Iran International
The UN Security Council’s decision not to lift sanctions on Iran has heightened the stakes for Tehran, with hardliners pushing for nuclear escalation, reformists urging engagement, and a public already strained by inflation.
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.
Hardliners and ultra-hardliners in Tehran, who have long dismissed the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) as a “total failure,” downplayed the impact of the UN’s decision. For them, renewed sanctions are little more than symbolic.
“In the past, sanctions far harsher than these have been imposed; this is simply a psychological tactic intended to impact our economy,” hardline lawmaker Hosseinali Haji-Deligani told ILNA.
Meanwhile, Kayhan newspaper, linked to the Supreme Leader’s office, and other hardline outlets such as Vatan-e Emrouz have urged Tehran to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
In an editorial titled “Is it still not time to leave the NPT after 22 years of costly negotiations?!” the paper argued for building a bomb to “fully strengthen national deterrence.”
Ahmad Naderi, a member of parliament’s presiding board, echoed this stance, insisting that “acquiring nuclear weapons is the only way to preserve Iran’s territorial integrity and national security.”
“Withdrawing from the NPT, adopting a policy of ambiguity and ultimately testing the atomic bomb is the only option that can spare Iran the fate of Iraq and Libya,” said Naderi.
“Experience has shown that countries without nuclear deterrence eventually become victims of invasion or regime change. The time has come to make hard but necessary decisions.”
Warning of a deepening crisis, push for policy change
Others caution that the impact will be severe. Journalist Azadeh Mokhtari argued on social media that the Iranian people will once again bear the brunt of political maneuvering: “The return of UN sanctions means increased economic pressure, reduced access to essential goods and medicine, and a deepening livelihood crisis.”
Meanwhile, reformists are calling for urgent diplomacy. Azar Mansouri, head of the Reform Front, warned that “immediate and maximal use of diplomatic capacity to prevent a global consensus against Iran is an unavoidable necessity.”
She stressed that the window of opportunity for negotiations is closing fast, with reinstated UN resolutions carrying “wide-ranging international consequences.”
Ebrahim Asgharzadeh, a reformist politician, went further, telling Etemad newspaper: “Iran stands on the brink of a historic choice: either insist on the illusion of costly deterrence and a single-track foreign policy, which yields nothing but isolation and domestic erosion, or acknowledge the reality of rival powers.”
He added that the world today is “waiting for a change in Iran’s language and behavior, not a repetition or justification of the past.”
Doubts over Russia and China
Hardliners often argue that Russia and China will help Iran weather sanctions. Yet that view has drawn criticism even from conservative voices. Journalist Ali Gholhaki dismissed the notion: “At least in China’s case, it’s just empty talk! Industrial and economic managers understand the reason well. They have seen examples of this in just the past few days.”
Mohammad-Ali Hanaei, head of the Nations Diplomacy Think Tank, told Etemad that Beijing profits from buying Iranian oil cheaply and has little incentive to back sanctions relief. He urged Tehran to consider “logical restrictions” as a way to manage the crisis.
Moscow has suggested it might mediate. Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia’s envoy to international organizations in Vienna, told Al Mayadeen that Russia and China are preparing a joint initiative to resolve the crisis, though he offered no details.
Diplomatic openings still possible?
Some experts still see potential for compromise. Economics professor Alireza Soltani told Khabar Online that the diplomatic window is not yet closed, while cautioning against “emotional reactions.”
Even if previous UN resolutions are reinstated, he argued, a comprehensive deal remains possible “provided there is political will from both Iran and the United States.”
Foreign policy analyst Morteza Makki raised the possibility of a “miracle” if Tehran can strike a temporary arrangement with the E3 (Britain, France, and Germany) in the coming days or at the UN General Assembly.
Pezeshkian-Trump Meeting Debate
At home, debate is intensifying over whether President Masoud Pezeshkian should meet US President Donald Trump during his upcoming trip to New York.
Reformist cleric Mohammad-Taghi Fazel-Meybodi called such a meeting “the last chance of the system,” recalling that a missed opportunity between Mohammad Khatami and Bill Clinton two decades ago paved the way for today’s sanctions.
Yet many doubt Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei will allow it, having denied similar requests from both Khatami and Hassan Rouhani.
