the latter is why they might be tempted to let the snapback dissolve and UNSC mandate disappear: they don't need a UNSC mandate to enforce sanctions against Iran, so the risk of Iran leaving the NPT offsets the additional practical gain from a UNSC mandate vs a US-EU mandate.
I agree. The UN SnapBack was only to get Russia and China onboard. But now there are Chinese companies set up that don’t do any business with West that can take on the sanctions risk, so it becomes a political issue rather than an economic one (ie Chinese government cracking down on their traders at the request of the West vs Chinese companies afraid of investing in Iran like you see in rest of world).
Russia is really a non factor here since they compete with Iran in energy markets and they would be glad to see Iran not producing as much so they can make up the extra supply via OPEC+. Same for the Arabs/Africans.
Lastly, and it’s important to note. Just because a lot of sunset expirations are scheduled to happen it’s not going to make anyone more eager to trade with Iran.
Just look at Arms Embargo it fell off how many years ago? And everyone on here was celebrating as some type of victory. Since then, who has sold major arms to Iran? No one. What countries has Iran sold major arms to? Just other pariah countries like Venzuenla/Russia and a drone factory in Tajikstan or somewhere. Despite claims by Iran that 50+ countries want to buy their arms .
So the only way you are gonna convince the world that Iran is safe for business is for EU or U.S. companies to come into the country in a major way and invest. Until then everyone will be afraid of US Treasury and EU financial regulators and consider Iran radioactive.
Just look at Founder (CZ) of Binance, a major Asian cryptocurrency. Binance was hammered by the U.S. and CZ is going to jail for not having proper money laundering mechanisms that allowed Iran and other pariah countries to skirt sanctions.So the arm of U.S. Treasury still has far reaching implications.
At the end of the day, what is Iran’s strategy from an economic standpoint? It cannot stay under economic warfare forever. The problem with Iran leaving the NPT is that just a negotiating tactic to scare the world. It doesn’t economically change anything for Iran.
Having a bomb will also mean Iran stays under economic warfare for 25-50 years or whatever period it takes for the world to “accept” a nuclear Iran. So far for NK it’s going on 25 years and they are still a pariah with no end in sight. So iran might have to wait a long time for acceptance and reintegration back into global economy if it has a bomb.
So again, I ask, what is Iran’s long term strategy? Waiting for the economic collapse of the West is not a strategy. That could take decades maybe even centuries based on historical precedent. Hoping for a Soviet Union style rapid collapse is too optimistic. Not to mention most of the most valuable companies in the world are US originated companies.
So from an IP and technology standpoint, US is the holder of the greatest amount of IP and tech. Which means its value post collapse isn’t going to disappear like the Soviet Union or Great Britain did. The west has a monopoly on IP and tech right now. China is challenging that, but it’s got a long way to go for Huwawei to stand toe to toe with Apple or BYD to stand against BMW/Mercedes/Porsche. Or Sino Pharma to be considered on same level as Merck/Pfizer/Eli Lily. This is not based so much based on who has the “superior” product, but more on which brand is globally accepted by households and consumers.
