Trigger mechanism or war, the Islamic Republic at a crossroads between survival and confrontation

The trigger mechanism or war has placed the Islamic Republic in a dilemma of confronting sanctions and international pressure.

The three European countries that are parties to the JCPOA have issued a clear warning to the UN Secretary-General to activate the “trigger mechanism” by the end of August, signaling the end of the West’s diplomatic patience with the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. If activated, this legal tool would reinstate all international sanctions lifted in 2015, sanctions that could further destabilize Iran’s already struggling economy.

The rejection of the proposal to extend the nuclear agreement by six months, the continuation of enrichment at a level higher than the JCPOA limits, and the refusal to allow the return of IAEA inspectors to Iran show that the regime continues to insist on a policy of “symbolic resistance”; a policy that, in appearance, is resistance but in practice, has put the country on the path to complete isolation. The clear disagreement among the Islamic Republic’s officials, from accepting temporary restrictions in exchange for the lifting of sanctions to strict positions against zero enrichment, indicates a gap and confusion in decision-making.

Abroad, Israel is preparing to strike Iran's nuclear and missile infrastructure again with a joint military and security exercise called "Dawn." European officials are warning that Tehran's continued course could not only trigger a nuclear war, but also lead to a full-scale military conflict that would threaten the stability of the Middle East and even southern Europe.

In such circumstances, Europe's pressure to reinstate sanctions cannot be considered merely a punitive measure, but rather a preventive effort to perhaps, by applying economic and political pressure, prevent the launch of a military attack by Israel and force Tehran to return to the direct negotiating table with the United States.

But the Islamic Republic today faces a real dilemma: either a tactical retreat in its nuclear and missile programs in the hope of reducing pressure, or continuing the path of confrontation, which will only result in increased sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and the risk of war. Masoud Pezzekian's recent remarks about the need for negotiations coordinated by Ali Khamenei indicate that the government is aware of the depth of the crisis, but experience has shown that even on the verge of danger, the regime's priority is to maintain the power structure and continue costly policies rather than the welfare and security of the people.