Iran, which denies seeking a weapon, over its nuclear activities.
But these were halted by the Israeli strikes in June on Iran's nuclear facilities.
Even before the strikes, the international powers had raised concerns about the lack of access given to IAEA inspectors.
Iran halted all cooperation with the IAEA after the strikes, but it announced that the agency's deputy chief was expected in Teheran for talks on a new cooperation deal.
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi sent a letter to the UN last month saying that the European countries did not have the legal right to restore sanctions.
The European ministers called this allegation "unfounded".
They insisted that as JCPOA signatories, they would be "clearly and unambiguously legally justified in using relevant provisions" of UN resolutions "to trigger UN snapback to reinstate UNSC resolutions against Iran which would prohibit enrichment and re-impose UN sanctions."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
an hour ago
- DW
What Ukrainians expect of the Putin-Trump summit – DW – 08/13/2025
Are Ukrainian experts and politicians optimistic about the upcoming talks between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Alaska? Or do they doubt there will be a real breakthrough? Soon after the August 15 meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska was announced, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy put out a video warning against excluding his country from the talks: "Any decisions made against us, any decisions made without Ukraine, are decisions made against peace. They will not work." Many Ukrainians share this view, according to a survey conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) in late July and early August. "Ukrainians remain open to negotiations and making difficult decisions," Anton Hruschezkyj of KIIS told DW. "The absolute majority, however, continues to reject demands for [Ukrainian] surrender." According to the survey, 76% of Ukrainians reject Russia's "peace plan" and the idea of making concessions to Russia. At the same time, 49% oppose the US peace plan that entails security guarantees for Ukraine from European countries but not from the US, recognizes Crimea as part of the Russian Federation, maintains Russian control over Ukraine's occupied territories, and lifts sanctions against Russia. Ukrainians do not rule out that the upcoming negotiations between Putin and Trump, which will not have Ukrainian or European representatives present, will be aimed at forcing Ukraine to capitulate. "The Russians never changed their negotiating stance and will not do so as long as they do not suffer serious military and political defeats," Volodymyr Horbach of the Ukrainian Institute for Northern Eurasia Transformation (INET) told DW. The fact that Trump is talking to Putin without first pressuring Russia to change its stance shows that this approach is doomed to failure, Horbach says. "The Russians will stick to their position and want to offer a ceasefire in return for Ukraine's de facto surrender, in other words, fulfilling Russian demands. So calling this concessions is very naive," Horbach said. The analyst does not regard the upcoming Putin-Trump talks as a disaster, but says they signal an "alarming trend" as Trump is "legitimizing Russian war criminal Vladimir Putin, which is unacceptable to Ukraine and Europe." Horbach said he sees "no possibility of implementing any real, practical outcomes of these negotiations in the context of the Ukrainian-Russian war. The proposals that Putin may make will satisfy neither Ukraine nor the European Union." He added that "Trump will have to maneuver, he will not be able to force Ukraine and its European partners to accept Putin's terms." Ukraine was in a similar situation in March 2025, says Dmytro Levus, who heads the Ukrainian Meridian Social Research Center. At the time, Donald Trump believed that the war could be quickly ended by negotiating with Russia and enforcing a peace agreement based on Ukraine's surrender. Lifting sanctions on Russia, however, proved impossible, as most of them had been imposed by the Europeans, Levus said. He believes that after this Alaska meeting, the US and Russia will once again have to face reality — Ukrainian forces continue defending their country and Ukrainian's European partners will not unconditionally accept and implement any deal agreed between Putin and Trump. "Ukraine's position, as stated by Zelenskyy, is clear and correct: the [Ukrainian] constitution does not allow for the ceding of [Ukrainian] territory," Levus told DW. "That is why I do not expect anything meaningful to come out of the Alaska meeting." Iryna Herashchenko, one of the leaders of Ukraine's opposition European Solidarity Party, says the Putin-Trump meeting represents a challenge for the entire international security system. She explains that it would signal to the whole world that violence can go unpunished if Russia, the aggressor, is rewarded for its attack on Ukraine, for annexing parts of the country and for committing war crimes. That is why Herashchenko says recognizing Russian occupation is a red line that must not be crossed. "This would pave the way for new wars, not only in our region," Herashchenko said on Telegram. "That is why all negotiations should be conducted with the participation of Ukraine and the EU, with strict security guarantees, international monitoring, and provisions for sanctions." Anything else would not bring peace, but only lead to new war. Danylo Hetmantsev of Ukraine's rulingServant of the People party takes a more positive view of the upcoming talks, saying the summit will finally reveal Russia's stance. "If there are once again attempts at 'diplomatic maneuvering' instead of productive negotiations at the meeting, this will likely lead to the imposition of tough American sanctions, including on Russia's allies, who will have to pay for supporting the aggressor, which they will not like," Hetmantsev said on Telegram. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video At the same time, Ukrainian experts do not rule out that the US will once again try blackmailing Ukraine into accepting unacceptable conditions after the Putin-Trump summit. Kyiv-Mohyla Academy lecturer and Ukrainian Prism think tank researcher Oleksandr Kraiev believes that Trump could threaten to halt arms deliveries to Ukraine. "But [weapons] deliveries are already sporadic and unsystematic, so it won't be as much of a shock as when Trump first announced something like this," Kraiev told DW. He believes the summit will be purely held for the "sake of talks," as neither side has any real idea of how the war should end. "There could be a joint statement on continuing the talks, but that's all," Kraiev said.
Local Germany
2 hours ago
- Local Germany
Gas push fuels fears of climate backsliding in Germany
Chancellor Friedrich Merz's coalition has made reviving Europe's struggling top economy a priority and argues that reliable and affordable energy supplies are crucial for the country's manufacturing titans. But critics charge the bid to boost fossil fuel production is ideologically driven and highlights a shift away from green policies under the new government. Merz leads a coalition that includes his centre-right CDU party and junior partners the centre-left SPD -- but without the Greens, who were in the last administration. The economy ministry, headed by Katherina Reiche of the CDU, is vocally backing a target of building new gas plants with about 20 gigawatts of power production capacity by 2030. Reiche, a former energy company executive, has argued it is important to "move very quickly" towards building the plants "in order to maintain a high level of security of supply in our country". The goal is to have a backup source of power in times there are shortfalls of renewables, which sometimes happens when the sun is not shining or there is not enough wind. Supporters say more supply is needed in the short term as nuclear power has been switched off in Germany and coal should follow suit in the coming years. Under German climate law, the share of renewable electricity consumed in the country should rise to 80 percent by 2030. It stood at around 55 percent in 2024, according to the federal environment agency. READ ALSO: Climate change made recent European heatwave 'up to 4C hotter' Energy focus Earlier this month, the government agreed gas production could begin off a North Sea island in an area straddling the border with the Netherlands, with a Dutch company planning to extract the fossil fuel, sparking condemnation from environmentalists. Advertisement Plans to build more gas plants are not new, and the previous government also wanted to expand capacity, but the new targets are around double those of the past. Underlining the new government's changing priorities, Reiche's ministry has been renamed the "Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy" -- under the Greens in the previous, SPD-led coalition, it was called the "Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action". She also appeared at one point to question Germany's legally binding target of achieving greenhouse gas neutrality by 2045, sparking tensions with SPD environment minister Carsten Schneider. An economy ministry spokesman told AFP that Reiche "stands by" the current climate goal. "The government is committed to achieving these targets with the political measures at its disposal -- while maintaining Germany's position as an industrial location," he said. Advertisement 'Dramatic setback' The Greens have regularly attacked Reiche while more than 380,000 people have so far signed a petition by campaign group Campact warning her policies risk "a dramatic setback in climate policy". But criticism is emerging even within the conservatives. The Climate Union, grouping CDU and other conservative politicians, has warned subsidies for new gas plants could push up power costs, the Handelsblatt financial daily reported. Energy think tank Agora Energiewende estimates that only a maximum of 10 gigawatts of extra gas plants would be needed by 2030 to supplement other power sources. "This will ensure security of supply -- even if coal-fired power plants are taken off the grid as planned," Philipp Godron, the head of the group's power programme, told AFP. READ ALSO: Why gas bills in Germany are set to get cheaper Meanwhile, questions remain over how quickly the plants can be built, while the European Commission, the EU's executive arm, still needs to give its approval. The economy ministry spokesman told AFP that talks with the EU for putting out tenders for a "significant portion" of the plants were "well-advanced". He also stressed that any new gas-fired plants must be "decarbonised in the long term", for example by switching them to green hydrogen, which was necessary "in view of the decarbonisation of the electricity system and compliance with EU law".
