☑️ | Damascus has fallen militarily, and israel is capable of entering it within two hours. The current negotiations led by Julani are only about preserving his position. Although Damascus officially announced that there is no crossing with israel toward Sweida, an actual crossing does exist. The denial was issued only to absorb public anger directed at Julani. Also to use it as a kind of soft threat in order to show its anger and press its demands this is also directed by Hakan Fidan (if we analyse his speech).

There is also ongoing propaganda about Julani preparing to travel to New York to deliver a speech said to be the first in 60 years. In reality, both Hafez al-Assad and Bashar al-Assad were invited by the United States before but declined. Bill Clinton personally traveled to Damascus to meet Hafez al-Assad, who insisted that the meeting be held in Switzerland rather than Washington.

🔹@enemywatch

🇾🇪 | Breaking — The Yemeni Armed Forces have launched a ballistic missile toward a target in occupied Palestine.

🔹@enemywatch

🏴‍☠️ | X Media reports that Al-Julani sold land belonging to Alawites and Christians along the Syrian coast to Qatar using forged documents.

🔹@enemywatch

✅ | Wait for the Yemeni statement, which may include news about a new missile.

🔹@enemywatch

🇾🇪 | Breaking — Statement by the Yemeni Armed Forces Regarding the Targeting of Lod Airport in Occupied Jaffa and Two Israeli Enemy Objectives, One Military and One Vital, in the Jaffa and Ashkelon Areas with Ballistic Missiles and Drones – 28 Safar 1447 AH | 22 August 2025 CE


In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Allah the Almighty said: “O you who believe! If you support Allah, He will support you and make your feet firm.” Indeed, Allah speaks the truth.

In support of the oppressed Palestinian people and their esteemed mujahideen, and in response to the crimes of genocide and starvation being committed by the Zionist enemy against our brothers in the Gaza Strip, the Missile Force of the Yemeni Armed Forces executed a precise military operation targeting Lod Airport in occupied Jaffa with a hypersonic ballistic missile of the “Palestine 2” type, bypassing Israeli interception systems.

By the grace of Allah, the operation successfully achieved its objective, causing significant confusion within the ranks of the Israeli enemy, forcing millions of usurping Zionists to seek shelter, and suspending airport operations.

The Unmanned Air Force of the Yemeni Armed Forces carried out two operations using drones that targeted two Israeli enemy objectives – one military and one vital – in the Jaffa and Ashkelon areas of occupied Palestine. Both operations successfully achieved their objectives by the grace of Allah.

The Yemeni Armed Forces, together with all the sons of the great Yemeni people, honor the heroism and sacrifices of our steadfast mujahideen brothers in Gaza. They set the finest examples in standing against the enemies of the nation, offering themselves and all they possess for the sake of Allah in defense of the nation’s honor and dignity, and in rejection of violations and expansionist schemes. They receive from us and all free people of the nation a thousand thousand salutes, and may the eyes of cowards never sleep.

Yemen, with its loyal people, mujahid army, and faithful leadership, stands with them until the aggression ceases and the blockade is lifted.

Allah is sufficient for us, and He is the best Disposer of affairs, the best Protector, and the best Helper.

Long live Yemen – free, dignified, and independent.

Victory to Yemen and to all the free people of the nation.

🔹@enemywatch

🗞️ | Khaleel Nasrallah:

- Three Yemeni attacks were carried out using a ballistic missile and two drones. The attacks caused significant disruption and come just days after Katz threatened to impose a maritime and aerial blockade on Yemen.

Sana’a continues its operations undeterred by any statements from Tel Aviv, fully aware that its enemies are seeking lethal security gaps to exploit against it.

- In a statement that undermines the Israeli narrative presented by Netanyahu as part of his “victory” in the war (including the missile strikes and nuclear project), the Iranian Defense Minister revealed that Tehran continued missile production even during the war and reconsidered its “manufacturing methods after the conflict.”

Additionally, the Iranian Defense Minister disclosed that Tehran has established “infrastructure and weapons factories” in certain countries and will reveal them within a month “if the need arises.”

