SAEDNEWS: The Iranian Foreign Minister, in a letter to the Security Council and the UN Secretary-General regarding the Troika’s misinterpretation of the dispute resolution mechanism outlined in the JCPOA and issues related to Resolution 2231, stated.
The Iranian Foreign Minister, in a letter to the Security Council and the UN Secretary-General regarding the Troika’s misinterpretation of the dispute resolution mechanism outlined in the JCPOA and issues related to Resolution 2231, stated: “We call on all members of the Security Council to reject unjust political maneuvering and to commit to safeguarding the integrity of international law and the authority of the Security Council.”
According to the political service of the news website Saed News, Seyyed Abbas Araghchi, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister, wrote in a letter to the President of the Security Council and the UN Secretary-General: “Such behavior can in no way be justified by referring to Iran’s fully legitimate and legal remedial measures, which were implemented gradually and proportionally, fully in accordance with the procedures and rights stipulated in the JCPOA. Nevertheless, the Troika’s letter inadvertently reveals, in a somewhat ironic manner, two fundamental flaws in the Troika’s reasoning for any potential attempt to resort to what is so-called ‘automatic re-imposition of sanctions.’”
The full text of the Iranian Foreign Minister’s letter is as follows:
In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
I am honored hereby to address some of the false claims contained in the letter dated August 8, 2025, from the Foreign Ministers of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom (hereinafter referred to as the Troika) regarding matters related to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and UN Security Council Resolution 2231 (2015). The aforementioned letter, by distorting facts, represents another attempt to pave the way for two courses of action, both of which are unjust and constitute a dangerous precedent in undermining the credibility and integrity of the Security Council and its resolutions.
Distortion of Facts by the Troika
It is necessary to reiterate that such behavior can in no way be justified by referring to Iran’s fully legitimate and legal remedial measures, which were implemented gradually and proportionally, fully in accordance with the procedures and rights stipulated in the JCPOA. Nevertheless, the Troika’s letter inadvertently reveals, in a somewhat ironic manner, two fundamental flaws in the Troika’s reasoning for any potential attempt to resort to what is so-called the ‘automatic re-imposition of sanctions.’
a) The order of matters is significant. The Troika, by making the false claim that “Iran only activated the dispute resolution mechanism in July 2020,” seeks to discredit Iran’s remedial measures, distort the sequence of events, and simultaneously conceal the fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran officially activated the dispute resolution mechanism in a letter dated May 10, 2018. This declaration led to the convening of Joint Commission meetings and other anticipated actions to fully exhaust the mechanism. Iran again, on August 21, 2018, while emphasizing the use of Article 36, stated that it had previously “resorted to the dispute resolution mechanism under Article 36 of the JCPOA, for which the Joint Commission convened at the level of political directors and foreign ministers on May 25 and July 6, 2018.”
By raising the issue of sequence, the Troika implicitly acknowledges that the order of activating the dispute resolution mechanism by different parties is important; measures taken under Article 36 of the JCPOA cannot serve as a justification for countermeasures by other parties. In short, the Troika’s own reasoning acknowledges that remedial measures cannot be cited against previous remedial measures taken by the other party, and such reasoning is unacceptable and inapplicable.
b) False claim regarding the necessity of recognizing the activation of the dispute resolution mechanism.
The Troika, with the false claim that “any further recourse to this mechanism has not been recognized by the JCPOA members, neither at the time nor today,” implies that the legitimacy of activating the dispute resolution mechanism requires consensus among the JCPOA members. Based on this logic, the Troika’s own attempt to activate the mechanism or trigger the so-called snapback sanctions would lack legitimacy, as it has never been explicitly recognized by the other JCPOA members.
If only one instance of activating the dispute resolution mechanism is to be considered valid, recognized, and fully exhausted, it is the one initiated by the Islamic Republic of Iran on May 10, 2018. This action led to an extraordinary meeting of the Joint Commission on May 25, 2018, and a ministerial meeting on July 6, 2018, both convened at Iran’s request. Following these meetings, Iran repeatedly stated in correspondence, including letters dated August 21 and November 6, 2018, as well as April 7, 2019, that it had resorted to Article 36 of the JCPOA and, should the other parties’ fundamental failures continue, would exercise its rights and “gradually, and according to the planned timeline, suspend its implementation of obligations under the JCPOA.”
The Troika’s letter, in fact, undermines itself. Their attempt to activate the dispute resolution mechanism, which coincided with their continued failure, constitutes a “remedial action against a remedial action” that was neither recognized by all JCPOA members nor fully exhausted.