DW
2 hours ago
- DW
Germany rejects US censorship claims in human rights report – DW – 08/13/2025
The report itself has been accused of political bias, with the US softening criticism of Israel and El Salvador. Germany rejected the report saying it has "a very high level of freedom of expression." Human rights, such as freedom of expression, are under threat in Germany and other European countries, according to the 2024 Human Rights Report by the US State Department. The report, which in former years has been seen as a reliable point of reference for global human rights advocacy, has been criticized by human rights groups as containing numerous omissions and mischaracterizations to fit the current US administration's political aims. The German government rejected the report. "There is no censorship in Germany," Deputy Government Spokesman Steffen Meyer said. "We have a very high level of freedom of expression in Germany, and we will continue to defend it in every form," he added. "The human rights situation in Germany worsened during the year," an executive summary of the report's Germany entry said. "Significant human rights issues included restrictions on freedom of expression and credible reports of crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by antisemitism," the report said. The report stated, however, that the German government "took some credible steps to investigate, prosecute, and punish officials who committed human rights abuses." The report follows on from comments made by US Vice President JD Vance in February, in which he accused Germany and other European allies of imposing restrictions on free speech and attempting to marginalize far-right parties, including the Alternative for Germany (AfD). His remarks have been described as "intrusive" by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The report devotes a much smaller section to Israel than it did last year and fails to mention the severe humanitarian crisis and death toll in the Gaza Strip amid Israel's ongoing offensive against the Palestininian militant group Hamas. El Salvador, which was described in the 2023 report under the Biden administration as having "significant human rights issues," also got off lightly in 2024. "There were no credible reports of significant human rights abuses," the 2024 report said about the Central American country, whose president, Nayib Bukele, is accused of overseeing unlawful and arbitrary killings, torture and harsh prison conditions. The Trump administration's relations with El Salvador have strengthened in recent months, with Washington using a high-security mega-prison in the country to house migrants it has deported under draconian new migration policies. Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine was referred to in the report mainly as the "Russia-Ukraine war," though it did say Russia's forces and officials were reported to have committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and abuses in Ukraine. In contrast, countries such as South Africa and Brazil, with whose governments Trump has clashed, came in for severe criticism that was not contained in the 2023 report. The report was issued with a delay as officials appointed by US President Donald Trump altered an earlier draft to bring it into line with his administration's foreign policies and ideological slant. It was prepared after the department underwent a major revamp during which hundreds of people were dismissed, many from the agency's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, which has a large role in writing the report. In April, Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote in an opinion piece that the bureau had become a nest of "left-wing activists" and pledged that the Trump administration would change its focus in favor of "Western values." "The report demonstrates what happens when political agendas take priority over the facts," said Josh Paul, a former State Department official and director of nongovernmental organization A New Policy. "The outcome is a much-abbreviated product that is more reflective of a Soviet propaganda release than of a democratic system," he told Reuters news agency. Rights groups Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also criticized the report, saying the Trump administration had mischaracterized some records of abuses and omitted others to suit its political agenda. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce, however, defended the report, saying it had been restructured to improve readability and to stop it from being a list of "politically biased demands and assertions."
