Iranian negotiator doesn't rule out exiting nuclear treaty if sanctions are reimposed
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — A top Iranian official warned Wednesday that European threats to reimpose sanctions could lead Iran to withdraw from an international pact that limits the spread of nuclear weapons, one of the last remaining safeguards against the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi discussed with reporters his country's recourse against further financial punishment ahead of a critical meeting Friday with Britain, France and Germany.
The talks between Iran and some of the remaining members of the 2015 nuclear deal, which the U.S. withdrew from in President Donald Trump's first term, are expected to take place in Istanbul.
The three European countries have suggested triggering a so-called snapback provision in that accord that would reimpose sanctions on Iran if there is no progress on a deal to limit its nuclear program by August. The 2015 deal had eased economic penalties on Iran in exchange for restrictions and monitoring of its nuclear program, which Iran has insisted is peaceful.
Gharibabadi, who has been part of the nuclear negotiation team, said that despite domestic pressure to withdraw from the separate, older Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, especially in the aftermath of the recent Israeli and U.S. strikes on its nuclear sites, Iran has remained compliant with the 1970 treaty.
'But, I'm quite confident that if the snapback is triggered, Iran will not show more restraint in this regard,' Gharibabadi said.
If Iran does exit the treaty, it will be just the second country to do so, after North Korea in 2003, whose withdrawal has never been formally accepted.
The warning from Iran comes as the Trump administration is once again seeking to reach a deal with Tehran on its nuclear program. The two sides had held several rounds of talks before Israel staged a surprise attack in June.
Gharibabadi and Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, have remained optimistic that the triggering of sanctions and withdrawal from the treaty can be avoided with 'diplomacy and negotiation.'
Gharibabadi said Friday's meeting is very important but that its success will depend on how the Europeans approach Iran this time around.
'We have always valued our meetings with the European countries. But there is an important issue: I think we have always told them that the policies of the European countries should be independent,' he said. 'They should not coordinate their positions with the Americans.'
He added, 'If this is the case, why should we negotiate with the Europeans when we can negotiate with the Americans?'
Iranian officials, including Gharibabadi, said they are open to proposals on how to prevent further sanctions and 'prevent a more complicated situation.'
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
41 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump's trade deals punish US allies. American consumers will pay the cost.
President Donald Trump has set up a grand contest between his Economics 101 textbook and what mainstream economists teach. President Donald Trump recently gave U.S. allies a painful whack in the international trade arena. Among the victims were Japan, South Korea and Europe. Why did Trump punish these countries? What punishments were served up? Why did the allies accept unequal deals? Finally, were the beatings deserved? Punishment was delivered because the three allies, like many others, sold more wares to U.S. customers than they purchased from U.S. vendors. In 2024, Japan sold $148.4 billion of goods to U.S. buyers and bought just $79 billion, resulting in a trade surplus of $69.4 billion. On similar arithmetic and terminology, South Korea enjoyed a 'subsidy' of $66 billion, and the European Union (27 countries) received a whopping $236 billion. In Trump's edition of Economics 101, the trade surpluses not only equate to unfair subsidies paid to foreigners, but they also destroy millions of U.S. manufacturing jobs. These are huge offenses, according to Trump's thought process, especially when committed by U.S. friends and allies. Punishment is accordingly severe. Starting on Aug. 7, Japanese and Korean goods reaching U.S. ports will pay tariffs of 15%, up from about 1% in 2024. Trump's trade practices turn back clock on economic theory Average U.S. tariffs at 15% have not been seen since the 1930s. So a $10,000 auto imported from either country would now cost the U.S. buyers $11,500. Tariffs on steel, an important export for both countries, will be much higher, at 50%. POSCO steel from Korea, which previously cost about $1,000 a ton, could now cost $1,500. But wait! In Trump's version of Economics 101, Toyota, Hyundai and POSCO will eat the added cost of the tariffs rather than passing them along to their customers. That