The US Treasury on Tuesday imposed sanctions on an Iraqi-Kittitian businessman and a network of companies and vessels accused of smuggling Iranian oil disguised as Iraqi crude.
“Three European countries began the process of activating sanctions at the behest of the Zionist regime and the United States,” ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told reporters at a weekly news conference in Tehran.
He said Washington’s support for the move showed it was “part of a plan to impose unlawful pressure on Iran.”
Baghaei said Europe had no standing to invoke the dispute mechanism under the 2015 nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA, because it had itself failed to meet its obligations.
“When three European countries talk about the JCPOA, the question must be asked: which JCPOA are you referring to? They accuse Iran of not fulfilling commitments, but this claim is made in bad faith. The parties that failed to implement their own obligations are not in a position to accuse Iran,” he said.
He pointed to a recent statement from the US Secretary of State, which described the European action as aligned with American policy.
“The European Union and the three European countries, which once acted as intermediaries toward the JCPOA, have now reduced their role to paving the way for Iran to negotiate with America. Reports have also indicated that the Europeans began this process at the request of the Zionist regime and the United States,” he said.
Baghaei’s remarks also followed a statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who welcomed the decision.
“These European allies have laid out a clear case of Iran’s continuing significant non-performance,” Rubio said in a statement published on Sunday. He said the US would work closely with them to complete the reimposition of sanctions.
“Snapback does not contradict our earnest readiness for diplomacy, it only enhances it,” Rubio said. He also said the US remained open to direct engagement with Iran.
Baghaei rejected that position and said diplomacy cannot function under pressure. “Setting conditions while supporting military or economic pressure is not a serious diplomatic path,” he said.
Response to Europe’s 30-day deadline
Germany and its European partners have given Iran 30 days to return to negotiations, allow full access to IAEA inspectors, and clarify the status of enriched uranium stockpiles, or face the automatic return of UN sanctions.
Baghaei dismissed the timeline. “Diplomacy is not a ball game. They pretend to be credible actors with good faith, but what the Europeans need is to strengthen moral courage and responsibility,” he said.
“At the same time as they threaten us and use military tools, they speak of diplomacy. This shows they lack good faith and do not believe in negotiations.”
In a separate interview published Monday by the Guardian, Baghaei criticized a set of conditions announced by Britain, France and Germany.
The three governments had formally notified the UN that they intend to restore sanctions by the end of September unless Iran takes specific steps.
These include allowing UN inspectors access to nuclear sites damaged in Israeli strikes, clarifying the status of its enriched uranium stockpile, and entering direct talks with the United States.
Baghaei said the conditions were not sincere. “It’s a sign they are not serious and they do not have good faith,” he told the Guardian. He added that the four-week window for diplomacy did not reflect a real opportunity.
Possible NPT withdrawal raised in parliament
Baghaei also said Iran’s parliament—not the government—holds constitutional authority over membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Lawmakers are considering a bill that would require Tehran to leave the treaty if sanctions are restored.
Such a move would end international oversight of Iran’s nuclear program and raise concerns in Western capitals.
IAEA inspections
Asked about cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Baghaei said no decision had been made on continuing recent rounds of talks.
“So far, two rounds of negotiations with the IAEA were held with representatives of the Foreign Ministry and the Atomic Energy Organization, but no final result was reached,” he said.
He confirmed that two inspectors had recently entered Iran to oversee fuel loading at the Bushehr reactor, which he said was required. “At present there is no inspection in Iran, although contacts with the agency continue,” he added.
He said a framework for future cooperation was still under consideration: “The drafting of guidelines for interaction after the new developments has not been finalized and we are still deciding.”
Iran atomic energy chief Mohammad Eslami said Sunday that Tehran is preparing for another round of negotiations with the UN nuclear watchdog.
He said two IAEA inspectors were allowed to visit Bushehr to observe a fuel replacement process and that the visit had been authorized by the Supreme National Security Council. It was the first IAEA access since Iran suspended cooperation during the June conflict with Israel.
Eslami also dismissed the activation of the snapback mechanism as expected. “Our enemies always find excuses to pressure the Iranian nation,” he said, accusing the IAEA leadership of acting under Western influence.
Despite the tensions, Eslami said Tehran had informed the agency that enriched uranium stockpiles had not been moved and indicated Iran could return to the 3.67 percent enrichment cap set in the 2015 deal if its right to domestic enrichment is maintained.
Russia and China
Baghaei said Moscow and Beijing had already signaled opposition to the European step. “Russia and China have announced their position against the action of the three European countries.
"A joint letter by Iran, Russia and China has also been published, and we believe the Europeans lack the legal ground to resort to the dispute resolution mechanism,” he said.
He added that any discussion about extending Resolution 2231 — which underpins the 2015 deal — must take place in the UN Security Council, where Iran was consulting with Russia and China “to act in line with Iran’s interests.”
Disputes in Persian Gulf
Baghaei rejected a statement from Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) foreign ministers that repeated claims over disputed territory and the Arash gas field.
“Repeating territorial claims that amount to coveting the territory of an independent state is unacceptable and does not create any rights for the other side,” he said, adding that Iran maintained dialogue with Kuwait but rejected the GCC position.
President’s China trip and SCO summit
The spokesperson said President Masoud Pezeshkian’s visit to China for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit was significant, marking Iran’s third participation as a full member.
“Given international developments, this meeting and consultations are of greater importance. Meetings have taken place between our president and other heads of state,” Baghaei said.
He said the summit had produced important outcomes, including “the condemnation of aggression by the Zionist regime and the United States against Iran and the emphasis on Resolution 2231.” He added that further talks, including a bilateral with the Chinese president, were scheduled.
