Iran, Russia and China have sent a joint letter to the UN Secretary-General and Security Council slamming European attempts to restore international sanctions on Tehran, Iran's foreign minister wrote on X.
Two rounds of talks between the IAEA and the foreign ministry had already taken place, with a third session planned, Mohammad Eslami, head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, told reporters.
“The matter of IAEA supervision over the refueling of Bushehr was on the agenda. Two inspectors came, observed the process and left,” he said.
Inspectors entered the country with authorization from the Supreme National Security Council to oversee a fuel replacement process at Bushehr, he added.
The visit marked the first IAEA presence since Tehran suspended cooperation during the 12-day war with Israel, when US and Israeli strikes targeted Iranian nuclear facilities.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said last week that while inspectors were allowed back into Bushehr, access to other key sites remained blocked. He also warned that the agency was still dissatisfied with the level of Iranian cooperation.
Some Iranian officials and media outlets had also threatened that as soon as Grossi entered Iranian territory, he should be arrested and put on trial. The Kayhan newspaper, overseen by the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, had called for Grossi to be tried and executed “for spying for Mossad.”
Dispute over snapback sanctions
Eslami dismissed the activation of the UN snapback mechanism by Britain, France and Germany as unsurprising. “Our enemies always find excuses to pressure the Iranian nation,” he said, accusing the IAEA leadership of acting under the influence of Western powers.
The European states triggered the mechanism on August 28, seeking the reimposition of all previous UN sanctions and demanding that Iran resume full cooperation with the IAEA within 30 days. Tehran has so far refused.
Officials have threatened that if pressure intensifies, Iran could withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty — a move that would deepen its isolation and risk losing support from Russia and China.
The IAEA has reported that Iran holds enriched uranium stocks far beyond the limits set in the 2015 nuclear deal, including more than 400 kilograms enriched to 60 percent.
The fate of this material remains unclear after the strikes on Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan during the June conflict. Experts warn it could be enough, if further refined, to build several nuclear weapons.
Ebrahim Azizi, the head of Iran’s parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said Iranian border guards reported seeing drones crossing from Azerbaijani territory.
“Border guards of the Islamic Republic of Iran explicitly said that the Zionist regime used Azerbaijan’s border to infiltrate drones into Iran,” Azizi during an interview with state media.
He added that the matter had been raised by Iran’s presidency and foreign ministry with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, who had requested documentation.
“Now, whether we provide documents is one issue, but the reality itself is undeniable. Our border guards clearly said: ‘We were there and with our own eyes we saw that Israeli drones entered Iran from Azerbaijani soil,’” Azizi said.
The comments follow a phone call in late June in which Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian urged Aliyev to investigate reports that Israeli drones and micro-UAVs had entered Iran from Azerbaijan during the conflict.
According to Iran’s readout of the call, Aliyev denied that Azerbaijan had allowed its territory to be used in attacks against Iran, describing such actions as a “red line.”
Iran has long voiced unease about what it sees as Israel’s security and intelligence presence in Azerbaijan.
In February, Kamal Kharrazi, a senior foreign policy adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said countries “should take their neighbors’ sensitivities into consideration,” expressing concern over Israel’s activities in the South Caucasus state.
Azerbaijan, for its part, has consistently rejected allegations of hosting Israeli military bases or permitting its territory to be used against Iran. Its officials have occasionally accused Iranian clerics and state-linked media of spreading inflammatory rhetoric.
In January, Azerbaijan summoned Iran’s chargé d’affaires in Baku to protest alleged anti-Azerbaijan content in Iranian outlets.
Despite recurring flare-ups, Tehran and Baku have maintained cooperation in areas such as cross-border trade, energy swaps, and infrastructure projects, including the Rasht-Astara railway.
But mistrust persists, particularly over the Zangezur Corridor linking Azerbaijan to Nakhchivan through Armenian territory, a project Iran fears could undermine its regional influence.
A US-brokered peace deal last month between Armenia and Azerbaijan granted Washington leasing rights to develop the Zangezur transit corridor, now renamed the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP).
While Iranian officials continue to accuse Baku of tacit collaboration with Israel, Azerbaijan’s ambassador to Israel said in 2023 that his country “would not let Israel’s military use Azerbaijan as a base for a possible attack against Iran.”
Addressing the gathering on Monday, Pezeshkian outlined a three-part proposal called the “Special Accounts and Settlements of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.”
The plan proposes to expand the use of national currencies in trade, develop shared digital systems including central bank digital currencies, and create a multilateral swap fund to support members facing sanctions or liquidity crises.
“This initiative will enhance economic resilience and turn the SCO into a model of a fair multipolar financial order,” he said.
He also urged the formation of a committee of foreign ministers to manage crises and respond quickly to violations of sovereignty.
This was not the first time Pezeshkian stressed de-dollarization. At a BRICS meeting in Russia in 2024, he said the bloc was recognized for “challenging the dominance of the dollar” and promoting national currencies.
At that time, an image of a banknote bearing the BRICS emblem in the hands of Russian President Vladimir Putin at the organization’s summit in Tatarstan drew media attention and sparked discussion about the possibility of its members adopting a common currency.