🔹@enemywatch

🇮🇷 | On August 22, 2025, the Office of Imam Khamenei released a comprehensive interview with Dr. Ali Larijani, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. The interview is part of the dossier noscriptd “Narrative of Victory” (روایت فتح), which narrates and provides a macro-level analysis of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s success in the recent 12-day imposed conflict against the Zionist regime: (1/14):

Que: As the first question, I would like to ask: in the current circumstances in which you have assumed this new responsibility, what is the most important duty of the Supreme National Security Council? Since the challenges are diverse and can be prioritized, will there be structural, procedural, or strategic changes in this regard or not?

In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. I must say, the most important duty of this council is to manage challenges in such a way that the outcome is a calm environment for the country’s national development, allowing the people to live a predictable life. Challenges always exist; today it may be war or other issues, yesterday it was something else. There are regional matters, and there are also international issues.

Ultimately, the art of the work lies in blending diplomacy, the conditions of the resistance forces, and the military forces, so that the national interests of the country are safeguarded, and in reality, a balanced path of development and progress is secured for the country and the state.

Naturally, since we are currently engaged in a war and there is now a ceasefire, this is an important matter that we must pay attention to, while also creating capacities so that the enemy does not dare to contemplate renewed action. At the same time, this issue carries with it side aspects of a nuclear nature, regional topics, and other matters.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(2/14)

- Dr. Ali Larijani's interview:

Que: What are the council’s measures for this preparedness? Perhaps it is better to put it this way: these days, the first question that people who somehow have access to you are likely asking is whether there will be another war or not — this is today’s common question. And after whether there will be war or not, the second question is how prepared we are for it.

Answering this question partly depends on us, and partly on the enemy, because not everything is in our hands. But the most important issue is to see, through the measures we can take, how we can push back war. My view is that several factors can play a decisive role in this matter.

The first issue is national cohesion. Just as in the twelve-day war, national cohesion was truly very influential. During those days, Iranians had a high level of awareness, analyzed the enemy and the rival correctly, and despite all the differences of opinion that existed, they agreed that Iran and Iran’s interests must be defended. That was a great act of wisdom. Of course, this must be safeguarded; meaning that the state, the people, everyone must make efforts to preserve this solidarity and cohesion. This is one point. On one of our trips, one of the leaders of a country said: “The world has understood this national cohesion of the Iranians!” So, this is a national asset, and preserving and protecting it has various requirements, which I will not go into here.

The second point is that one of the essential factors for resilience is that people should enjoy at least a minimum standard in life. It is true that there is war, but in any case, the affairs of people’s daily life must be managed in such a way that they can remain steadfast. This is one of the issues we are currently discussing, and I think the government and the President himself are very committed to this matter and consider it part of justice. Therefore, some basic needs of the people must be well provided. In non-war conditions this is one way, and in wartime it is another. This is the second point that, in my opinion, must be prepared for.

The next point is maintaining and strengthening the country’s military capabilities. We already had good capabilities, and despite the enemy starting the war, he ended up struggling to end it. Of course, outwardly they advertise that they achieved great success, but almost all the important countries and nations understood that our enemy suffered a strategic defeat in this war though there are various reasons for this. This is useful for Iran, but it can also tempt the enemy; because an enemy that has failed strategically naturally looks for ways to somehow regain success. How can we dissuade him? We must strengthen our military and security capabilities and fix some of the flaws in our own performance. So, part of our time is spent carefully identifying where our shortcomings have been, seeing them realistically, correcting them, and reinforcing our capacities. This is another part of the work.

Another part of the work is international and regional interactions, and establishing balances that can be created meaning, more precise talks in the international arena, outside the usual courtesies and formalities, must be part of our work.

My real recommendation is that inside the country we must pay attention to the fact that our war has not yet ended. Both political groups and those who have public platforms must understand that we are in an important situation. Of course, Iran’s deterrent capacity is very high. I am not saying there is an actual war right now, but we must know that a war has started and that this war has only paused with a ceasefire. So, we must be prepared and preserve our cohesion.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(3/14):

- Dr. Ali Larijani's interview:

Therefore, in these circumstances, this guide must be fully supported, and of course the rational aspect of this matter is also very strong. Individuals may have differing opinions on some political matters, but when we are in a major crisis, our support for the one who is the leader and is actually directing the war must be strong. So, we must not create friction. In my opinion, this is part of the essential understanding of the times. I am not saying there are no differences of opinion; there may be many in society, among politicians, among parties. The point is that we must not be heedless of the circumstances, the time, the place, and the situation in which the people find themselves; because sometimes this creates frictions that embolden the enemy to act against us. Therefore, this aspect too, in my view, is important and must be carefully considered.

