Skip to main content

UN Security Council Voting on Snapback, September 2025

This post follows up yesterday’s posting on the outcome of the snapback mechanism in the UN Security Council. Looking at the requirement to vote on a resolution within 30 days (September 26), here are thoughts on how the voting will go. In the UN Security Council, nine (9) votes are required to pass a resolution; the five permanent members have a veto. 
Votes that may be taken by UNSC 
1. Resolution to extend RES/2231 with no snapback mechanism for 6 months [Russia, China] 
2. Resolution to extend RES/2231 with snapback mechanism for 6 months [E3] 
3. Resolution to make permanent the termination of UNSC sanctions under RES/2231 [UNSC Chair, ROK] 
Snapback Sanctions Voting (projected)
2025 Members                                          For                   Against 
China                                                                                          X 
France                                                              X 
Russian Federation - Chair, Oct 2025                        X 
United Kingdom                                              X 
United States                                                    X 
Algeria                                                                                       X 
Denmark                                                          X 
Greece                                                              X 
Guyana                                                                                       X 
Pakistan                                                                                      X 
Panama                                                                                       X 
Republic of Korea - Chair, Sept 2025  X 
Sierra Leone                                                                               X 
Slovenia                                                            X 
Somalia                                                                                       X 

Scenario for what may happen 
First, there will be a vote on the Russian/Chinese resolution to extend RES/2231 for 6 months with no snapback mechanism. That will fail, either not receiving 9 votes or vetoed by France or UK. 
Next, there will be a vote on the E3 resolution to extend RES/2231 for 6 months with a snapback mechanism. This will pass, possibly receiving 15 votes. 
Then, there will be the required vote (within 30 days) on the resolution making permanent the termination of UNSC sanctions under RES/2231. This will pass with more than 9 votes, possibly 15. 

The Result. Extension of RES/2231 (and JCPOA) for 6 months from October 18, 2025, to April 18, 2026. Hopefully, this is not too optimistic a projection!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

‘New war with Israel at any moment’, ‘still digging through rubble’

The news about Iran has taken an ominous tone in the last couple days. Here is some reporting and commentary.  Newsweek on August 18, 2025, reported that Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior military adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said ‘ We are not in a ceasefire; we are in a stage of war. No protocol, regulation, or agreement has been written between us and the U.S. or Israel. A new war with Israel could break out at any moment .’  Yonah Jeremy Bob commented in The Jerusalem Post on August 19, 2025, that ‘ Khamenei can either “drink from the poisoned chalice” of diplomatic concessions … or face more airstrikes, possibly next time some targeting him directly ’.   Bob also noted that ‘ right now Iran is still digging through rubbl e’. The U.S. attacked Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan on June 22. Two months of digging. No surprise that there has been no public news about that.
Post a Comment
Read more

Assessing possible outcomes of the snapback mechanism

The initiation by the E3 of the 30-day snapback mechanism in the UN Security Council makes everything more difficult and there is great uncertainty about the outcome. Will it be peaceful with a new nuclear deal with Iran, negotiated by the U.S., endorsed by the UNSC and verified by IAEA, or will Iran withdraw from NPT with further military action by Israel and the U.S.?                 To perhaps shed a little light on what the outcome will be, here is my analysis of how the players - Iran, U.S. and E3 - may be assessing the acceptability of the range of outcomes. Four levels of acceptability were used: 1 Fully acceptable; 2 Less acceptable; 3 Just acceptable; and 4 Not acceptable. Four near term 30-day outcomes are listed, and two optimistic outcomes with an interim U.S.-Iran agreement reached within a 6-month extension.                 For the 30-day near term, the best outcome would b...
Post a Comment
Read more

‘Making nuclear fuel’ under the NPT

It is with some hesitation that I take issue with the latest publication of the renowned Henry Sokolski and Sharon Squassoni on August 15 in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, titled: “ Actually, the NPT doesn’t guarantee a right to make nuclear fuel .”  But someone should defend the IAEA and international safeguards! Here are points in question.            ‘ The [NPT] treaty was designed to prevent dangerous bombmaking activitie s.’  NPT is far more complex than that. It is common to state the three pillars of NPT: nuclear disarmament; nuclear nonproliferation; and peaceful uses of nuclear technology. Nonproliferation involves the commitment of non-nuclear states not to pursue nuclear weapons and to accept IAEA inspection to confirm that commitment is being followed. Perhaps Sokolsky intends to refer to INFCIRC/153, which lays out how IAEA and the state cooperate to carry out that confirmation. If so, INFCIRC/153 is not designed to ‘prevent’...
Post a Comment
Read more