Araqchi Rejects US, EU3’s Snapback Move as Baseless, Harmful to UN

Araqchi, in a letter to his foreign counterparts, rejected as unlawful and baseless the attempt by the United States and three European countries to trigger the snapback mechanism and reinstate terminated UN Security Council resolutions, warning that the move undermines the authority of the Security Council and the credibility of multilateral diplomacy.

Here is the full text of his letter:

In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful

Excellency,

I have the honor to draw your attention to a matter of great urgency and importance for the credibility of the international legal order and the authority of the United Nations. Recent claims by the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany that the United Nations Security Council resolutions, previously terminated under Security Council resolution 2231 (2015), have been “restored” through the so-called snapback mechanism are entirely unfounded, unlawful, and invalid.

These assertions must be rejected in their entirety. They contradict both the letter and the spirit of resolution 2231, undermine the integrity of the Security Council, and pose a serious threat to the credibility of multilateral diplomacy.

Resolution 2231 (2015), adopted unanimously by the Security Council, endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and established a carefully balanced framework. In particular:

• It terminated the previous Security Council resolutions on the Iranian nuclear program, including all sanctions measures therein, as part of the agreed compromise;

• It provided a clear time-bound framework, according to which all nuclear-related restrictions would permanently expire on 18 October 2025; and

• It vested no State with unilateral authority to alter, reinterpret, or extend the provisions of the resolution.

This resolution was the product of long and difficult negotiations, in which mutual commitments and reciprocal assurances formed the foundation of the agreement. Any attempt to reinterpret or manipulate its provisions ex post facto runs counter to the binding nature of Security Council decisions under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations.

The so-called snapback procedure invoked by the aforesaid states is null and void. Specifically:

• The United States, having unilaterally withdrawn from the JCPOA in May 2018 and thereby having ceased participation in all related processes, and having further engaged in the unlawful attacks against Iran’s nuclear facilities under the IAEA safeguards regime, and the E3, being in substantial non-performance of their own commitments, stand absolutely devoid of eligibility to invoke resolution 2231 for any purpose whatsoever. Any claims advanced thereunder are self-contradictory and bereft of legal foundation;

• The notification circulated by the United Kingdom, France, and Germany on 28 August 2025 does not meet the requirements of operative paragraph 11 of resolution 2231. Russia, China, Iran, and other Member States have made this position abundantly clear including, inter alia, through formal communications to the Secretary General and the Security Council; and

• The draft resolution submitted to the Security Council on 19 September 2025 by the President of the Council was manifestly inconsistent with resolution 2231 and, as such, the outcome of its consideration cannot and does not entail restoration of sanctions.

For these reasons, no valid legal act has taken place that could restore the terminated resolutions. To claim otherwise is an attempt to mislead the international community and to impose unilateral political agendas under the guise of United Nations authority.

Efforts by the E3 and the United States to revive terminated resolutions amount to a unilateral rewriting of international law. Such actions:

• Violate the explicit provisions of resolution 2231 and erode trust in the binding nature of Security Council decisions;

• Undermine the authority of the Council by creating the false impression that its decisions can be overridden by a minority of states acting outside established procedures; and

• Damage the integrity of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime by weaponizing it for political coercion against a sovereign Member State.

Furthermore, any attempt to put pressure on the UN Secretariat to take steps for which it has no mandate under the Charter, in particular Article 100, threatens the neutrality and impartiality of the Secretariat.

The Islamic Republic of Iran categorically rejects the alleged reinstatement of terminated resolutions. Neither Iran nor any other Member State of the United Nations is under any legal obligation to comply with such unlawful claims. On the contrary, recognition or implementation of these measures would itself amount to a violation of international law.

Iran reiterates that all restrictions under resolution 2231 shall permanently expire on 18 October 2025. Any attempt to extend or revive them beyond that date will have no basis in law and will not be recognized by the Islamic Republic of Iran and any peace-loving country.

Iran has consistently demonstrated its readiness for diplomacy and constructive engagement. The record of the past years proves, however, that certain states have chosen confrontation and coercion over dialogue and compromise. Iran will continue to defend its sovereign rights and legitimate interests firmly, while remaining open to genuine negotiations on an equal footing.

In light of the foregoing, I urge Your Excellency and your Government to:

1. Reject unequivocally any assertion that terminated Security Council resolutions under resolution 2231 have been restored;

2. Refrain from incorporating such unlawful measures into your domestic legislation, administrative practice, or foreign policy; and

3. Encourage all states to uphold multilateralism and to resist attempts to manipulate international institutions for narrow political purposes.

Excellency,

The present moment is a critical test for the credibility of international law. If the unlawful claims of a few states are permitted to prevail, the authority of the Security Council, the integrity of the United Nations, and the very principle of “pacta sunt servanda” will be gravely compromised.

I trust in your responsible leadership and principled position to ensure that such a dangerous precedent is not allowed to take root.

Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.