E3-Trump: Diplo-namics Await Maximum Pressure 2.0 on Iran

Triggering a potential new tension phase, the E3 (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom) and the United States passed an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) resolution today condemning Iran’s non-compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and urging stricter monitoring of Tehran’s nuclear program. “We…call on Iran to not only offer halting high-level enrichment but to immediately dispose of its high enriched uranium stockpile,” says the E3’s statement. “The Agency has lost continuity of knowledge in relation to the production and inventory of centrifuges, rotors and bellows, heavy water and uranium ore concentrate.”

During a phone call on Wednesday with IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that Tehran would respond “appropriately and proportionately” if the UN’s nuclear watchdog had proceeded with the resolution. He emphasized that the Islamic Republic had already demonstrated “goodwill,” adding that such a resolution would undermine the positive momentum achieved in recent interactions between Iran and the IAEA.

The E3-US move is not as strong as two previous times and comes amidst growing concerns over Iran’s increasing uranium enrichment activities, which the IAEA has been closely monitoring. Agency Chief Grossi, during his recent visit to Iran, managed to secure an agreement to cap uranium enrichment at 60%, stating cautiously: “I hope this will hold.”

This European initiative, however, is not occurring in a vacuum. With Donald Trump poised to return to the White House, questions arise about whether the E3 resolution signals a broader alignment with the US’s anticipated hardline approach, dubbed “Maximum Pressure 2.0.” Skeptics might even view it as a preemptive move to avoid potential friction with Trump, who has previously threatened European allies with complex trade measures.

Maximum Pressure 2.0: Trump’s Return to Familiar Ground

During his first term, Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign sought to isolate Iran and curtail its nuclear and regional ambitions economically. Reports from The Economist and The Financial Times suggest that the strategy, rebranded as “Maximum Pressure 2.0,” will form the cornerstone of his second-term policy toward Iran. However, the geopolitical landscape in 2024 is markedly different from 2018—when Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the JCPOA.

Iran’s resilience, bolstered by partnerships with China and Russia, presents new challenges. Meanwhile, Iran has also engaged in normalization efforts with Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which view geopolitical stability as essential to their global ambitions. This recalibration has made Gulf capitals wary of policies that could reignite tensions and disrupt their strategic priorities. These dynamics complicate Trump’s strategy, as explored in another Times of Israel analysis, “KSA and the UAE await Trump with eyes on Iran”.

The Hardliners Behind Trump’s Maximum Pressure 2.0

The likelihood of a renewed “Maximum Pressure 2.0” campaign on Iran is strongly supported by the hardline stances of Trump’s key appointees. Marco Rubio, as Secretary of State, brings his fierce opposition to the Iran nuclear deal and a commitment to sanctions, previously stating they are crucial to “push back forcefully against this threat to our security and that of our allies.”

National Security Adviser Mike Waltz has similarly called for strong measures, arguing in 2020 that Iran has been in “endless war with us for 40 years” and must be confronted decisively. Pete Hegseth, nominated for Secretary of Defense, takes an even more aggressive stance, defending the killing of General Qasem Soleimani and advocating strikes on Iranian targets, declaring Iran’s regime an “evil threat.” Elise Stefanik, Trump’s pick for US Ambassador to the United Nations, has already signaled alignment with this strategy, declaring on X that “the US is ready for a return to President Trump’s MAXIMUM PRESSURE campaign against Iran.” Her statement mirrors the administration’s intent to reimpose sanctions and pursue an aggressive approach toward Tehran.

With figures like Rubio, Waltz, Hegseth, and Stefanik leading the charge, Trump’s team is poised to implement an uncompromising policy toward Tehran, setting the stage for a more confrontational US-Iran relationship.

Trump’s First Test: Balancing Allies and Containing Iran

As Atlantic Council’s Fred Kempe highlights, the Iran file will be a litmus test for Trump’s leadership on the global stage. Definitely it will be the first test in chronological order, linked to the war in the Middle East, and managing this dossier will require navigating not only Tehran’s nuclear ambitions but also the complex priorities of the region. For Israel, the destruction of an Iranian nuclear weapons research facility scooped last week underscores its urgency for direct action against Tehran. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government sees Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and may push Trump toward escalation.

Conversely, as mentioned, Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE prioritize regional stability, having made significant diplomatic overtures to Iran. The ongoing war in the Middle East complicates this picture further, emboldening hardliners within Tehran who view heightened tensions as an opportunity to consolidate power domestically and expand their influence regionally.

How Trump navigates these competing pressures—balancing Israel’s calls for escalation, the Gulf’s preference for stability, and the US’s strategic objectives—will set the tone for his administration’s Middle East policy. But it will also have a ripple effect on the relations with European allies.

Historical Context: The E3 and Trump’s Iran Policy

The divergence between Donald Trump and the E3 over the Iran nuclear deal was starkly evident in 2018 when Trump withdrew the US from the JCPOA despite opposition from European leaders. At the time, French President Emmanuel Macron warned that the move risked “opening the door to an escalation,” while Angela Merkel emphasized the importance of diplomatic solutions.

These early transatlantic tensions over Iran policy marked a significant fracture, but the intervening years have brought new dynamics. The failure of the Biden administration to revive the JCPOA and Iran’s growing ties with Russia and China have fundamentally shifted European priorities, compelling the E3 to reassess their approach—always in a manageable way, avoiding escalation’s risk.

A Call to Action for Europe

As Donald Trump prepares to retake office, European governments face a critical moment in shaping their approach to the unfolding crisis in the Middle East. An analysis by the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) offers a stark warning: the illusion that Israel can reshape the region through military means and the looming risk of a Trump-backed escalating conflict between Israel and Iran threaten to pull the US and Europe into a devastating war.

Europe must act decisively to prevent this scenario. One path lies in cooperating closely with Arab capitals, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which have invested in rapprochement with Tehran. These Gulf states view a return to Trump’s maximum pressure policies with alarm, recognizing the potential for such a strategy to accelerate Israeli-Iranian tensions. A coordinated effort by European and Arab countries could present a unified case to Trump, urging him to pressure Israel toward restraint and to signal to Iran that de-escalation—not confrontation—is the only path to economic relief and stability.

If Europe fails to act decisively, it risks losing its influence in shaping Middle Eastern dynamics to other global powers, further eroding its strategic partnership with the Gulf and its ability to contribute to regional stability. Preventing a broader war between Israel and Iran must be Europe’s paramount priority. By acting swiftly and decisively in concert with Arab partners, European states can influence Trump’s approach and avert the devastating consequences of unchecked escalation. “Clearly, however, Trump’s unpredictability–combined with Netanyahu’s zeal for military victory and Iran’s determination to re-establish deterrence–means that Europeans need to also prepare for a very dangerous period ahead,” stressed ECFR’s experts.