In the shadowy chessboard of global power, a silent countdown has begun. One secret strike. One broken deal. One last chance at diplomacy slipping through the cracks. The world’s most volatile region stands inches from chaos, and at the heart of it all lies a forgotten agreement, the JCPOA. Once celebrated as a triumph of peace, now buried under sanctions, sabotage, and secrets. But something has shifted. Talks are stalling. Missiles are flying. And October 2025 could change everything.
What is the Iran Nuclear Deal?
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed in 2015 by Iran and the P5+1, was a landmark agreement designed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It imposed strict restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program, limiting uranium enrichment to 3.67%, reducing centrifuges by two-thirds, and cutting its uranium stockpile by 98%. The IAEA was granted sweeping access to verify compliance.
In exchange, Iran was granted relief from crippling international sanctions, giving it access to billions of dollars in frozen assets and re-entry into global financial and energy markets. The deal was codified under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 and hailed as a triumph of multilateral diplomacy. As of now, JCPOA & UNSC res. 2231, which endorsed the JCPOA, both are set to expire in Oct 2025.
What Went Wrong?
The JCPOA began to unravel in 2018 when the United States, under President Donald Trump, unilaterally withdrew from the agreement. This withdrawal reintroduced sanctions on Iran and marked a sharp departure from the consensus that had underpinned the deal. Iran responded by breaching enrichment limits and curbing IAEA access. By 2025, its breakout time to develop bomb-grade material has shrunk to mere weeks.
Recent backchannel talks between Iran and the U.S. brokered by Oman were derailed in June when Israeli airstrikes targeted IAEA-monitored nuclear facilities inside Iran. These attacks halted verification work and triggered fears of wider conflict.
Pakistan’s UN Warning: Reclaim Diplomacy Before It’s Too Late
At the UN Security Council on June 24, Pakistan’s Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad stressed that despite the crisis, the JCPOA remains a blueprint for peaceful resolution. He condemned the attacks on safeguarded sites, calling them a violation of international law, UN resolutions, and IAEA safeguards.
Calling for restraint, Ahmad urged the Council to support a ceasefire and enable the IAEA to resume its verification role. He announced Pakistan, China, and Russia had submitted a revised resolution reaffirming diplomacy and non-aggression.
“The cost of resolving disputes through force is now obvious,” Ahmad said. “Diplomacy has delivered before, and it can again.”
Ahmad stressed that for a country like Pakistan, geographically and economically tied to Gulf stability, the stakes are especially high. He warned that the region is “one miscalculation away” from a potentially catastrophic war.
The Clock Is Ticking: Can the JCPOA Still Be Useful?
With key JCPOA provisions expiring in October 2025, time is running out. Without a renewed agreement or an alternative, global non-proliferation norms risk collapsing. The IAEA’s access remains blocked, and the region is one miscalculation away from conflict.
Pakistan, deeply impacted by Gulf instability, sees the deal’s restoration as essential for regional security. Ahmad called for the UN and IAEA to assess the damage caused by military strikes and facilitate renewed engagement.
Why Is It Back in the Spotlight?
The JCPOA worked until it was dismantled. It reduced Iran’s nuclear risk and opened space for diplomacy. Its survival now hinges on restoring trust and avoiding further escalation. Whether the international community reclaims the diplomatic path or watches the agreement collapse under pressure will define the future of nuclear diplomacy.
What is the JCPOA, and why is it back in the Spotlight
In the shadowy chessboard of global power, a silent countdown has begun. One secret strike. One broken deal. One last chance at diplomacy slipping through the cracks. The world’s most volatile region stands inches from chaos, and at the heart of it all lies a forgotten agreement, the JCPOA. Once celebrated as a triumph of peace, now buried under sanctions, sabotage, and secrets. But something has shifted. Talks are stalling. Missiles are flying. And October 2025 could change everything.
What is the Iran Nuclear Deal?
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed in 2015 by Iran and the P5+1, was a landmark agreement designed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It imposed strict restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program, limiting uranium enrichment to 3.67%, reducing centrifuges by two-thirds, and cutting its uranium stockpile by 98%. The IAEA was granted sweeping access to verify compliance.
In exchange, Iran was granted relief from crippling international sanctions, giving it access to billions of dollars in frozen assets and re-entry into global financial and energy markets. The deal was codified under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 and hailed as a triumph of multilateral diplomacy. As of now, JCPOA & UNSC res. 2231, which endorsed the JCPOA, both are set to expire in Oct 2025.
