How Europe caused a diplomatic fallout with Iran and how it can undo it
How Europe caused a diplomatic fallout with Iran, and how it can undo it
MADRID – In the ongoing indirect negotiations between Iran and the United States to reach a new nuclear agreement, a significant absence stands out compared to the talks that led to the landmark JCPOA: the absence of European countries.
This exclusion marks a notable shift in the diplomatic balance that had characterized the process for years, raising questions about Europe's future role in one of the most sensitive fronts of international politics.
In a post on his X account on Thursday, Araghchi described the status quo of bilateral relations with each of the European troika as a “lose-lose” situation, regretting that despite his call for diplomacy, the trio has selected the “hard way.”
“Iran's relations with the E3 (France, Germany, and Britain) have experienced ups and downs in recent history. Like it or not, they are currently down. Why? Each side has its own narrative. To me, placing blame is a futile exercise. What matters is that the status quo is lose-lose,” Araghchi said.
Araghchi noted that during a meeting with the foreign ministers of the E3 and other European counterparts in New York last September, he offered dialogue and cooperation instead of confrontation.
He told them that his proposal extended beyond the nuclear issue to include all areas of mutual interest and concern, but the Europeans have chosen the harder path, the minister recounted.
“I once again propose diplomacy. After my recent consultations in Moscow & Beijing, I am ready to take the first step with visits to Paris, Berlin & London. I was ready to do it before Iran commenced its indirect dialogue with the U.S., but the E3 opted out,” Araghchi stressed.
“The ball is now in the E3's court. They have an opportunity to do away with the grip of Special Interest groups and forge a different path. How we act at this critical junction is likely to define the foreseeable future,” he added.
Europe's relationship with Iran in the nuclear realm has a long history, dating back to 2002, when, following the emergence of the Iranian nuclear dossier in international forums and increasing external pressures, President Seyed Mohammad Khatami's government opted for a diplomatic route. In this context, talks were initiated with three European countries: the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. These efforts led to three key agreements — Saadabad, Brussels, and Paris — culminating in the voluntary suspension of Iran's nuclear activities as a goodwill gesture to the international community.
However, in 2005, during the tenure of Hassan Rouhani as Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, Iran submitted a report to then-IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, noting that the negotiations with the European troika had failed. Despite Iran adhering strictly to its commitments, including suspending significant parts of its nuclear program, the three European countries failed to meet the obligations they had made, leaving Iran dissatisfied with the process.
Despite this setback, European involvement in negotiations with the P5+1 was resumed in 2007, but this round of talks concluded with the end of the Iranian president’s term. It was under President Rouhani’s leadership that negotiations were reactivated, ultimately leading to the deal known as the JCPOA. In this process, France adopted a rigid stance, playing the role of the "bad cop", while the United States took a more flexible approach.
The talks to revive the JCPOA continued under the presidency of martyr Raisi. In this new phase, negotiations were conducted indirectly, with Europeans acting as intermediaries. However, despite efforts, these talks did not achieve the expected success, leaving both Iran and the international community with a sense of frustration.
In this context, the absence of Europeans in the current negotiations between Iran and the United States represents a significant turning point. For years, European countries, particularly the members of the troika (the United Kingdom, France, and Germany), played a crucial role in the process, but their lack of direct participation in the efforts to revitalize the nuclear agreement raises doubts about the future of the talks and the role Europe will play in this new diplomatic landscape.
Jean-Noël Barrot, France's Minister for Foreign Affairs, responded to the indirect negotiations taking place in Oman. Ahead of the upcoming meeting of the European Union’s foreign ministers, Barrot stated that, together with Germany, the United Kingdom, and other allies, France would ensure that any agreement between Iran and the United States aligns with Europe’s strategic interests, particularly regarding Iran's nuclear program. "We await the report from the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency in the coming weeks, a report that should clarify the precise state of progress in this program," he added, underscoring the need for transparency and monitoring in the process.
More than two decades of nuclear negotiations between Iran and Europe, spanning the Paris and Saadabad agreements to the JCPOA, show that Europe has failed to establish itself as a truly independent actor in this area. Despite its involvement in negotiation rounds, Europeans have been unable to fulfill their commitments, especially after the United States' withdrawal from the agreement. A clear example of this was the creation of a common financial channel with Iran, which was ultimately cancelled in near silence, reflecting Europe’s difficulty in acting autonomously in the face of Washington's pressures.
From the Iranian perspective, Europe should take a crucial step towards reclaiming its true independence, which could begin with a thorough review of its approach to sanctions. Rather than blindly following the coercive measures imposed by the United States, a tangible gesture such as the annulment of these sanctions would not only be a first step toward autonomy but also a clear signal that Europe is willing to play a more active and relevant role in international diplomacy. This step could allow Europe to distance itself from strategic dependence on Washington and recover its capacity to act in line with its own interests.
In this context, the threats made by the E3 (the United Kingdom, France, and Germany) to reactivate the so-called "snapback mechanism," which would allow for the reactivation of United Nations sanctions against Iran if it is deemed to have violated the JCPOA, reflect a policy of following the lead of others, which Iran has criticized on numerous occasions. This threat, seen by Tehran as an act of unconditional alignment with the United States and its allies, is perceived as a significant obstacle to the diplomatic resolution of the conflict.
From the Iranian perspective, the activation of the "snapback" mechanism, which is considered illegal by Iran, would not only undermine the possibility of a negotiated solution but would also align the E3 countries with Israel in its attempt to sabotage any diplomatic effort in the region. Such a stance would not only weaken the mutual trust necessary for effective negotiations but also perpetuate a confrontational dynamic rather than promoting understanding and lasting peace in West Asia.
In this regard, for any negotiation process to succeed, it is considered essential that reciprocity exists and that all parties honor their commitments. In the current context, where Europe is not present at the negotiating table between Iran and the United States, it may be the right time for European actors to reflect on the constructive role they could play. If Europe approaches this new cycle of negotiations with a renewed focus, based on mutual respect and effective commitment, it could make a significant contribution to resolving nuclear challenges and regional stability. In doing so, Europe would not only have the opportunity to recover its relevance in international diplomacy but also strengthen its political independence in an increasingly complex global scenario.
source: tehrantimes.com