Editor's note: Jessica Durdu, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is a foreign affairs specialist and PhD candidate in international relations at China Foreign Affairs University. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

July 14, 2025, marks the tenth anniversary of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), a deal once praised as a triumph of diplomacy. After ten years, the agreement is expiring amid heightened tensions and geopolitical fragmentation. The failure to sustain the JCPOA serves as a sobering reminder of the fragility of diplomacy when not matched with consistent political will.

The deal initially achieved its intended goals. According to multiple reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) between 2016 and 2018, Iran complied with strict limitations on uranium enrichment and allowed intrusive inspections. In response, the European Union and the United Nations lifted nuclear-related sanctions, and billions of dollars in Iranian assets were unfrozen. Western firms signed major investment deals with Tehran, signaling Iran's gradual return to global markets.

However, in May 2018, the U.S. unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA and reimposed sweeping sanctions under its "maximum pressure" campaign. The consequences were immediate and severe: International companies pulled out of Iran to avoid U.S. penalties, European financial mechanisms like INSTEX failed to gain traction, and Iran's economy contracted sharply.

In response, Tehran began reducing its compliance with the deal, exceeding enrichment limits, installing advanced centrifuges, and limiting IAEA access. By 2021, the agreement's technical framework remained in name only. Although the Biden administration expressed interest in rejoining the deal, negotiations in Vienna faltered over sequencing disagreements and the U.S. designation of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization.

This year, diplomacy faced another setback. In June, Iran suspended nuclear talks, citing U.S. military support for Israel amid escalating Israel-Iran tensions. In particular, the Israeli strike on Iran's consulate in Damascus in April 2024 and Tehran's unprecedented missile retaliation in April 2024 intensified hostilities, pushing the nuclear file further into the background. With the JCPOA's sunset clauses now taking effect, the UN Security Council must decide whether to reinstate full sanctions, a decision with implications far beyond Iran.

The JCPOA's unraveling illustrates a deeper failure of global security governance to adapt to a multipolar, distrust-driven world. The key stakeholders, especially Iran and the U.S., approach diplomacy with fundamentally different lenses. For the U.S., the JCPOA became entangled with domestic political polarization; in Iran, it is viewed through a historical lens of foreign intervention and economic coercion. These diverging perspectives eroded the trust needed to uphold such a complex agreement.

Meanwhile, other stakeholders, particularly China and Russia, have consistently advocated for the preservation of the JCPOA as a symbol of rules-based diplomacy. China, for example, not only participated constructively in the original negotiations but also played a stabilizing role in subsequent years.

Beijing hosted dialogues involving regional actors and proposed balanced frameworks that emphasized respect for sovereignty and non-interference. Moreover, China's successful brokering of the 2023 Saudi Arabia-Iran rapprochement demonstrated its growing diplomatic credibility in the Middle East, a region long dominated by Western-led security frameworks.

The contrast is stark. While unilateral sanctions and military posturing have often escalated tensions, inclusive dialogue and balanced mediation, such as China's approach, have shown tangible results. The normalization of Saudi-Iran relations has already reduced hostilities in Yemen, improved economic cooperation across the Gulf, and revived discussions around a regional security mechanism.

The JCPOA's expiry also sends a cautionary message to developing countries: Agreements with global powers may not be sustainable if one party can abandon its commitments without consequence. This erodes trust in multilateralism and weakens the very institutions meant to safeguard global security, such as the United Nations. Already, we see emerging economies expressing concern over selective enforcement of international rules, leading some to pursue alternative partnerships and regional frameworks.

In this environment, China's steady and principle-driven diplomacy stands out. By promoting dialogue, rejecting unilateralism, and advocating for development-led peace, China offers an alternative vision for global security governance, one rooted in cooperation rather than coercion. The JCPOA may be ending, but the challenge it represents remains deeply relevant: How can the world build a fairer, more stable system of diplomacy that reflects the complexity of our times?

Ten years ago, the JCPOA gave hope that such a system was possible. Today, the international community must learn from its collapse and recommit to the patient, principled diplomacy needed to build a more secure world.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X, formerly Twitter, to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)