Que: Is it possible for the Supreme National Security Council to engage in such matters as well?

The Council has always had mechanisms and enactments in this regard; therefore, there is no need for a new decree, as these mechanisms already exist. I am aware that in the past, work was being done in this direction. What matters most is that these mechanisms remain active — that is, they maintain communication with experts, journalists, and writers and provide them with proper guidance. We used to hold such sessions in the past to explain the circumstances to them. I also believe that most of these individuals possess the intellectual maturity; when the situation is properly outlined for them, they can make decisions in a rational and appropriate manner.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(4/14):

—Dr. Larijani's Interview:

Que: Dr. Larijani! Although the enemy suffered a strategic defeat in this war, we also experienced certain tactical and practical gaps in military and other areas. Since the defense program in this regard is centralized within the Supreme National Security Council, the public may understandably wish to receive, as much as possible, a report on the measures being taken to fill these security, military, defense, and media gaps before any potential next round of conflict, if it occurs.

In the defense dimension, an important decision was made by the Supreme National Security Council to establish a Defense Council. This Defense Council functions as an auxiliary body of the Supreme National Security Council, tasked solely with defense matters, addressing shortcomings in the armed forces, and planning related activities. Its framework has been established, it has convened sessions, and work is being steadily pursued. In this regard, the General Staff of the Armed Forces has assumed responsibilities and is actively following them up; the Ministry of Defense is also engaged in meeting the necessary requirements, and everyone involved, particularly the commanders of the IRGC and the Aerospace Force, is working diligently to correct any deficiencies observed along the way. Furthermore, the expertise of qualified specialists and capable young personnel is being fully utilized.

At the Secretariat, given our entry into the era of modern warfare, we have established a technological division within the defense domain, focused exclusively on these matters, and it is actively working. Therefore, measures have already been initiated in this field, and I am personally very hopeful, as many specialized university personnel are now linked to this process.

Que: If you wish, I can provide a somewhat more concrete and detailed explanation.

For example, in the area of air defense and radar systems, we had certain deficiencies that are now being addressed, or other related issues are being worked on. While it is not necessary to go into all the minutiae, this gives a general sense of the process. Of course, we also had significant strengths in areas such as missile capabilities, which broke the enemy’s backbone; these strengths must continue to be reinforced, and work is ongoing in this regard. Thus, the defense dimension is actively pursued and, inshaAllah, the outlook is positive.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(5/14):

—Dr. Larijani's Interview:

Que: In this context, has the issue of purchasing new equipment also been raised?

Yes, it has. In any case, our main reliance is on domestic capabilities, but we also make use of external assistance. Another dimension is addressing deficiencies in security sectors, and meetings are being held in this regard. This is a problem that must be resolved. It is not only about human resources; for example, when we speak of “infiltration,” it should not be assumed that human agents are always involved. Yes, human elements exist , I am not denying that but there are also other factors.

Que: In fact, one of the ambiguities and challenges within our domestic public opinion, which has not been adequately addressed and has been exploited by the enemy in propaganda, is that a transparent report on the extent and depth of “infiltration” into our own people and public opinion is not provided. I do not know whether it is possible for the national security official to speak more specifically on this issue; if possible, please elaborate a bit. Of course, there is no need to go into minute details, as that could be harmful, but it is essential that these issues are being pursued.

The initial assumption that many have: that infiltration merely involves agents on the streets or elsewhere providing information to the enemy is incorrect. When you examine the field of infiltration, you realize that new technologies and extensive cross-referencing of intelligence can assist foreign services far beyond these basic human elements. Therefore, technical mastery over information can play a crucial role, and this is the primary concern. The methods used by other actors are not limited to sending human agents; that is an older method which still exists, but is not the main tool. The most important factor is that intelligence services can extract valuable operational insights from the totality and intersection of gathered information. Hence, this aspect requires far greater attention.

Another gap we have concerns media narratives. Overall, I do not consider the condition of Iranian media to be poor. Many are working diligently, writing articles, speaking on radio, television, and other platforms. Given that this war was unprecedented, somewhat surprising, and carried out with deception, we must acknowledge that our media suffered an initial shock, but it recovered and began taking action.

The important issue now is that we must both expand and technically enhance our media capacities. I believe our media output is somewhat flat and not very impactful. The audience needs short, concise, and packaged information that is relevant to them. I am not saying that longer, detailed content is unnecessary, if it is engaging, the audience may consume it, but generally, brief, clear segments are preferred.

