Iran International
A decisive UN Security Council vote setting Iran on course for the automatic return of pre-2015 sanctions has heightened tensions inside Tehran, as rival factions clash over strategy while officials strive to project a unified message abroad.
The resolution, tabled by South Korea in its role as Security Council president, was a procedural part of a process launched last month after Britain, France, and Germany triggered the so-called snapback mechanism, declaring Iran in “significant non-performance” of the 2015 nuclear deal.
The decision not to lift Iran sanctions means all pre-2015 UN sanctions on Iran will automatically return once the 30-day snapback period ends on September 28, unless the Security Council takes further action.
Iran along with permanent Security Council members Russia and China lambasted the vote on Friday as a blow to diplomacy.
Algeria, China, Pakistan, and Russia voted to lift Iran sanctions. Denmark, France, Greece, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Somalia, Britain, and the United States voted against the resolution while Guyana and South Korea abstained.
Acting US Representative to the United Nations Dorothy Shea said the European troika was right to pursue sanctions given what she called Iran's clear violations.
“In July, the E3 offered to extend the snapback mechanism if Iran were to take steps to address concerns regarding its highly enriched uranium stockpile, comply with its IAEA obligations, and resume direct diplomacy with the United States," Shea said. "Despite suggestions to the contrary from Iran and others, Tehran has not yet fulfilled those conditions."
The resolution outcome does "not impede the possibility of real diplomacy,” Shea added, without elaborating.
'Unlawful'
Iran blasted the move, calling it “hasty, unnecessary, and unlawful”.
“Iran's safeguarded nuclear facilities have been attacked not in secret, but openly by Israel, the rogue regime, and by the United States,” Iran's ambassador to the UN, Amir Saeid Iravani, said.
He was referring to a 12-day surprise military campaign by Israel which was capped off by US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. “This reckless step undermines dialogue without aggression and sets a dangerous precedent,” Iravani added.
The Iranian envoy said Tehran never rejected diplomacy, presenting the recent agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to advance resumed international inspections of nuclear sites as evidence.
In a phone call with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi criticized what he called a politicized move that ignored Tehran's good faith approach.
“Araghchi stressed that Iran, as a responsible country, has always pursued the path of diplomacy and technical cooperation to resolve issues related to its nuclear program and rejects any political measures or unfair pressure that could escalate tensions,” his ministry added in a statement.
Britain's permanent representative to the United Nations, Barbara Woodward, questioned Iran's nuclear motives but said it was open to talks.
“The United Kingdom is committed to pursuing a diplomatic solution to ensure that Iran shall never seek, acquire or develop a nuclear weapon,” Woodward said.
“That is why, on August 28, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany notified this Council of Iran's clear and deliberate non-compliance,” she added.
Russia and China opposed
Moscow and Beijing have grown closer to Tehran as their relations with Washington have frayed in recent years. Their envoys castigated the Western position.
Fu Cong, China's permanent representative to the UN, raised doubts about the move by the three European countries, warning it might inflame the long standoff
“China maintains that under such circumstances, hastily pushing for a vote on the draft resolution might exacerbate confrontation further and is not conducive to the resolution of the issue,” Fu Cong said.
Despite defense and economic agreements with Iran, Russia and China offered little substantive support to Iran as it confronted Israel and the United States over the summer.
More willing to exert pressure on Iran at the time of the 2015 nuclear deal, the two superpowers have broken with Western countries by mending fences with another international atomic pariah, North Korea.
Russia's Permanent Representative to the UN Security Council, Vasily Nebenzya, said the sanctions bid violated a 2015 nuclear deal.
“Britain, France, and Germany grossly violated the procedure for the consideration of disputed situations we have under the JCPOA in particular,” Nebenzya said. “Here you have a very good illustration of the fact that our European colleagues do, in essence, reject diplomacy. They prefer the language of blackmail and intimidation.”
Long an advocate of more international pressure on Iran at the United Nations, Israel celebrated a diplomatic win.
Israel's Ambassador to the UN hailed the Security Council's decision, calling it “another step forward towards imposing sanctions on the Iranian regime.”
“It is good that the world has woken up and joined the fight against Tehran’s violence and terrorism toward the Western world. The State of Israel will not allow a nuclear threat from Iran,” Danny Danon said.
The resolution that could have lifted the sanctions was rejected after nine members voted against it on Friday, meaning they will be reimposed on 27 September unless a drastic diplomatic breakthrough prompts the Council to reconsider before then.
“The carelessness and passivity of the Islamic Republic in the face of the snapback is truly astonishing,” wrote outspoken sociologist Hossein Hamdieh on X, urging leaders to “wrest the national interests from the devil’s mouth in the middle of hell.”
Ultra-hardliners, meanwhile, remain opposed to any concession and lay the blame for the so-called snapback at the moderates’ door for agreeing to a deal with such mechanisms a decade ago.
“This flawed mechanism is the result of the mistakes of the JCPOA negotiating team in 2015, including Mr. Araghchi himself,” lawmaker Amir-Hossein Sabeti wrote on X.
“The cost of implementing the snapback is less than the cost of extending it,” he added, arguing that prolonging the deadline would strip Iran of its “nuclear ambiguity” card.
Diplomacy or publicity stunt?
Araghchi’s authority, under attack at home, is also being questioned abroad.
A day earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron had called the sanctions return a “done deal” and questioned whether Araghchi had full authority when presenting his recent IAEA agreement and proposal to the Europeans.
Araghchi rejected the claim, writing on X that he enjoyed the backing of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. Analysts in Tehran said Macron’s comments were aimed at pressuring Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to openly endorse or reject the initiatives.
Skepticism also persists over Araghchi’s timing.
“The proposal ahead of the UNSC vote on Resolution 2231 was not meant as a serious move,” Turkey-based analyst Ruhollah Rahimpour wrote on X.
Submitting such a plan just two days before the vote, he argued, meant “you have no sense of timing, or you only sought publicity.”
Last chance?
Some analysts believe the UN General Assembly next week could be Tehran’s final opportunity to resolve the standoff.
“The only chance remaining is that Iran’s proposals are submitted in writing and signed, and direct dialogue between Iran and the United States takes place when Pezeshkian is in New York,” Canada-based commentator Alireza Namvar-Haghighi told Iran International.
Both US and Iranian envoys said after the UNSC vote on Friday that the door is not shut to diplomacy. A negotiated way to avoid UN sanctions is still possible — but not probable.