What Went Wrong?
The JCPOA began to unravel in 2018 when the United States, under President Donald Trump, unilaterally withdrew from the agreement. This withdrawal reintroduced sanctions on Iran and marked a sharp departure from the consensus that had underpinned the deal. Iran responded by breaching enrichment limits and curbing IAEA access. By 2025, its breakout time to develop bomb-grade material has shrunk to mere weeks.
Recent backchannel talks between Iran and the U.S. brokered by Oman were derailed in June when Israeli airstrikes targeted IAEA-monitored nuclear facilities inside Iran. These attacks halted verification work and triggered fears of wider conflict.
Pakistan’s UN Warning: Reclaim Diplomacy Before It’s Too Late
At the UN Security Council on June 24, Pakistan’s Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad stressed that despite the crisis, the JCPOA remains a blueprint for peaceful resolution. He condemned the attacks on safeguarded sites, calling them a violation of international law, UN resolutions, and IAEA safeguards.
Calling for restraint, Ahmad urged the Council to support a ceasefire and enable the IAEA to resume its verification role. He announced Pakistan, China, and Russia had submitted a revised resolution reaffirming diplomacy and non-aggression.
“The cost of resolving disputes through force is now obvious,” Ahmad said. “Diplomacy has delivered before, and it can again.”
Ahmad stressed that for a country like Pakistan, geographically and economically tied to Gulf stability, the stakes are especially high. He warned that the region is “one miscalculation away” from a potentially catastrophic war.
The Clock Is Ticking: Can the JCPOA Still Be Useful?
With key JCPOA provisions expiring in October 2025, time is running out. Without a renewed agreement or an alternative, global non-proliferation norms risk collapsing. The IAEA’s access remains blocked, and the region is one miscalculation away from conflict.
Pakistan, deeply impacted by Gulf instability, sees the deal’s restoration as essential for regional security. Ahmad called for the UN and IAEA to assess the damage caused by military strikes and facilitate renewed engagement.
Why Is It Back in the Spotlight?
The JCPOA worked until it was dismantled. It reduced Iran’s nuclear risk and opened space for diplomacy. Its survival now hinges on restoring trust and avoiding further escalation. Whether the international community reclaims the diplomatic path or watches the agreement collapse under pressure will define the future of nuclear diplomacy.
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
Recent
Qatar’s Dubious Neutrality and the Narrative Campaign Against Pakistan
Qatar’s role in South Asia illustrates how mediation and media narratives can quietly converge into instruments of influence. Through Al Jazeera’s selective framing of Pakistan’s security challenges and Doha’s unbalanced facilitation with the Taliban, neutrality risks becoming a performative posture rather than a principled practice. Mediation that avoids accountability does not resolve conflict, it entrenches it.
From Dialogue to Patronage: How Qatar Mainstreamed Radical Movements Under the Banner of Mediation
Qatar’s diplomacy has long been framed as pragmatic engagement, but its mediation model has increasingly blurred into political patronage. By hosting and legitimizing groups such as the Taliban and Hamas without enforceable conditions, Doha has helped normalize armed movements in international politics, weakening counterterrorism norms and reshaping regional stability.
AI, Extremism, and the Weaponization of Hate: Islamophobia in India
AI is no longer a neutral tool in India’s digital space. A growing body of research shows how artificial intelligence is being deliberately weaponized to mass-produce Islamophobic narratives, normalize harassment, and amplify Hindutva extremism. As online hate increasingly spills into real-world violence, India’s AI-driven propaganda ecosystem raises urgent questions about accountability, democracy, and the future of pluralism.
AQAP’s Threat to China: Pathways Through Al-Qaeda’s Global Network
AQAP’s threat against China marks a shift from rhetoric to execution, rooted in Al-Qaeda’s decentralized global architecture. By using Afghanistan as a coordination hub and relying on AQIS, TTP, and Uyghur militants of the Turkistan Islamic Party as local enablers, the threat is designed to be carried out far beyond Yemen. From CPEC projects in Pakistan to Chinese interests in Central Asia and Africa, the networked nature of Al-Qaeda allows a geographically dispersed yet strategically aligned campaign against Beijing.
The Enduring Consequences of America’s Exit from Afghanistan
The 2021 US withdrawal from Afghanistan was more than the end of a long war, it was a poorly executed exit that triggered the rapid collapse of the Afghan state. The fall of Kabul, the Abbey Gate attack, and the return of militant groups exposed serious gaps in planning and coordination.