Another crucial factor is the sincerity of the message. Everyone understands that for security reasons, not everything can be disclosed, but false information must not be presented. The public must feel that the media does not lie or mislead. If there are matters that cannot be disclosed, simply say, “We cannot disclose this now,” and the public will accept it. But if false information is presented, credibility is lost. This principle should guide media work. Especially during wartime, just as the people rely on leadership to pursue objectives, they must equally rely on the media for truthful reporting so that they can understand and navigate the circumstances of the time.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(6/14):

—Dr. Larijani's Interview:

Que: Dr. Larijani, you have probably had meetings with the Supreme Leader during this period. I want to ask: in the first meeting you had with him after assuming this new responsibility and post, what was his most important request of you?

His main request was that, overall, we make every effort to ensure the country’s national interests are properly safeguarded and that security is maintained. This is a broad directive, encompassing domestic, regional, and international matters. His view is that this must be pursued with steadfastness, endurance, and resolve. His conduct reflects the same principle. Throughout this period of war, I never observed the slightest doubt in him regarding the path he follows.

Ques: Did you maintain contact with him during that period?

Yes, I did. His guidance consistently reached us. We also held meetings, submitted our opinions to him regularly, received feedback, and it was entirely evident. Now, even after the war, our communications have increased. He moves with great confidence, a behavior very similar to Imam Khomeini.

When Imam Khomeini was in Paris, the late Martyr Motahhari visited him and spent several days there. Upon returning, I, together with Ali Motahhari, went to the airport to receive him. On the way, we asked how he had seen the Imam. He replied that he saw him as a believer in the path, in the people, and in God, fully reliant on God. Later, in a book, he described four aspects of “belief” — believing in the goal, believing in the path, believing in the people, believing in God. In these matters, I observed the same state in Ayatollah Khamenei: his steps are taken with complete confidence, which is a hallmark of leaders who follow a divine path and are goal-oriented.

Que: Well, let’s move to another topic. As you briefly mentioned earlier, we were in the midst of negotiations when the enemy effectively bombarded the negotiating table. Certainly, our approach to diplomacy now differs from that prior to 23 Khordad. In your view, is diplomacy still possible under these circumstances, and if so, under what conditions?

My advice has always been that Iran should never abandon diplomacy, because diplomacy itself is a tool. The Supreme Leader has said that the flag of negotiation should always be in your hands; this is entirely correct. Diplomacy is inherently part of governance, and it makes no sense to abandon it. The key issue is when and how to use it.

If the enemy turns the diplomatic scene into a theater or a display, then nothing productive comes from that diplomacy. Or if the purpose of diplomacy is merely to justify some other action, then that is not genuine diplomacy and they do not intend to use it as such. But if diplomacy is used to avoid the costs of war, to seek peace, then that is genuine diplomacy. I do not see the current situation in this way; I feel that the diplomacy being practiced by them is primarily for creating pretexts. Nevertheless, this does not mean that we should cut off our diplomatic efforts.

When, and under what conditions, negotiations bear fruit depends on the other side understanding that war achieves nothing and genuinely seeking to resolve issues through diplomacy. If negotiations are used as a pretext for other operations, then that is not real negotiation. Therefore, our condition is that negotiations must be genuine. If the other side is committed to war, let them act, and when they regret it, they can come to negotiate. But if they truly realize that they cannot subdue this steadfast and resilient nation through war: all the absurd claims they make about needing to pressure Iran into submission, which the Supreme Leader has already addressed and which the enemy has now realized during this war, that “Iranians do not surrender” then the precondition for real negotiations is to understand this reality.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(7/14):

—Dr. Larijani's Interview:

Que: Dr. Larijani, what is the Islamic Republic’s outlook regarding the groups and the “Resistance Front” after the twelve-day war? You have traveled to Iraq and Lebanon. In Lebanon, heavy pressure is now being applied to Hezbollah to disarm something Israel could not achieve in direct military confrontation. On the other hand, in international media, there is an analysis claiming that the groups supported by the Islamic Republic as part of the “Resistance Front” are weakening.