As detailed in the January 29, 2020 letter from Iran’s then-Foreign Minister to the JCPOA Coordinator (attached), Iran had effectively and officially activated the dispute resolution mechanism long before initiating its remedial measures, and only did so once it became clear that the issues arising from the United States’ withdrawal from the JCPOA and the imposition of sanctions against Iran by other members were irreparable.
It should be emphasized that the Troika’s reference to the JCPOA dispute resolution mechanism, citing their January 14, 2020 letter in response to Iran’s remedial measures from May 2019 onward, is completely misleading and irrelevant. As repeatedly stated in correspondence, Iran’s decision to suspend its obligations, in accordance with Articles 26 and 36 of the JCPOA, was a legitimate and lawful response to the United States’ unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA and the re-imposition of its illegal sanctions. Therefore, it is entirely illogical for the Troika to regard its own failure to implement obligations or its attempt to activate snapback sanctions as a reaction to Iran’s legitimate remedial measures—actions taken a full year after the U.S.’s illegal withdrawal and the EU and Troika’s failure to fulfill their commitments.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has explicitly and officially, on multiple occasions, informed the JCPOA Joint Commission Coordinator—and through him, the other members—that it has resorted to Article 36 of the JCPOA and the dispute resolution mechanism contained therein. In particular, in the letter dated January 29, 2020, Iran stated that it had fully exhausted all the procedures foreseen under Article 36. The Joint Commission meeting at the level of foreign ministers on July 6, 2018, also recognized Iran’s referred issues to the Joint Commission as “unresolved issues” and subsequently approved a set of commitments in this regard. These issues remain “unresolved” to this day, and no outcome has been achieved that satisfies Iran as the complaining party. Issues that remain unresolved for Iran cannot serve as a basis for the Troika’s decision to activate the snapback mechanism.
It is noteworthy that these facts in no way undermine the exclusive rights of the Islamic Republic of Iran under Article 26 of the JCPOA; an article that explicitly stipulates that Iran “shall consider the re-imposition or reactivation of sanctions [...] as a reason to suspend its implementation of obligations under this JCPOA, in whole or in part.”
Contrary to the Troika’s simultaneously ill-intentioned behavior, the measures taken by the Islamic Republic of Iran—fully in accordance with its rights under Articles 26 and 36 of the JCPOA—were intended to preserve the agreement by compelling the parties to comply, not to weaken it. Iran provided adequate information, participated in good faith through multiple Joint Commission meetings, structured its measures to allow reversibility, and maintained diplomatic engagements to restore full implementation of the JCPOA by all parties. The Troika’s depiction of these legitimate actions as “non-implementation of obligations” ignores their own responsibility in provoking this legitimate recourse.
Resolution 2231 must expire on its “expiry date.”
Within its policy of using the snapback mechanism as leverage to extract concessions from others, the Troika has “proposed” a limited extension of the relevant provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, conditional upon Iran fulfilling certain demands. Nevertheless, the Islamic Republic of Iran firmly believes that Resolution 2231 must expire according to its originally scheduled timeline.
Any other attempt contrary to the facts and disregarding the ultimate purpose of the resolution would create an improper precedent in the functioning of the Security Council and deepen divisions within the Council. It is evident that in such an unfortunate scenario, the Islamic Republic of Iran will respond firmly and proportionately, taking into account its national interests.
The Islamic Republic of Iran calls upon the Security Council to fully adhere to the binding timelines outlined in Resolution 2231 so that its provisions conclude as foreseen, thereby paving the way for the resumption of diplomatic interactions in a more constructive environment, free from coercion or threats.
Iran remains fully open to diplomacy.
The Islamic Republic of Iran firmly believes that diplomacy remains the most effective and efficient path for resolving disputes. As emphasized during the meeting of Iran’s Deputy Foreign Ministers with the political directors of the European Union and the Troika on July 25 in Istanbul, the Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms its commitment to meaningful diplomatic engagements aimed at reaching a new agreement—an agreement that, while respecting Iran’s rights under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, addresses all mutual concerns, including the unjust sanctions that target the livelihood and welfare of the Iranian people.
We call upon all members of the Security Council to reject unjust political maneuvers and to uphold the integrity of international law and the authority of the Security Council. The path forward lies in mutual respect, not coercion.
It would be appreciated if you would instruct that this correspondence be recorded and distributed as a document of the General Assembly and the Security Council.
With highest regards,
Seyyed Abbas Araghchi
Minister of Foreign Affairs
