Alwaght- Ten years after signing the Iran nuclear deal with the world powers and suspending the UN Security Council sanctions under Resolution 2231, the resolution has finally expired on October 18.
The UN sanctions that for years capped Iran's nuclear, missile, and conventional arms programs, as well as the monitoring mechanisms overseeing them, have now officially came to their end. This move legally unshackles Tehran from a core set of international restrictions. This development grants Iran a fresh opportunity to operate more freely, allowing it to pursue international trade, economic partnerships, and political and security ties with fewer constraints, potentially strengthening its global standing. Yet, the expiration of this decade-old resolution was not without challenges.
Clash of statements
Despite the expiration of the UN resolution, the signatories of the 2015 agreement, which are divided between East and West, have presented various and conflicting interpretations of the fate of this resolution. Iran, alongside Russia and China, has sent separate and joint letters to the UN Secretary-General, emphasizing the definitive expiration of Resolution 2231 and the necessity of fully normalizing Iran's nuclear case.
In its letter, Iran stated that the nuclear deal, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and Resolution 2231 have officially ended on October 18 and requested that its nuclear file be removed from the Security Council's agenda. It demanded that its nuclear program be treated like that of any other non-nuclear weapons state party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The letter clarified that countries no longer have any obligations under the expired sanctions resolutions and emphasized that with the termination of the resolution, the status of Iran's case at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also changes. Consequently, the IAEA Director General is no longer required to provide reports concerning the JCPOA.
The Russian Foreign Ministry stressed in a statement that with the expiration of UNSC, all its provisions, including restrictions and procedures related to Iran's nuclear program, have completely terminated. It stated that the Security Council is obliged to end its review of issues related to Iran's nuclear program and remove the "non-proliferation" clause from its agenda.
Furthermore, a joint letter from Iran, Russia, and China was submitted to the UN secretary-general and the President of the Security Council, outlining the formal end of Resolution 2231 and the cancellation of all nuclear and arms restrictions mentioned within it.
From the perspective of these three countries, any continuation of restrictions or political pressure on Iran after the legal expiration of the resolution lacks a legal basis and must be replaced with mutual cooperation and confidence-building. This approach reflects the persistent, deep divide between the viewpoints of Eastern and Western powers regarding the future of Iran's nuclear program and its place in the international system.
However, European powers, which recently activated the snapback mechanism in a bid to reimpose UN sanctions on Iran, are maintaining that the restrictions on Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs must continue, even after the expiration of Resolution 2231.
In line with this stance, the European Union has doubled down on its uncompromising position. In a new statement, it announced that several non-EU countries, including Albania, Norway, Serbia, and Ukraine, have aligned with the European Council's decision to restore nuclear-related sanctions against Iran via the snapback mechanism. In its latest decision, the Council of the European Union declared that it will reimpose restrictive measures on the import of Iranian crude oil, natural gas, and petroleum & petrochemical products, the sale and supply of key equipment used in the energy sector, transactions concerning gold, certain metals, and diamonds, and specific marine equipment and related software.
International groupings
At a time the US and the European troika are trying to forge an international consensus against Iran using diplomatic and media tools, political and international realities show that the global equations have changed significantly compared to the years before. Just contrary to the past that the Western pressures were given substantial support of world countries, this time many countries are not yielding to unilateral policies of Washington and Brussels and refuse to join moves internationally illegal.
Nevertheless, the countries that the European Union is relying on to pressure Tehran hold limited influence in global affairs. Many of these nations, particularly Ukraine, maintain negligible economic or trade relations with Iran, rendering their potential impact on Tehran's diplomatic and economic trajectory largely insignificant. This situation demonstrates that the policy of maximum pressure has lost its former effectiveness, while highlighting the entrenched divide between the West and other powers, particularly across the Global South and the East, as an established reality of the new international order.
