Iran is in a vulnerable position. President Trump should seize the moment to sink Iranian oil revenues and force Tehran to dismantle its nuclear program.

With the United Nations set to reimpose snapback sanctions on September 27, 2025, Tehran is once again rattling the saber, hinting it may even quit the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Its nuclear program has been badly damaged, its regional proxies weakened, and its economy driven into collapse. Yet the regime still clings to the illusion that nothing has changed. That is why President Trump now faces a defining moment: will he allow this endless cycle to continue, or will he play his ace card—cutting off Iran’s last lifeline, its oil revenues—for good?

This confrontation has deep roots. Twenty-three years ago, the world first learned of Iran’s secret Natanz and Arak uranium enrichment facilities. What began in 2002 has outlasted four US presidents, countless negotiations, repeated sanctions campaigns, and has become one of the world’s most persistent security challenges.

President Trump extended multiple openings for dialogue, even appointing his trusted personal friend Steve Witkoff, a confidant known for his conciliatory approach, to lead negotiations. But the Islamic Republic spurned every gesture, clinging to hardline positions even after absorbing some of its harshest setbacks.

Three months after the US-Israeli strikes, Iranian leaders hardly bothered to conceal their defiance. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi scoffed that “Diplomacy is often cheaper and less risky, though sometimes it can cost more than war.” Iran’s UN ambassador Amir-Saeid Iravani declared in June that “The enrichment is our right, an inalienable right, and we want to implement this right.” Most importantly, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei doubled down on uranium enrichment, declaring, “We will never abandon our religion and our science.”

Despite this posturing, Tehran’s blackmail tools have eroded. President Trump’s critics called him reckless, but unlike many in Washington, he demonstrated genuine goodwill—pursuing diplomacy first while making it clear that he would not compromise on US redlines. Tehran, however, miscalculated. It assumed President Trump was desperate for a deal. Instead, the leverage it once enjoyed through uranium enrichment has been stripped away by the US and Israeli operations that damaged the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities. 

Faced with these losses, the regime has turned to its familiar tactic of delay. As a Persian proverb puts it: “between one pillar and the next, relief may come.” Knowing it cannot withstand US military might, Tehran hopes congressional inaction will triumph. It bets President Trump, wary of domestic opinion, will restrain Israel as well, and maintain his image as a reluctant peacemaker.

That gamble creates an opportunity. The United States holds a far stronger lever than military strikes; if it wishes to, Washington can cut Tehran’s oil exports to an absolute zero. With Europe activating the UN’s snapback mechanism, Washington has a rare chance to strike at Tehran’s economic jugular.

The idea of “zero oil exports” has never been fully tested. Even at the height of President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign in 2019–2020, Iran still managed to export about 500,000 barrels a day.

Why is 2025 different? In 2019, Europe resisted snapback sanctions, and Tehran still had multiple levers of blackmail—from enrichment escalation to proxy wars. Today, most of those options are no longer available. What remains is one last card: threatening to quit the NPT. But that is not a show of strength. It is a sign of weakness. A regime confident in its power does not gamble with abandoning the very treaty that legitimizes its nuclear program.

The timing could not be more favorable. The Iranian people have endured years of sanctions. They know the problem lies in Tehran, not Washington. For years, they bore hardship believing there was light at the end of the tunnel. That patience is now gone.