The European troika—France, Germany, and Britain—has re-imposed United Nations sanctions on Iran that were lifted in 2015 over its nuclear programme. The move has reignited fears of a renewed military conflict between Tehran and its adversaries.
Israeli Pressure Behind Sanctions
According to Israeli affairs expert Mahmoud Yazbek, Israel does not want any regional state to acquire technological knowledge that could threaten its security, as this would undermine its absolute dominance in the Middle East.
Speaking to Masar al-Ahdath (Path of Events), Yazbek explained that Iran has challenged this Israeli logic, prompting Western states to act under US pressure driven by Israeli lobbying, exploiting what appears to be Iran’s weakened position after the most recent war.
He added that Israel is preparing the stage for a new military operation against Iran, similar to the twelve-day war, since it will never tolerate a nuclear or technological programme that poses a challenge. In his view, Israel will continue to pressure Washington to launch fresh strikes.
Yazbek expressed conviction that the region could erupt into a volcano of conflict if the Gaza issue is resolved and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is restored to power, noting that Netanyahu “cannot accept a quiet region.”
A Possible Confrontation
Ziad Majed, professor of political science at the American University of Paris, did not rule out the possibility of a military confrontation, especially given the risk of Israeli escalation. However, he stressed that such a confrontation is unlikely in the near term, with room still available for negotiations as Iran seeks to assess the contours of the coming stage.
Majed explained that the sanctions have both a technical and political dimension. On the technical side, Western powers have now aligned more closely with the US position, unlike during Donald Trump’s first presidency.
European governments believe that Iran is playing for time, continuing its nuclear programme without adhering to enrichment commitments. Politically, Europe is also pursuing a set of disputes it hopes to resolve in coordination with Washington.
According to Majed, Europeans feel that Iran is weakened after the fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria and the weakening of its allies in the region. They hope to isolate Tehran and push for understandings beyond the nuclear file, particularly since Iran’s previous strategies are no longer viable.
On this basis, Europe may accept a peaceful nuclear programme, while the United States is likely to push further, seeking to terminate the programme entirely. In return, Washington may consider lifting sanctions and opening investments if Iran halts its ballistic missile programme—the aspect that most troubles Israel.
Iranian Perspective: Sanctions as Political Pressure
On the other hand, Fouad Izadi, professor of political studies at the University of Tehran, stressed that US military bases would face severe attacks if Iran were subjected to any military aggression.
He argued that there would be no significant changes in Iran’s economic relations, since the states already dealing with Iran will continue doing so. At the same time, Iranians are sceptical of Western and US promises on the political front.
Izadi downplayed the impact of the new sanctions, noting that they do not cover banking operations or oil sales, and therefore remain less damaging than US sanctions. He described them as more of a political and psychological campaign aimed at pressuring Iran and weakening its currency, rather than an effective economic blow.
US Perspective and the Threat of Escalation
Former US State Department official Thomas Warrick accused Iran of failing to comply with its nuclear commitments and of exceeding uranium enrichment limits. He said Western states want Iran to resume cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency inspections.
According to Warrick, Iran must abandon any capability that could enable the production of nuclear weapons. He stressed that this is exactly what President Trump demands in exchange for lifting sanctions on Tehran, similar to his approach with Damascus.
If Iran refuses, Warrick did not rule out a large-scale US military response far greater than the twelve-day war, one that could inflict massive damage on Iran’s military infrastructure. Yet he concluded by saying that diplomacy remains the preferred option.
