Europe wonders about sanctions against Iran for Syria

There is a conflict within European countries about the attitude to be taken with Iran. There are two issues, and even if they seem unrelated to each other, they are a problem on relations with Teheran, but also with Washington. Iranian involvement in the Syrian war alongside Assad, and therefore all of his misdeeds, requires European countries to give a strong diplomatic response to the Iranian country: the solution found would be to impose sanctions on Teheran, however, the reason for the discussion is how serious these measures should be. The question is related to the nuclear agreement that Iran has also stipulated with the European Union, Germany, France and the United Kingdom. The fear is that, because of the sanctions for the presence in Syria, Teheran has a negative reaction also on the nuclear agreement, especially for the pressure coming from the USA, which, with President Trump, seems to want to withdraw from what agreed. What Europeans fear is that putting new sanctions on Iran could be a sort of excuse for Tehran to make the treaty ineffective and pave the way for Iranian atomic military development. This scenario would be the worst possible at this stage, characterized by tensions between Americans and Russians, because the Iranian front would open up officially. In fact, Trump's behavior is influenced not only by the preconceptions of the White House, but also by the pressures of the Israelis and Sunni monarchies, traditional opponents of Tehran. The concrete risk is that of nuclear proliferation and a state of permanent tension, with Iran that could claim its right to nuclear research, also for military purposes and a dialectic consisting of threats of armed intervention, and adequate responses, such as it had already happened before the signature on the agreement was reached. In order to avoid the return of a balance of terror on a multipolar scale, and therefore more difficult to control, Berlini, Paris and London have proposed sanctions against Iran with a scheme of selective measures: the reason is not to cause a tightening of Tehran and, at the same time, demonstrate to Washington that, in this way, one can be strict with Iran without inducing him to withdraw from the treaty. Despite the disagreement with some European partners, the proposed measures concern not the Iranian state, but its officials believed to be directly involved in the Syrian conflict. If, on the one hand, it is clearly an operation carried out demonstrating all the goodwill possible towards a country that has in any case been responsible for massacres against civilians, on the other hand, precisely this caution could be mistaken for weakness from Trump and, therefore, provide him with the opportunity to continue the project to boycott the nuclear treaty. The real danger is that, in addition to the US president, even the Iranian government take advantage of these sanctions to renounce the treaty, considering, too, that the expected benefits in the economic field have been hitherto greatly reduced. In other words, Teheran could judge that it is more convenient to move towards becoming an atomic power and, at the same time, reinforce political and commercial relations with the enemy countries of the Americans like Russia, but also China, considered more advantageous in a strategic sense. anhe at the expense of the possible economic benefits, for now not arrived, that the end of the sanctions by Europeans and Americans should have guaranteed. It will be necessary to wait what the Teheran government will consider more important: if the geopolitical or economic aspects, certainly without tangible benefits, it seems obvious that Iran favors its international ambitions.