Iran successfully tested intercontinental missile, lawmaker says

Hardliners and ultra-hardliners in Tehran, who have long dismissed the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) as a “total failure,” downplayed the impact of the UN’s decision. For them, renewed sanctions are little more than symbolic.

“In the past, sanctions far harsher than these have been imposed; this is simply a psychological tactic intended to impact our economy,” hardline lawmaker Hosseinali Haji-Deligani told ILNA.

Meanwhile, Kayhan newspaper, linked to the Supreme Leader’s office, and other hardline outlets such as Vatan-e Emrouz have urged Tehran to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

In an editorial titled “Is it still not time to leave the NPT after 22 years of costly negotiations?!” the paper argued for building a bomb to “fully strengthen national deterrence.”

Ahmad Naderi, a member of parliament’s presiding board, echoed this stance, insisting that “acquiring nuclear weapons is the only way to preserve Iran’s territorial integrity and national security.”

“Withdrawing from the NPT, adopting a policy of ambiguity and ultimately testing the atomic bomb is the only option that can spare Iran the fate of Iraq and Libya,” said Naderi.

“Experience has shown that countries without nuclear deterrence eventually become victims of invasion or regime change. The time has come to make hard but necessary decisions.”

Warning of a deepening crisis, push for policy change

Others caution that the impact will be severe. Journalist Azadeh Mokhtari argued on social media that the Iranian people will once again bear the brunt of political maneuvering: “The return of UN sanctions means increased economic pressure, reduced access to essential goods and medicine, and a deepening livelihood crisis.”

Meanwhile, reformists are calling for urgent diplomacy. Azar Mansouri, head of the Reform Front, warned that “immediate and maximal use of diplomatic capacity to prevent a global consensus against Iran is an unavoidable necessity.”

She stressed that the window of opportunity for negotiations is closing fast, with reinstated UN resolutions carrying “wide-ranging international consequences.”

Ebrahim Asgharzadeh, a reformist politician, went further, telling Etemad newspaper: “Iran stands on the brink of a historic choice: either insist on the illusion of costly deterrence and a single-track foreign policy, which yields nothing but isolation and domestic erosion, or acknowledge the reality of rival powers.”

He added that the world today is “waiting for a change in Iran’s language and behavior, not a repetition or justification of the past.”

Doubts over Russia and China

Hardliners often argue that Russia and China will help Iran weather sanctions. Yet that view has drawn criticism even from conservative voices. Journalist Ali Gholhaki dismissed the notion: “At least in China’s case, it’s just empty talk! Industrial and economic managers understand the reason well. They have seen examples of this in just the past few days.”

Mohammad-Ali Hanaei, head of the Nations Diplomacy Think Tank, told Etemad that Beijing profits from buying Iranian oil cheaply and has little incentive to back sanctions relief. He urged Tehran to consider “logical restrictions” as a way to manage the crisis.

Moscow has suggested it might mediate. Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia’s envoy to international organizations in Vienna, told Al Mayadeen that Russia and China are preparing a joint initiative to resolve the crisis, though he offered no details.

Diplomatic openings still possible?

Some experts still see potential for compromise. Economics professor Alireza Soltani told Khabar Online that the diplomatic window is not yet closed, while cautioning against “emotional reactions.”

Even if previous UN resolutions are reinstated, he argued, a comprehensive deal remains possible “provided there is political will from both Iran and the United States.”

Foreign policy analyst Morteza Makki raised the possibility of a “miracle” if Tehran can strike a temporary arrangement with the E3 (Britain, France, and Germany) in the coming days or at the UN General Assembly.

Pezeshkian-Trump Meeting Debate

At home, debate is intensifying over whether President Masoud Pezeshkian should meet US President Donald Trump during his upcoming trip to New York.

Reformist cleric Mohammad-Taghi Fazel-Meybodi called such a meeting “the last chance of the system,” recalling that a missed opportunity between Mohammad Khatami and Bill Clinton two decades ago paved the way for today’s sanctions.

Yet many doubt Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei will allow it, having denied similar requests from both Khatami and Hassan Rouhani.

Writing in Kayhan, Shariatmadari argued that two decades of negotiations had failed to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities from attacks, saying that “remaining in the NPT no longer makes sense” and that Iran’s only option was to strengthen deterrence.

“Those who say that if we leave the NPT it will pave the way for an attack must answer two questions. First, did they not attack our nuclear facilities while we were in the NPT? Second, does not America insist that attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities should not be prohibited? … So what are you waiting for?” he wrote.

The 15-member UN Security Council on Friday opted not to permanently lift sanctions on Tehran, after Britain, France and Germany launched a 30-day process last month to reimpose them, accusing Iran of failing to comply with the 2015 nuclear deal.

