The agreement, signed on June 14 and scheduled for an official ceremony in Switzerland on June 19, includes provisions for an “immediate and permanent” end to military operations and outlines commitments by Iran to pause nuclear enrichment activity in exchange for sanctions relief and the release of frozen funds, though several terms remain subject to final negotiations.

Iran has sought broad economic relief as part of the arrangement, including the lifting of sanctions and access to frozen assets, while Iranian state media has cited a draft proposal that reportedly includes the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian funds during the negotiating period, though this has not been confirmed by either side.

A central obstacle lies in the United Nations Security Council’s “snapback” mechanism under Resolution 2231, which allowed for the reimposition of previously lifted sanctions on Iran following a notification of non-compliance by France, Germany and Britain in August 2025, resulting in sanctions being restored in September 2025.

Those measures include restrictions on Iran’s nuclear and missile programmes, asset freezes, travel bans and limits on Iranian banks’ access to the global financial system, and remain in force despite the US-Iran agreement, which does not affect UN-level restrictions.

The legal framework governing the sanctions means that while the United States can adjust its own unilateral measures, any reversal of UN sanctions requires consensus among Security Council members, a process complicated by deep divisions over the legality of the snapback mechanism.

China and Russia have challenged the legitimacy of the reimposed sanctions, arguing that earlier UN resolutions had expired, while Western states including the US, France and Britain maintain that the mechanism was properly triggered and therefore binding.

Analysts say this divergence has created an uneven enforcement environment in which some states continue limited trade with Iran while others adhere to restrictions, limiting the effectiveness of both sanctions and potential relief.

Daniel Forti of the International Crisis Group said lifting UN sanctions would require full Security Council agreement, noting that the sanctions cover multiple regimes targeting Iran’s nuclear programme, missile development, financial networks and related assets.

Iranian officials have indicated they will seek a new Security Council resolution to endorse any final agreement, a move that analysts say could provide legal clarity and international legitimacy but would require unanimous approval among permanent members of the Council.

The outcome of the ongoing negotiations will therefore depend not only on bilateral US-Iran terms but also on whether the Security Council can bridge its divisions over the snapback sanctions framework, which remains a central point of contention in the implementation of any broader settlement.