Tehran has pursued all rational and constructive diplomatic paths—from the Cairo Agreement to direct talks with the three European countries, even in the midst of Israeli attacks on Iranian soil. Yet, Europe has remained committed to the policy of pressure.

The 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly and its sidelines became the stage for the last efforts to preserve the path of Iran’s nuclear diplomacy. The Iranian diplomatic delegation led by Abbas Araghchi and the active diplomacy of President Masoud Pezeshkian demonstrated that Tehran has pursued every rational and constructive diplomatic course. Nonetheless, the Europeans continued to adhere to policies of pressure and blame-shifting against Iran.

Europe’s Adherence to the Policy of Pressure

The demands of the three European countries have always lacked logic; their aim has not been to resolve the crisis but rather to create pretexts for applying pressure on Iran and shirking responsibility. Tehran, within the framework of the JCPOA, has fully implemented its obligations and pursued all legitimate and rational diplomatic avenues.

Iran’s efforts even included cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and direct talks with Europe at critical junctures. Yet, no practical response was received from the other side.

What Happened in Friday’s UN Security Council Meeting?

On Friday, the UN Security Council convened to review a joint draft resolution by Russia and China that called for a six-month extension of Resolution 2231. The draft, which emphasized continued cooperation between Iran and the IAEA and offered a fresh opportunity for diplomacy, was rejected with 9 votes against, 2 abstentions, and 4 votes in favor. This revealed that Europe is incapable of making an independent decision without Washington’s green light—a point openly underlined by the Russian representative.

Russia, China, Algeria, and Pakistan voted in favor, while the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Denmark, Greece, and Somalia voted against. Guyana and South Korea abstained.

Dmitry Polyansky, Russia’s envoy, blamed the European Troika for exerting unreasonable pressure on Iran and declared the activation of the snapback mechanism illegitimate.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stressed that due to the West’s unilateral violation of commitments, Iran was compelled to reduce some of its JCPOA obligations. He added that the countries supporting the draft resolution were on “the right side of history,” since it represented a sincere effort to keep the doors of diplomacy and dialogue open and to avoid confrontation.

The representatives of China, Pakistan, and Algeria also emphasized diplomacy and the JCPOA as the only sustainable solution, warning that the absence of a peaceful resolution would threaten regional and international security.

In contrast, the representatives of the United States, France, and Germany accused Iran of violating commitments and announced the reimposition of sanctions.

Iran’s Response to US Pressure

On Saturday, before returning from New York, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told reporters that Washington had demanded a complete halt to uranium enrichment in exchange for a three-month suspension of sanctions.

Pezeshkian described the demand as “unacceptable” and rejected it, stressing, “If we must choose between their illogical demand and the snapback, we will choose the snapback and will manage our challenges accordingly.”

He added that Iran, relying on its ties with neighbors, BRICS and Shanghai countries, and with the support of its people, is capable of overcoming the current situation.

The President underscored that Iran’s foreign policy team, along with Abbas Araghchi, has held numerous talks with various European and Islamic countries, and that Iran will never yield to Western pressure. He reiterated that Iran has never come close to building a nuclear weapon, and that its objective is the preservation of regional peace and security.

He dismissed accusations about Iran’s role in provoking Resistance groups as Israeli propaganda, asserting that the actions and reactions of Resistance movements such as Hezbollah and Hamas are a direct response to Israeli aggression.

The President stressed the necessity of national unity, boosting the country’s scientific, cultural, and communicational power, and adherence to the principles of diplomacy, declaring, “The legitimacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran lies in the fact that we are not pursuing nuclear weapons; the West’s goal is to spread fear.”

Araghchi’s Letter to the UN Secretary-General: Sanctions Return Is Illegitimate

Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi, in a letter to the UN Secretary-General and the President of the UN Security Council on Saturday night, described the actions of the three European states and the United States to revive terminated sanctions under Resolution 2231 as “null and void and without validity.” He emphasized that Iran will not recognize any attempt to extend or revive restrictions after October 18, 2025.

Araghchi reminded that neither Iran nor any UN member state is obliged to comply with the illegal measures of the Western states. He urged the Secretary-General to prevent any misuse of the UN Secretariat to exert political pressure on Iran.

He also warned that any attempt to harm Iran will face an appropriate response, with full responsibility resting on those who have chosen confrontation.

Consequences and a New Chapter in Iran’s Diplomacy

The outcome of this session paved the way for the return of sanctions, effectively burying the JCPOA amid Western noise and propaganda—a reality acknowledged by Abbas Araghchi himself.

Tehran’s swift response—by recalling its ambassadors from Germany, France, and the United Kingdom—signaled the start of a new chapter in Iran’s nuclear diplomacy; one in which Iran, while fully adhering to its commitments and preserving diplomatic principles, still retains the capacity to manage the negotiation track and maintain logical balance in international relations.

This phase reflects the highly complex nature of global diplomacy and the interplay of major powers—where the irrational behavior of certain parties create new equations and unique challenges for both Iran and the international community.

Experience, however, shows that the capacity to return to the negotiating table and to steer diplomacy always exists—and that Tehran, with a prudent approach, can manage the situation.