This study applies thermodynamic principles to political analysis, conceptualizing it as a system to assess internal quality. Within this framework, the elements and pillars of analysis are regarded as active and structural components of a system, whose degree of coordination determines the level of analytical entropy. It introduces “analytical entropy” as a measure of disorder or inconsistency between analytical elements (actors, data, motives) and pillars (paradigm, methodology, reasoning). Using metaphorical modeling and systems theory, a diagnostic mechanism is designed. Applied to the political dispute over the “snapback” mechanism after the expiration of UNSC Resolution 2231, findings reveal that analytical entropy stems from epistemological divergence between rival frameworks (Iran-Russia-China vs. U.S.-Europe). This thermodynamic model proves reliable for measuring coherence and stability in political analyses, opening new interdisciplinary horizons for political research.