In the face of these Western efforts, Iran and its two strategic partners, Russia and China which are both permanent UN Security Council members, have repeatedly and explicitly voiced their opposition to what they term illegal and unilateral Western actions. These powers maintain that activating the snapback mechanism and reinstating UN sanctions against Iran are legally and politically void, and they have consequently refused to implement them.
Moscow's move to swiftly sign a new contract to build a power plant in Iran immediately after the snapback was initiated, coupled with Beijing's declaration that it will counter Western sanctions on companies cooperating with Iran, signals that Western powers are unable to force Tehran back to the negotiating table through maximum pressure to extract concessions.
Furthermore, during the recent foreign ministers' meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), over 121 countries emphasized that Resolution 2231 must be formally terminated. Simultaneously, the Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter issued a statement marking the resolution's expiration. It referenced the US's unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 and its reimposition of illegal sanctions on Iran, as well as the three European countries' failure to fulfill their JCPOA obligations. The group stressed that their move to activate the so-called snapback mechanism lacks any legal or procedural basis.
Among the NAM members, emerging powers like India play a distinctive role. In recent years, New Delhi has actively sought to expand its economic and trade ties with Tehran. Recent Iranian shipping statistics reveal that trade volume at Shahid Beheshti Port in Chabahar tripled during the first six months of the current Iranian year compared to the same period last year, partly driven by exchanges with India. This dramatic growth demonstrates that Washington's threats and pressure to deter countries from engaging with Iran have proven ineffective.
Furthermore, even some Western allies show little appetite for fully aligning with the pressure policies championed by Washington and Brussels. For instance, South Korea opted to abstain in the recent Security Council vote on a resolution to block the activation of the snapback mechanism. This move signals a clear erosion of Western cohesion and growing doubts among US allies regarding the efficacy and legitimacy of the confrontational approach toward Iran.
Consequently, the extensive efforts by the US and Europe to build a global consensus akin to the one seen a decade ago have now encountered a political and diplomatic deadlock. Therefore, any potential attempt to resurrect sanctions or reimpose international pressure on Iran, in the absence of broad global support, is doomed to fail.
Latest coordinations: Larijani's Moscow visit
As the resolution expired, the Secretary-general of Supreme National Security Council of Iran, Ali Larijani, visited Moscow to discuss bilateral relations with Russian officials.
Amidst the ongoing tensions between Tehran and the West, Larijani's visit to Moscow signals a new phase of strategic coordination between the two nations as they navigate the post-JCPOA landscape. Iran is actively leveraging its Eastern partnerships to fortify its global standing and neutralize Western sanctions.
Notably, Russia's current presidency of the UN Security Council provides Moscow with a pivotal platform to ward off Western initiatives against Tehran. In a concrete demonstration of this role, Moscow has formally requested the UN secretary-general to revoke the recent Secretariat announcement regarding the reinstatement of sanctions against Iran. This move not only underscores Russia's firm support for Iran but also showcases the practical influence Eastern powers wield within the Security Council to check unilateral Western policies.
With growing international alignment behind Iran's position and most nations rejecting unilateral Western sanctions following the termination of restrictions, Iranian commercial vessels can now operate freely in international waters. Unlike previous periods, these ships no longer need to disable their tracking signals and GPS systems when entering open waters, enabling them to conduct maritime activities transparently and in accordance with international law.
UNSC divided
The resolute opposition of Russia and China and some non-permanent members of the UNSC to the Western reinstatement of sanctions on Tehran has revealed unprecedented division in the body of the UNSC. This conflict of views has made the Security Council, which was supposed to be a place to maintain world peace and security, to become a scene for East-West confrontation. So, division of the Security Council has questioned its role to manage world crises.
Actually, this gap indicates a deep shift in the world power balance. It further suggests that the traditional influence of the Western countries is not absolute and emerging powers, on the strength of multilateralism principles, stand against the unilateral policies of Washington and allies. So, difference and distrust is overshadowing the UNSC and undermines its role as guarantor of world security more than any other time.
