Snapback Sanctions on Iran Can't Be Allowed to Make Another War Inevitable

After two years of Israel’s devastating war in Gaza, a ceasefire deal has officially been signed. President Donald Trump previously revealed his 20-point peace plan to end the conflict and, while it is not immediately clear if the plan will be implemented in its entirety, it seems that an initial phase is currently underway. Captives from both sides will be exchanged, and Israel will partially withdraw from Gaza.

As the war in Gaza hopefully draws to an end, an embattled Iran is now facing the reimposition of United Nations “snapback” sanctions that will wreak havoc on its oil trade, reinstate an arms embargo, and prohibit all uranium enrichment. Previously, the Iranian parliament was set to deliberate on a resolution to withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a response to the sanctions being implemented. With sanctions now in effect, Iranian withdrawal from the NPT might be interpreted as a move toward nuclear weaponization and amplify Israeli and American calls for regime change. Despite the nascent peace in Gaza, it appears the stage is being set for renewed belligerence in the Middle East. Accordingly, the US must definitively restrain Israel to disentangle from a region where involvement has not provided any tangible benefits.

After the Iran-Israel War, Iran preconditioned resuming diplomacy on a good faith guarantee from the US that they would not be attacked while negotiating. From the Iranian perspective, it is evident that the US is unable to ensure Iran’s safety amid renewed nuclear negotiations. Since October 7, 2023, Israel has conducted offensive operations in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, and Qatar. Israel’s unilateral bombing of Qatar, a US ally which hosts the largest US military base in the Middle East, represents a dangerous and unprecedented escalation. Qatar plays the role of a de facto regional mediator, and Israel’s brazen strike targeted Hamas representatives in Doha who were discussing President Trump’s ceasefire proposal to end the war in Gaza.

This is a glaring instantiation of the fact that the US is either unwilling or unable to restrain Israel. If US support for Israel remains unconditional despite bombing the mediator country in peace negotiations, which voices will be elevated in Tehran: the moderates open to resuming diplomacy or the hardliners asserting that the US cannot be trusted? Iran’s suspicions are reflected in Ayatollah Khamenei’s assertion that negotiations with the US would not serve Iran’s interests.

It is becoming impossible to ignore that Israeli and American interests are separate and distinct: Israel wants regional hegemony, while the US’ interests lie in diplomacy.

Moreover, the underlying strategic considerations remain relatively unchanged after the war in June. The US was unable to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, Israel failed to spur regime change, and Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium is believed to have survived US strikes. While reattempting nuclear diplomacy is preferable to renewed hostilities, diplomatic efforts have reached an irreconcilable impasse. Israel and the US remain committed to imposing a policy of zero uranium enrichment on Iran while Iran remains steadfast on retaining their enrichment capability. Although President Trump proclaimed that Iran’s nuclear sites were totally "obliterated,” assessments from the US, Israel, Iran, and the International Atomic Energy Agency appear to contradict his rosy estimation. Subsequently, Israel reportedly is planning for additional strikes if Iran resumes enrichment and President Trump has asserted that he would be open to striking Iran again “without question” if enrichment continues. Why would Iran agree to suspend uranium enrichment and forfeit nuclear latency when their existential fears were reinforced by surprise bombings amid diplomatic talks?

The inconvenient truth is that Israel hopes to seize this unique opportunity to coordinate with the US to change the Middle East. Concerning Gaza, the expulsion of the Palestinian population and opposition to Palestinian statehood enjoy a national consensus that transcends partisan lines in Israeli society. Since the Gaza war began in 2023, the human cost has been enormous—Israel has killed over 67,000 Palestinians, an estimated 20,000 of which are children; starvation is rampant; and nearly all of Gaza’s educational and medical infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed. Similarly, Israel’s primary strategic objective in Iran is regime change wherein Iran shares a fate similar to Iraq and Syria: a fracturing along ethnic and religious lines into smaller, manageable entities that pose no threat to Israel.

Realistically, Israel needs to drag the US into further hostilities with Iran due to Israel’s inability to adequately defend itself without US augmentation. Indeed, in the past two years alone, the US spent tens of billions on military aid to Israel. This figure pales in comparison with the fact that Israel has been the leading recipient of US aid for decades. Additionally, the war with Iran in June exposed glaring capacity insufficiencies with Israel’s missile defense systems and the US accounted for “almost half of all interceptions.” The US reportedly burned through about 25% of its THAAD missile interceptors defending Israel from Iranian retaliations. Israel could not execute their expansive agenda without unconditional, absolute, and unlimited guarantees from the US. Bewilderingly, the US continues to underwrite Israel’s ambitious foreign policy contrary to the US national interest. The US must first acknowledge this bizarre dynamic to ultimately divorce itself from it.

At the genesis of President Trump’s second term, he claimed the success of his administration would be measured “not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.” Why Israel is allowed to continually derail the US’ “no new wars” agenda without fear of consequence defies credulity. It is becoming impossible to ignore that Israeli and American interests are separate and distinct: Israel wants regional hegemony, while the US’ interests lie in diplomacy.

If the Iranian regime is toppled, Israel will have achieved their goal of changing the strategic landscape of the Middle East. As the sole regional nuclear power with a sophisticated intelligence apparatus, unconditional US support, and no local competitors posing a threat, Israel will have ascended to the uncontested hegemon of a region that encompasses vital continental trade crossroads between Asia, Europe, and Africa. With diplomacy seemingly buried, the US must restrain their “greatest friend.” Facilitating regime change in Iran serves Israel, but leaves the US vulnerable to retaliations, blowback terrorism, or managing regional destabilization due to an ensuing refugee crisis. If there is to be a second Iran-Israel War, the US should make it clear that Israel will have to go it alone.