Veto-holding powers clashed at the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday over Iran’s nuclear program, with China and Russia denouncing Western efforts to revive UN sanctions as legally invalid.
Speaking during the session, Beijing and Moscow envoys rejected claims by France, Germany and the United Kingdom that Resolution 2231 remains in force and that international sanctions on Iran have automatically returned.
Both argued that the resolution expired in October and that the Council no longer has a mandate to consider Iran’s nuclear file.
China’s deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, Sun Lei, described the European move as riddled with “legal and procedural loopholes,” noting that the Council had never reached consensus on whether the European trio had the authority to activate snapback.
“Resolution 2231 expired on October 18, and the Council has ceased its considerations on the Iranian nuclear issue,” Sun added.
Russian envoy Vasily Nebenzya said neither the Security Council nor the UN Secretariat had any remaining mandate on Iran, calling the meeting “a blatant attempt” by Western members to create the impression that Resolution 2231 and the snapback mechanism remain in force.
He warned that such efforts would deepen rifts within the Council “not only politically, but also on legal and procedural matters.”
'Not arbitrary'
Britain and the United States rejected those arguments outright.
Archie Young, the United Kingdom’s deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, said the meeting was “fully in line with the decisions and procedure of this Council” and that London, alongside Paris and Berlin, had triggered snapback “in full accordance with Security Council Resolution 2231.”
“We did so because of Iran’s significant non-performance of its commitments under the JCPOA,” Young said, referring to the 2015 nuclear deal.
US representative Jeff Bartos also defended the sanctions' return as a consequence of Tehran's actions.
"These resolutions are not arbitrary or punitive," he said, "but rather narrowly scoped to address a nuclear program that seeks to operate out of view of the international community and in continued noncompliance with its Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Mandated Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA,as reaffirmed last month by the IAEA Board."
"The United States continues to prefer a negotiated solution to this matter," Bartos added.
'Masks off'
Russia's envoy accused the United States and Israel of derailing diplomacy by airstrikes on Iran in June.
"There were five rounds of indirect negotiations, and the parties agreed to meet for a sixth round. However, two days before that, Israel opted for a military escalation and struck Iranian territory, including civilian nuclear facilities that were under IAEA safeguards. A week later, Western Jerusalem was joined by the U.S. in this misadventure," he told the council.
"In 2025, Western countries took their masks off once and for all regarding the settlement of the Iranian nuclear program. If anyone still had any doubts as to their real position, then these positions have been revealed now once and for all."
'Deliberate disinformation'
Iran's ambassador to the UN Amir Saeed Iravani echoed his Chinese and Russian counterparts in objecting to the convening of the security council meeting.
What we are witnessing is not a legitimate disagreement over interpretation but a calculated distortion of Resolution 2231 to deliberate dissemination of disinformation regarding Iran's peaceful nuclear program and a cynical attempt to abuse this Council for their narrow political interests," Iravani said.
"The root causes of the current situation are clear and did not emerge overnight or in isolation. They lie in the unilateral withdrawal of the United States from the JCPOA in 2018, the sustained and deliberate non-compliance of the three European countries with their commitments and the subsequent military aggression by the United States and the Israeli regime against Iran's peaceful safeguard nuclear facilities."
'Negotiated settlement'
UN under-secretary-general Rosemary A. DiCarlo tried to bring a divided council together with emphasis on continued diplomacy.
"Notwithstanding the significant differences between the relevant parties ... all of them have continued to emphasize the importance of a diplomatic solution and expressed overall readiness to engage with each other for this purpose," DiCarlo said.
"A negotiated settlement that would secure the overall objectives of ensuring a peaceful Iranian nuclear program and providing sanctions relief is the best option available to the international community."
“The simplest task is to build a nuclear bomb, because it does not need fuel control and explodes at once,” Behrouz Kamalvandi said on Saturday, calling it much simpler than developing a nuclear power plant.
“Building a nuclear power plant, which needs control of fuel and reaction levels, is difficult and technical.”
Kamalvandi said Iran has reached "the edge of power in the nuclear field, and there is no unknown issue left for us."
Before a 12-day war in June that culminated in US airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities and paused any uranium enrichment in Iran, the country was enriching uranium to near weapons-grade purity levels.
While Tehran denies seeking a nuclear weapon, the United States and Western countries want Iran to end uranium enrichment, arguing that enrichment beyond 20% has no civilian purpose.
UN inspections
The UN nuclear watchdog has resumed inspection activities in Iran but remains unable to access several of the country’s most sensitive nuclear sites following June strikes, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi said last week.
“We are only allowed to access sites that were not hit,” he said, calling the resumption important but insufficient.
Grossi said Iran cannot unilaterally decide whether inspectors may enter the damaged facilities.
“If they say it is unsafe and inspectors cannot go there, then inspectors must be allowed to confirm that this is indeed the case,” Grossi said in an interview with Russian state media. “That determination has to be made by the agency.”
Kamalvandi, however, says the UN nuclear watchdog's requests are unreasonable.
“The agency’s insistence that access and inspections take place strictly under a safeguards agreement written for non-war conditions is unreasonable,” he said.
Kamalvandi said Iran believes the current safeguards framework cannot be applied in the same way after military attacks.
“This framework was written for ordinary circumstances,” he said. “When nuclear facilities and materials are damaged in a military attack, the conditions are different.”
He said granting access to Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan while security threats persist could endanger Iran, and added that Tehran is considering other ways to account for nuclear material without inspectors entering the sites.
The standoff follows the June war that began with Israeli strikes on June 13 on nuclear facilities, senior military figures and nuclear scientists, followed by the US attacks on June 22.
Grossi said the three sites at Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan bombed by the US are central to uranium processing, conversion and enrichment, but stressed that Iran’s nuclear program extends well beyond them.
“Iran has much more than these three facilities,” he said. “It has a very developed nuclear program, with research activities and many other sites.”
He cited Iran’s operating nuclear power plant at Bushehr and plans for additional reactors, including projects with Russia, adding: “Work continues in all these areas.”
The IAEA has long sought answers from Iran over past nuclear activities and the whereabouts of undeclared nuclear material, issues Grossi has said cannot be resolved without access to relevant sites.
