Iranian head of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission says "The Iranian nation will never forget France's constant betrayals on issues such as contaminated blood, INSTEX, and snapback", IRIB reports

Rhetoric of this kind from a parliamentary security commission chairman is a recurring feature of Iranian messaging toward European states and has historically carried limited weight on its own; the channel that matters is whether such language precedes concrete diplomatic steps, since Iran's friction with the E3 over the snapback mechanism and the JCPOA file has tended to move markets only when it escalates into actual sanctions reimposition, IAEA confrontations, or nuclear program announcements rather than rhetorical grievance. The references bundled here, INSTEX and snapback, are the standing list of European failures to deliver sanctions relief, a theme Tehran has replayed across many negotiating cycles without it translating into price action absent a follow-on event. The actor's prior form is domestic-audience signaling rather than policy-setting; in Iran's system the operative voices on the nuclear file sit with the Supreme National Security Council and the executive, so commission statements typically test or harden a negotiating posture rather than announce one. What separates noise from signal in this pattern is sequencing: comparable episodes have mattered when parliamentary rhetoric was followed by legislation restricting inspections, formal letters to the IAEA, or steps away from talks, and faded when it stood alone. Worth watching is any parallel movement in the E3's posture on snapback deadlines and whether the language is echoed by officials with actual decision authority. As it stands, this reads as posture, not escalation.