If they are weakening, then why is so much pressure being applied? Normally, pressure is applied where there is strength; if they are weak, then they are weak. In my view, this is a strange argument. If we look at the media four or five years ago, before these events, there was no talk of weakening, right? But regarding resistance and Iran’s relationship with the resistance, they said: “Iran is making a mistake; these groups are nothing; they are just a cost to Iran. They are not significant.” The rhetoric was that these groups were not important and Iran was wasting resources on them. Now, they say the Resistance Front has weakened, but even when they believed it was strong, they said similar things in a different tone. If they are weak, let them be; why are they designing so many schemes against them?

In my opinion, over the past two years, these actors have caused immense hardship for the people of the region — killing, wounding, and creating hunger. But these are the crimes of a regime with no red lines; it does everything and the West has tolerated this savagery.

Then the question arises: if you claim to have destroyed Hamas, why are you afraid to take Gaza? You have killed and starved people but could not destroy Hamas. Why does it not collapse? It is in their hands — when you kill people, they have families and young people; you push them onto a path of resistance. When did Hezbollah emerge? It emerged when Israel fully occupied Beirut. Naturally, the local population is not willing to accept occupation, so young people said, “We must defend ourselves,” forming the core of Hezbollah. Now some say Iran created Hezbollah. No — the Lebanese people themselves created it. Yes, we helped, and we continue to help, but the essence of Hezbollah came from the Lebanese people. This was a strategic asset — a small country resisting Israel.

The same applies to Hamas. When you take over a country and tell the people, “You have no standing, give up your lands,” the people will resist. In Iraq, when the Americans occupied the country, resistance movements emerged; in Yemen, when the bombing began, resistance also emerged. Resistance arises because of their behavior, and the more pressure they apply, the deeper resistance becomes.

They claim they have struck; yes, they have hit Hezbollah, but the question is whether Hezbollah rebuilt itself or not. There were enough young mujahideen to reconstruct the organization. Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor, wrote that the Middle East faces a phenomenon of political awareness among youth and hatred toward the U.S. even citing examples from poets. This is reality. When the Americans pressure the region with the theory of “peace through force,” what does that mean? It means submission.

Who would accept such submission?

Netanyahu repeats the same logic, saying, “I will impose peace through power.” He tells countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Kuwait: either submit or fight. This creates tension. The current regional environment is one of alertness toward Israel. While some countries may not fully align with Iran, they see Iran as a barrier to Israel.

In my view, resistance is alive and active. It continues to grow and move forward.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(8/14):

—Dr. Larijani's Interview:

Que: Is the Islamic Republic’s policy after the twelve-day war the same as before supporting and strengthening the Resistance movement?

Look, there is no doubt that decisions must always be made in accordance with the circumstances. But the Islamic Republic has always supported the Resistance because it considers it an authentic movement and a strategic asset. Have they stopped opposing Israel? Has the U.S. stopped supporting Israel? No; they continue their support. If Iran does not utilize the capabilities it has which they claim are in support of Islam and Iran that would be a political misjudgment. Iran must make use of its own capacities. When the enemy employs all its resources, big and small, why shouldn’t we use ours?

I have seen people sometimes say, “The Resistance has done nothing for us!” In reality, they want to influence your mind, making you believe these groups are a burden or costly, and that you could achieve peace by abandoning them. Recently, I spoke with a world leader; now a member of the Security Council and I asked: “Why do you have these international regulations? When they attack us and you, as Security Council members, do nothing, what are these regulations for?” He replied, “These regulations are worthless; the international stage is about power.” That is the reality, if you do not protect your power, you will be harmed. It’s harsh, but it exists. Accept it or not, ignoring it will cause greater damage.

Therefore, you must strengthen your elements of power. Domestically, the people are essential: you must maintain their cohesion, provide for their needs, be close to them, speak to them respectfully, and understand their sentiments. Regionally, use your resources and alliances. Considering Hezbollah or Resistance forces a burden is a strategic mistake. In my view, they need our support, and we must also benefit from their help. Isolation does not serve Iran’s national security.

Que: During your trip to Lebanon, you also met with Sheikh Naim Qassem. Can you provide a less diplomatic, more general assessment of Hezbollah’s revival and reorganization?

I have spoken about this before. I saw Hezbollah’s forces and leadership very determined in their path. Both their leadership cadre and young members are resolute. At the welcoming ceremonies or at the shrine of Martyr Nasrallah, we saw the next generation they came voluntarily, not invited. Their spirit is strong; they feel injustice is being done and are committed to defending Lebanon. Some people say, “You must surrender!” But why surrender? To whom?

