Echoes of Old Hostilities
The reimposition of United Nations sanctions on Iran has reignited a combustible chapter in West Asia’s modern history, intertwining nuclear anxieties, regional conflict, and the perennial hostility between Tehran and Washington. The “snapback” mechanism, embedded in the 2015 nuclear accord, has once again penalised Iran for its uranium enrichment activities that now far exceed the agreed thresholds. France, Germany, and the United Kingdom triggered this mechanism before its expiry, citing Iran’s non-compliance, even as Tehran argued that the deal was voided in 2018 when the United States unilaterally withdrew under Donald Trump. The move comes in the aftermath of Israel’s June war on Iran, a devastating conflict that saw Israeli and American strikes cripple nuclear facilities at Natanz, Fordo, and Isfahan, destroying cascades of centrifuges and halting uranium enrichment in aboveground structures. The attacks, while temporarily slowing Iran’s programme, have also hardened its defiance and bolstered its narrative of victimhood. Iranian leaders, hemmed in by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s rejection of diplomacy with the US, have dismissed the sanctions as futile against the “determination” of their people, yet the country’s economy—already battered by inflation, currency collapse, and energy sanctions—will bear the brunt. The sanctions freeze Iranian assets abroad, curtail arms transactions, and penalise the ballistic missile programme, but more significantly, they once again polarise international alignments: Russia and China stand by Tehran, while the West tightens pressure, setting the stage for a prolonged standoff.
The deeper concern, however, lies in the nuclear question itself. Iran today possesses nearly 10,000 kilograms of enriched uranium, including over 440 kilograms at 60 per cent purity—levels alarmingly close to weapons grade. Though US intelligence assesses that Iran has not formally begun a weapons programme, it acknowledges activities that leave Tehran only a decision away from crossing the threshold. No other non-nuclear weapons state enriches uranium to such levels, and this, more than rhetoric, fuels the West’s fears. The destruction of key facilities has bought time but has not erased capability; much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure has redundancies, some located underground and fortified against bombardment. If Iran chooses to pursue weaponisation, its stockpile provides it with the raw material for several devices. This precarious status quo is compounded by the ongoing Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, which acts as a constant reminder of how quickly regional flashpoints escalate. Tehran’s vow to resist pressure and its leadership’s increasingly bellicose tone—threatening to “liberate” not only Palestinian territory but to retaliate against Israel—reinforce the dangers of miscalculation. Meanwhile, sanctions may weaken the Iranian economy but rarely shift the calculus of its ruling elite, who thrive on confrontation and use external pressure as a rallying cry for internal legitimacy. The West is caught in a dilemma: sanctions close the door on diplomacy, yet without them, Iran’s nuclear ambitions appear unchecked. The risk is that punitive measures without parallel engagement push Tehran into the very posture the world fears most: racing toward a bomb.
The hostility between Iran and the United States is not merely about centrifuges and sanctions; it is a story woven from decades of mistrust, ruptured alliances, and bloody confrontations. Once America’s closest ally in the Gulf under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran turned into Washington’s most implacable foe after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the 444-day hostage crisis that followed. The bitterness of the Iran-Iraq war, when the US tilted towards Saddam Hussein and even downed an Iranian passenger jet, remains etched in Tehran’s collective memory. The fleeting optimism of the 2015 nuclear deal—when diplomacy seemed to outshine animosity—was dismantled by Trump’s withdrawal, leading to cycles of escalation that have culminated in today’s impasse. The snapback sanctions mark not just the failure of a treaty but the failure of imagination: a missed chance to build a framework of trust in a region where mistrust is currency. As Iran braces for economic pain and as Israel and the US remain poised to strike again if Tehran crosses nuclear red lines, the spectre of a wider conflagration looms. If diplomacy is indeed a “sheer dead end,” as Khamenei declares, then the world must reckon with an era where sanctions, strikes, and shadow wars replace dialogue. The tragedy is that such an approach leaves little room for de-escalation and even less hope for ordinary Iranians, who will shoulder the costs of policies shaped not by pragmatism but by unyielding enmity.