would run counter to history, though. Experience with past trade wars, such as those over steel and aluminum in Trump's first term, demonstrated that U.S. customers pay nearly all the tariffs, not foreign suppliers. New tariffs, contravening prior U.S. obligations, are the main − but not the only − punishment. As part of the package, South Korea promised to buy $100 billion of U.S. energy products over the next four years, such as liquefied natural gas, and invest $350 billion in the U.S. shipbuilding and advanced technology sectors. How that investment will be managed remains to be determined. One possibility is that one or more South Korean business conglomerates will make proposals, subject to Trump's approval. Another possibility is a South Korean pot of money will be spent according to Trump's dictates. Either way, this part of the agreement is a step down the road to state capitalism. Tariffs are bad policy – and Trump keeps making disastrous trade deals because of it | Opinion According to the White House, Japan agreed to invest $550 billion directed by the United States in core industries, and the U.S. will retain 90% of the profits. Japan offered a looser interpretation of the agreement, with no mention of the 90% profit provision. The European Union package was icing on Trump's week of tariff deals. After heated internal debates, contesting appeasement versus retaliation, EU leaders reluctantly agreed to new U.S. tariffs of 15%, even though the average and legally promised rate was just 1% in January. The higher 50% tariff will apply to steel and aluminum exports. According to the White House, the EU agreed to buy $750 billion of U.S. energy and invest $600 billion in the U.S. before Trump leaves office. But the EU sees a best efforts deal, not binding terms. European tariff cuts remain to be negotiated and then be approved by the 27 member states. Consumers create trade imbalances, not governments Why did the allies accept highly unequal terms? Put simply, security overrides economics. Europe is desperate to keep Trump on its side in the Ukraine war. Japan and South Korea see their only hope of withstanding Chinese military strength is through American backing. Trump, when in trouble, throws tantrums. The economy is his latest conniption. | Opinion Did the allies deserve the beatings they accepted? Mainstream economists do not agree that it's unfair when a country sells more than it buys. Nor do they believe that tariffs will reduce U.S. trade deficits. Deficits arise because Americans as a nation spend more than they earn. Excess spending spills into imports from abroad. A household that spends more than it earns builds up credit card debt. Similarly, the United States builds up debt to foreign countries. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Higher import prices resulting from tariffs will cost American consumers more than $3,000 per household. Mainstream economists see no evidence that higher import prices will prompt Americans to spend less than they produce. Moreover, mainstream economists predict that tariffs on intermediate goods, like steel and auto parts, will destroy as many manufacturing jobs as tariffs on finished goods, like iPhones and furniture, might create. In fact, manufacturing employment is down. Trump has set up a grand contest between his Economics 101 textbook and what mainstream economists teach. Americans will soon know whether the mainstream text or the Trump version has better predicted the outcome of America's trip to the yesteryear of high tariffs. Gary Clyde Hufbauer is nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
Washington Post
42 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Israel is weighing its options in Gaza. Here are 4 scenarios for where things may be heading
Israel has routed its enemies across the region but has yet to return all its hostages from the Gaza Strip. Hamas appears to have been decimated militarily but has kept up insurgent attacks . Gaza is in ruins and experts say it is sliding into famine , and long-running ceasefire talks seem to have broken down .
Epoch Times
42 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
EU Official Says Europeans Eager to Secure US Deal, Get Down to Business
BOSTON—While the European Union's 27 member nations are still 'sorting out the details' of the July 27 framework trade deal between EU President Ursula von der Leyen and U.S. President Donald Trump, most European businesses are eager to expand the world's biggest bilateral trade and investment relationship, according to a key union representative. 'We feel very good about the framework agreement,' Deputy EU Ambassador to the United States Ruth Bajada said during the final day of the Aug. 4–6 National Conference of State Legislatures' (NCSL) 2025 Legislative Summit in Boston's Thomas Michael Menino Convention & Exhibition Center.
