The textual content, tabled by the Council president – the Republic of Korea – acquired solely 4 votes in favour, from Russia, China, Algeria, and Pakistan, failing to safe the 9 required for adoption.
Denmark, France, Greece, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Somalia, the UK, and the US voted in opposition to. Guyana and the Republic of Korea abstained.
Had it been adopted, the decision would have terminated UN sanctions imposed on Iran previous to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (or JCPOA), thereby preserving the sanctions aid offered to Tehran underneath the deal.
Phrases of the ‘snapback’
Decision 2231, which endorsed the JCPOA in July 2015, set out the method by which UN sanctions could be lifted, whereas establishing a mechanism to reimpose them in case of “important non-performance” by any of its individuals – China, France, Germany, Russia, the UK, the US, the European Union (EU) and Iran.
Beneath paragraph 11, if one of many signatories notifies the Council of a major breach, the Council president should, inside 30 days, put a draft decision to the vote for sanctions aid to proceed.
If the draft isn’t adopted, the earlier UN sanctions are routinely reimposed which means that until the Council explicitly votes to maintain sanctions aid in place, earlier UN sanctions are routinely restored.
Safety Council members vote on the draft decision.
Heated discussions
Initially of Friday’s assembly, Russia raised some extent of order, rejecting the European declare to set off the snapback mechanism.
Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia stated that there have been no authorized, political or procedural causes to permit the “snapback” mechanism or to vote on the draft decision, and accused France, Germany and UK of appearing exterior each decision 2231 and the JCPOA.
He stated the three had did not comply with the dispute settlement mechanism and as a substitute imposed unilateral sanctions in opposition to Iran, which he described as “unlawful”.
“Makes an attempt on the a part of the European international locations to current the scenario as if they’ve the suitable to activate the punitive provisions of prior resolutions, whereas themselves failing to fulfil their very own obligations…can’t maintain water,” Ambassador Nebenzia stated.
China additionally urged warning.
Ambassador FU Cong stated “main discrepancies” existed between Council members over the snapback and warned {that a} rushed vote might “exacerbate State confrontation”, complicating efforts to resolve the difficulty diplomatically.
UK Ambassador Barbara Woodward countered, stating that the E3 (the European individuals of the JCPOA) choice to invoke snapback was “fully authorized, justified, extensive and per the necessities of decision 2231.”
She cited the 28 August 2025 notification submitted by France, Germany and the UK: “All that’s required to set off snapback is…a notification by a JCPOA participant state of a difficulty that it believes constitutes important non-performance of commitments underneath the JCPOA,” she stated.
France spoke earlier than the vote, citing Iran’s escalating nuclear programme and its diminished cooperation with the Worldwide Atomic Power Company (IAEA).
Ambassador Jérôme Bonnafont stated Iran had collected enriched uranium stockpiles far greater than the restrict set by the settlement and restricted IAEA entry to key amenities.
He referred to as the snapback mechanism essential to protect worldwide peace and safety, and the integrity of the worldwide non-proliferation regime.