Our position has always been that they resolve their matters through national dialogue, and we maintain the same principle. We have never imposed anything on the Resistance. Yes, they are connected with Iran, because they are our brothers, but not as subordinates. Our approach is different from others: their strategy may be “submit to us or fight,” but our view is to respect their intellectual maturity. We believe not only must we be strong, but the region must be independent and strong: Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia; all must be strong. We do not seek dominance; we support fraternal cooperation and independent, capable governments.

We always support the Resistance, and the Islamic Republic’s strategy is to back it.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(9/14):

—Dr. Larijani's Interview:

Que: If you agree, let’s turn to the issue of nuclear energy. You have long and extensive experience with the nuclear dossier and dealing with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). What is your assessment of the IAEA’s performance in these recent incidents and during this war, and what is the Islamic Republic’s plan for dealing with this issue including interactions with the IAEA and possible legal follow-ups?

As far as I know, from the time of Mr. ElBaradei and the generation that followed him up to the current director, the IAEA has never been in the destructive situation it is today! ElBaradei exercised some rational judgment; although under Western influence, he still maintained a degree of international propriety.

The current director, however, has seemingly handed a blank check to Israel and the United States essentially fueling the conflict. It is humiliating because the safeguards regulations clearly state that the IAEA must defend NPT member states, immediately convene a Board of Governors meeting, and report to the Security Council. Yet he stood by, watching, and did not even issue a condemnation! Can such a person truly deserve to be the IAEA director?

ElBaradei acted very wisely. International pressure is always present, but he preserved, to some extent, the professional dignity of the agency. It was at least clear that technical assessments were being carried out. The current director, however, has entirely abandoned that responsibility and surrendered. During the last war, our nuclear sites were bombed, and the IAEA did not even issue a statement condemning it an absolutely disgraceful situation.

In my view, first, the agency itself needs to reconsider its role and authority. Countries are now questioning the IAEA’s significance. We are NPT members so what is the point of cooperating with the IAEA? I am not suggesting we leave the NPT, but this is a logical question for our people and for all countries.

🔹@enemywatch

+

+

(10/14):

—Dr. Larijani's Interview:

Que: Is leaving the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) one of the options for the Islamic Republic?

That possibility has always existed. I’m not saying anyone is taking that step right now, because it must be done with prudence, and we need to consider its implications. We are not seeking a bomb; if a country wanted a bomb, it shouldn’t join the NPT. But when you are not pursuing a bomb, the NPT should be accepted there is no reason not to. The reality, however, is that the NPT has had no real significance for us.

Look, whenever you act with power in these matters, your work progresses that’s how the international arena operates. If you think, for instance, that diplomacy alone can solve a problem through gestures, that is not the case. If you have strength, your work moves forward. Therefore, Iran must pursue power.

Que: How does this translate into our nuclear policy?

In our nuclear policy, it means never abandoning negotiations, but also never yielding in them. You must present rational solutions. I’m not saying one should never be flexible, but flexibility is appropriate only when the other side genuinely seeks a resolution. For instance, the Supreme Leader once spoke of “heroic flexibility” this is meant for situations where the other party intends to resolve the issue. If the other side demands submission, then you must stand firm.

Que: In the coming weeks, we face the “snapback” mechanism, which has been discussed for several months. In this context, Europeans play a major role and are using threats against Iran. How do you assess this mechanism and the Europeans’ actions?

The Europeans’ behavior is obvious; it needs no analysis. They are merely executing part of the U.S. strategy. But there is disagreement many countries, including Russia and China, have issued statements asserting that the snapback was intended for cases where a party violates the JCPOA. Who violated it? Our facilities were bombed so why are they using the snapback against us? From an international law perspective, this is deeply troubling.

Moreover, if you want to use the snapback, you cannot immediately go to the Security Council. First, you submit a request, then a technical committee reviews it, then a ministerial committee, and only after evaluation does it reach the Security Council. Yet they went straight to the Council.

Additionally, the U.S. has exited. Now there are six countries remaining Iran, Russia, China, and three European countries making it a 3–3 situation. How do you decide in such a case? With seven members, majority decisions make sense; now, it’s deadlocked. The proper approach would have been negotiation, but they want to enforce it through pressure via U.S. bombing and European threats which is fundamentally flawed.

🔹@enemywatch

+