In December 2024, before officially taking office as US President Donald Trump warned BRICS members that if they used any currency other than the US dollar, they would face a 100% tariff.
Absent from leaders’ photo
A video released Sunday showed Pezeshkian missing from the customary group photo.
Iranian media said he arrived late, while his deputy for communications said the official summit was to begin the following day and the photo was taken during an informal banquet. Unofficial Iranian accounts said his absence was due to alcohol being served at the reception, an issue sensitive for Iranian officials.
Tehran is seen as banking on bilateral meetings during the summit, particularly with Russian President Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, as it seeks to manage fallout from its nuclear dispute with the West.
Founded in 2001 by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) initially focused on regional security and counterterrorism.
Over time, China and Russia have framed it as a counterweight to US and NATO influence. The SCO now has 10 full members—including India, Pakistan, Iran (since 2023), and Belarus (since 2024)—and its agenda has expanded to economic, political, and military cooperation.
Malley served as US special envoy for Iran under President Joe Biden and was a key architect of the Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran. He was placed on leave and had his security clearance suspended in 2023 over alleged mishandling of classified information.
His Yale course for Fall 2025, titled Adversaries by Design: Deconstructing the Iran-US Relationship, will examine ties between Washington and Tehran from the 1979 Islamic Revolution to the present.
The syllabus, seen by Iran International, says students are expected to “internalize” both American and Iranian perspectives, and assignments include role-playing exercises simulating negotiations between the two governments.
However, the list of people whose works students are required to read mainly consists of former Islamic Republic officials or analysts aligned with their thinking.
The syllabus’s reading list includes “How Iran Sees the Path to Peace,” a December 2024 Foreign Affairs essay by former foreign minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif, who has been under US sanctions since 2019. The article, assigned for the Week 11, outlines his diplomatic perspective on Iran’s relations with the West.
While Yale’s website says the course will feature guest speakers, it does not identify them. However, an op-ed by a Yale student published Friday in the Jewish News Syndicate names Zarif as one of the invited speakers.
The syllabus also assigns a 2019 Foreign Affairs article by Hossein Mousavian, a former Iranian nuclear negotiator and diplomat. The piece, “How Iran Sees its Standoff with the United States,” appears in the Week 8 readings on the collapse of the 2015 nuclear deal.
Mousavian recently ended his 15-year tenure at Princeton University, which the university described as a retirement. Activists, however, said it followed pressure over his alleged ties to state-linked assassinations and propaganda efforts especially when he served as Iran's ambassador to Berlin.
Other authors featured on the reading list include Narges Bajoghli, Vali Nasr, Djavad Salehi-Isfahani, Ali Vaez, Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, and Trita Parsi who are mostly opposed to Iran sanctions and favor normalized relations.
Their works, assigned in weeks dedicated to sanctions and diplomacy, argue that US sanctions have been ineffective or harmful to ordinary Iranians and explore possible diplomatic paths forward.
One of the required reading texts is How Sanctions Work: Iran and the Impact of Economic Warfare by Bajoghli, Nasr, Salehi-Isfahani, and Vaez, alongside Batmanghelidj’s How Sanctions Hurt Iran’s Protesters and Parsi’s No, Sanctions Didn’t Force Iran to Make a Deal.
In 2023, Iran International and Semafor investigation uncovered the Iran Experts Initiative (IEI) - a network formed under Zarif to promote Iran's foreign policy and nuclear strategy through scholars based abroad. Ali Vaez was named as one of its key members.
Abbas Araghchi, who signed the letter with his Russian and Chinese counterparts at a foreign ministers’ summit in Tianjin in China, said the powers were united in condemning Europe's "politically destructive" move.
The snapback mechanism, created under UN Security Council Resolution 2231, allows any signatory to the now mostly lapsed 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to restore previous UN sanctions if Iran is judged to be in major violation.
Once invoked, sanctions return automatically after 30 days unless the Council votes to extend relief. The provision expires in October 2025.
On August 28, Britain, France and Germany formally triggered the process, citing Iran’s accumulation of highly enriched uranium.
The European powers said they were prepared to delay enforcement if Iran resumed cooperation with UN inspectors and engaged in negotiations.
But the three Eurasian powers were categorical in their rejection of the move.
"The UN Security Council cannot proceed on the basis of the communication submitted by the E3 and should consider it null and void," they wrote in the joint letter according to a picture of the document shared by Araghchi.
"We strongly urge the members of the UN Security Council to reject the claims of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom on allegedly invoking the 'snapback' mechanism and reaffirm their commitment to the principles of international law and multilateral diplomacy," they added.
Araghchi blamed the United States and Europe for undermining the deal.
“It was the United States that first violated the JCPOA and Resolution 2231,” he wrote on X, referring to its 2018 exit from the agreement during President Donald Trump''s first term.
“Europe, instead of fulfilling its commitments, chose to align with unlawful sanctions," he said. “Countries that fail to meet their obligations have no right to enjoy the benefits of an agreement they themselves have weakened. The credibility of multilateral diplomacy can only be preserved on this logic.”