Speaking at a parliamentary session, Ghalibaf said, “The unified decision of the Islamic Republic of Iran in response to the unlawful action of European countries will soon be announced and implemented.”
Britain, France and Germany -- the three European signatories to the 2015 nuclear deal -- notified the United Nations in late August that they would pursue the reimposition of sanctions unless Iran returned to nuclear talks, granted inspectors wider access, and provided details on its uranium stockpile. European governments have stressed there is still time for diplomacy before sanctions formally return.
Iran has rejected the move, arguing that the Europeans themselves failed to uphold their commitments under the 2015 agreement after the US withdrawal in 2018.
Ghalibaf told lawmakers that “the European powers lacked the legal right to activate paragraph 37 of the JCPOA because they failed to uphold their own commitments” and accused them of acting at Washington’s behest.
“It is necessary for Iran to take deterrent action to make this illegal step costly for the Europeans, in order to change their decision on activating the snapback,” he said.
He added that while UN resolutions carried symbolic weight, they would not significantly alter Iran’s economy compared with sweeping US unilateral sanctions already in place.
Ghalibaf also said claims that snapback sanctions could pave the way for military action against Iran were unfounded. “The real deterrent is our national unity and defensive strength, not UN resolutions,” he said.
NPT debate and European criticism
The remarks come as Iranian officials intensify criticism of European governments.
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told the Guardian this week that Europe had “ceased being a mediator” and was now acting as a “proxy of the US and Israel.”
He warned that parliament, not the government, controls Iran’s membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and that lawmakers could vote to withdraw if sanctions are restored.
The debate has been a recurring theme in parliament and gained further momentum after the 12-day war, during which the United States struck three major Iranian nuclear facilities while Israel targeted additional nuclear infrastructure and scientists.
Baghaei also said Iran would consider reducing enrichment to the 3.67% cap set in the 2015 nuclear deal, but only if its right to enrich uranium domestically was guaranteed. He expressed Tehran’s distrust of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), alleging that information gathered by inspectors had been leaked to Israel.
90-minute closed session
Iran’s parliament held a closed-door session on Tuesday to discuss how to respond to European powers’ move to trigger the snapback mechanism, with lawmakers insisting the measure would have little real economic impact but vowing that Tehran’s reaction would be forceful and coordinated.
Parliament’s presidium spokesman Abbas Goudarzi told reporters that the snapback mechanism, which could lead to the reimposition of six UN Security Council resolutions, would not meaningfully worsen Iran’s current situation.
“Activation of the snapback mechanism, which results in the return of six resolutions, will not have a real and tangible effect on the country’s economic situation,” he said.
He added that UN sanctions covered 120 individuals and entities, while “more than 2,000 individuals and entities have already been sanctioned by the United States, so the situation will not be worse than it is now.”
Goudarzi said the main aim of the European step was to create “a psychological atmosphere in the country” that could trigger currency volatility and market anxiety. “Officials must play their role in this area so that the people do not suffer,” he said.
Goudarzi stressed that Iran’s institutions would act in unison. “The parliament, government, Supreme National Security Council and all the pillars of the system are united and coherent, and we will take reciprocal measures,” he said.
The 90-minute non-public session brought together lawmakers and the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, which presented a detailed report on the snapback process and its potential effects. Several lawmakers also spoke, presenting their own views.
Goudarzi said Speaker Ghalibaf had emphasized that Iran’s “hand is full in this regard, and whatever reciprocal action is decided will be pursued without hesitation.”
he confirmed that proposals from lawmakers would be reviewed in upcoming sessions, with the Committee preparing recommendations for adoption. “All these proposals will be examined and the necessary decision will be made,” he said.
Esmail Kowsari, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said: “If the other side chooses to pursue the path of coercion, we also know how to stand against them.”
Yaghoub Rezazadeh, another member of the committee, said the best response would be to cut off all cooperation with the IAEA and move toward uranium enrichment up to 90 percent.
“All the pressure is aimed at making us sit at the same table with the United States, which is impossible.”
However, he said the return of sanctions would not amount to anything new. “Eighty percent of these sanctions are already being enforced."
The sanctions target Waleed Khaled Hameed al-Samarra’i, based in the United Arab Emirates, along with his firms Babylon Navigation DMCC and Galaxy Oil FZ LLC, and nine Liberia-flagged tankers.
Washington said the network covertly blended Iranian and Iraqi oil through ship-to-ship transfers in the Persian Gulf and in Iraqi ports, marketing it as solely Iraqi in origin.
The Treasury estimated the operation generated about $300 million annually for both Iran and al-Samarra’i.
It accused the group of using shell companies in the Marshall Islands to obscure ownership of vessels and employing tactics such as night transfers and location spoofing to hide activity.
“Iraq cannot become a safe haven for terrorists, which is why the United States is working to counter Iran’s influence in the country,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.
“By targeting Iran’s oil revenue stream, Treasury will further degrade the regime’s ability to carry out attacks against the United States and its allies.”
The measures follow sanctions announced in July against another network accused of blending Iranian and Iraqi oil.
For two consecutive years, Chinese records show imports of “Iraqi” oil exceeding Iraq’s declared shipments by around 100,000 barrels per day—worth more than $2.5 billion annually.
The gap has grown since 2021, suggesting a persistent pattern of disguised flows, according to experts.
Iraq’s oil minister Hayyan Abdul-Ghani acknowledged earlier this year that Iranian tankers were using forged Iraqi documents and said the matter had been reported to the United States.
