Point of order:

Mr. President,

Once again, in these past few days, we are forced to witness attempts by some members of the Security Council and its President to grossly abuse the procedure and hold the meeting on the same – and non-existent on top of that – agenda item.

Yet again, we would like to remind you the stubborn facts. UNSC Resolution 2231 expired on 18 October 2025. That same day, the Security Council concluded its consideration of the Iranian nuclear issue, and the item “Non-proliferation” was removed from the list of matters of which the Council is seized. Such wording was clearly stipulated in Operative Paragraph 8 of this resolution. The mechanism reinstating the pre-2015 SC resolutions on Iran provided for by Resolution 2231 was not triggered for a whole number of reasons about which we and some other delegations have spoken many times.

Thus, there are no legal or procedural grounds for conducting today’s Council meeting on the defunct agenda item “Non-proliferation.” We strongly reject attempts by some members of the Council to create an illusion of legitimacy through their assertions about the snapback that ostensibly took place.

We call for the adoption of the agenda of the meeting to be put to a procedural vote.

Thank you.

Main statement:

Mr. President,

Today we have heard how international law works and how a Security Council resolution is implemented. Now listen to what we have to say.

The Russian Federation voted against the US-sponsored draft resolution to extend the mandate of the panel of experts of the illegitimate 1737 Committee.

Russia’s position regarding the speculations of the Western countries about the so-called “snapback” mechanism, which they claim was successfully triggered in 2025, is crystal clear to all. For those with particularly short memories, I wish to remind you: the United Kingdom, France, and Germany had neither the right nor the grounds to use this tool. The reasons have been explained repeatedly by us and other colleagues in great detail. All those interested can look up our previous statements, as well as the joint letters by Russia, China, and Iran on this matter.

Thus, the UNSC resolutions regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran that were effective until 2015 – including the SC Resolutions 1737 and 1929 – were not reinstated. No attempts to challenge this fact, nor the erroneous and biased actions by the UN Secretariat’s leadership taken without any authorization from the Security Council, can alter this objective reality.

Against this backdrop, the draft resolution just considered by the Council was deeply flawed and simply lacked a legal framework. It proposed extending the mandate of the Security Council Committee 1737’s panel of experts – even though both the panel and the Committee had ceased to exist when the Council adopted Resolution 2231, and its expiration in October 2025 made this fact irreversible.

It was clear from the very beginning that the document drafted by the United States was a priori unacceptable to us. Together with our Chinese partners, we consistently communicated this idea to our colleagues from the US and the other members of the Council and urged the sponsors to forgo the promotion of such a draft. It was clear that this persistent imposition of such resolutions would result in even greater tensions within the Security Council, both on political and procedural matters. Nonetheless, Washington decided to opt for confrontation and put the draft to a vote.

On the other hand, such actions come as no surprise, as they align with the overall logic of escalatory steps taken by Western countries in the context of the Iranian nuclear issue. These steps are by no means prompted by concern for the global non-proliferation regime. If that were the case, the United States would not have unilaterally withdrawn from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, nor would it have carried out repeated strikes – along with Israel – against Iran’s civilian nuclear infrastructure, which is subject to IAEA safeguards, while countries loyal to Washington would not have supported these unlawful actions. The destructive path pursued by our Western colleagues is determined purely by their parochial interests in exerting pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran. To these ends, they have been utilizing every possible international platform, including the UN Security Council. They are not only creating the illusion of reinstating anti-Iran Security Council resolutions, but are also making direct attempts to impose non-existent restrictions on Member States.

A glaring example of this absurdity is the so-called objection regarding the entry into Austria of Vice-President of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran Mohammad Eslami, who was travelling to Vienna to attend meetings of the IAEA General Conference. These objections were circulated in the Security Council several days ago by some of its members, including the United States, which our US colleagues openly acknowledged in Vienna. The Austrian authorities used this as a pretext to revoke a visa that had already been issued to Mr. Eslami, thereby violating Austria’s obligations as the host country of the Agency.

In this context, we cannot but recall that just a week ago in this very Chamber, a number of Security Council members, including the United States, were actively demanding that Tehran step up its engagement with the IAEA Secretariat. The actions of the US side speak volumes about the sincerity of such calls. First, Washington, along with West Jerusalem, undermines the IAEA’s verification activities in Iran through its aggressive actions. Then, acting in contradiction to its own stated position, the United States attempts to exert unlawful pressure on other States in order to obstruct cooperation between Tehran and the Agency’s Secretariat. And on top of all this, Washington stubbornly refuses to provide credible guarantees that military strikes against Iran’s nuclear and energy infrastructure will not resume. On the contrary, it continues to threaten further escalatory measures.

Mr. President,

The Russian Federation categorically condemns this dangerous course. We likewise reject the abuse of Security Council procedures in pursuit of political interests. Our country will continue to oppose any attempts to legitimize claims that the so-called “snapback” has been triggered. We demand that the United Nations Secretary-General and his subordinates rectify the errors they have made.

We strongly urge our Western colleagues to cease their extremely dangerous actions with regard to Iran, which threaten to create even greater difficulties in resolving the crisis in the Persian Gulf region. The only way to resolve existing differences and address any concerns, including those related to the Iranian nuclear program, is through political and diplomatic efforts based on due consideration for the interests of all parties and Tehran’s legitimate rights.

The Security Council bears a special responsibility for creating conditions conducive to such efforts. We trust that all our colleagues will exercise common sense and cease obstructing the achievement of this objective.

Thank you.