Shariatmadari dismissed the return of UN sanctions under the so-called snapback mechanism as “an empty shell” compared with US secondary sanctions.

“For years Iran’s economy has been under the pressure of Washington’s multilayered sanctions, which are far broader and harsher than the UN’s restrictions," he wrote.

"The snapback (mechanism) neither brings extra sanctioning power nor grants a fresh license for war,” he wrote.

Lawmakers warn of NPT pullback

Shariatmadari’s call was echoed by lawmakers who also warned Iran could scale back its cooperation with international nuclear agreements.

"We warn the countries that exploit Iran's goodwill for 'dialogue' and close the doors of diplomacy to themselves that 'maximum pressure' never works, and this time they will regret it harder than ever," said Ebrahim Azizi, head of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee.

Another lawmaker, Fada-Hossein Maleki, said the country was prepared to scale back cooperation with international bodies. "The Islamic Republic is prepared for any scenario, including withdrawal from the agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and even seriously considering withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)," he said.

Iran's foreign ministry in a statement on Friday criticized the three European powers for dismissing "Iran’s reasonable proposal—which they themselves admitted was logical."

The proposal cited by the foreign ministry was presented to European officials during Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s phone call with his counterparts on Wednesday.

According to details of the proposal revealed by Wall Street Journal correspondent Laurence Norman, Iran proposed diluting its 60% uranium stockpile to 20% in exchange for US sanctions relief along with the extension and then voiding of a Security Council Resolution which enables UN sanctions on Iran to resume.

Iran would also pledge to meet with the US president's special envoy Steve Witkoff, according to Norman's sources, in an apparent bid to fulfil the Europeans' demand Iran reengages in talks with the US.

Iran, he wrote, would do that in return for a US guarantee against any new military attack.

Highly enriched uranium stocks

The Wall Street Journal's report said that Iran has proposed to "retrieve all the 60% (enriched uranium) it could. Once retrieved, the UNSC would kill Resolution 2231 supporting the JCPOA."

In return, the report added, Iran said it would commence physically retrieving its stockpile of 60%-enriched uranium and then diluting it to 20% purity.

The fate of Iran’s highly enriched uranium (HEU) stockpile of 400 kg (882 pounds) remains under investigation, while Tehran claims it is trapped under rubble after US attacks on three nuclear sites in June.

“A wise colleague also points out that once Iran retrieves the HEU stockpile, if the deal then stalls, Tehran has solved one big problem it currently faces," Norman said. "Right now, if it retrieves the stockpile, it could face military action. This Iranian suggestion instructs Iran to retrieve it."

The London-based Amwaj Media also reported on Friday that Araghchi had been in touch with Witkoff on the proposal.

'Actionable plan'

French President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday that Iran’s Foreign Minister “tried to make a reasonable offer” to reach a deal with European powers but did not receive backing from other members of the Iranian ruling system.

Abbas Araghchi reacted to reports on the proposed deal, saying Tehran provided an “actionable plan.”

“Instead of being met with engagement on the substance of this plan, Iran is now faced with a litany of excuses and outright deflection, including the farcical claim that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not represent the entire political establishment,” Araghchi said.

“I have the full support of the entirety of the Islamic Republic of Iran, including my country's Supreme National Security Council,” he added.

The resolution that could have lifted the sanctions was rejected after nine members voted against it on Friday, meaning they will be reimposed on 27 September unless a drastic diplomatic breakthrough prompts the Council to reconsider before then.

“The carelessness and passivity of the Islamic Republic in the face of the snapback is truly astonishing,” wrote outspoken sociologist Hossein Hamdieh on X, urging leaders to “wrest the national interests from the devil’s mouth in the middle of hell.”

Ultra-hardliners, meanwhile, remain opposed to any concession and lay the blame for the so-called snapback at the moderates’ door for agreeing to a deal with such mechanisms a decade ago.

“This flawed mechanism is the result of the mistakes of the JCPOA negotiating team in 2015, including Mr. Araghchi himself,” lawmaker Amir-Hossein Sabeti wrote on X.

“The cost of implementing the snapback is less than the cost of extending it,” he added, arguing that prolonging the deadline would strip Iran of its “nuclear ambiguity” card.

Diplomacy or publicity stunt?

Araghchi’s authority, under attack at home, is also being questioned abroad.

A day earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron had called the sanctions return a “done deal” and questioned whether Araghchi had full authority when presenting his recent IAEA agreement and proposal to the Europeans.

Araghchi rejected the claim, writing on X that he enjoyed the backing of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. Analysts in Tehran said Macron’s comments were aimed at pressuring Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to openly endorse or reject the initiatives.

Skepticism also persists over Araghchi’s timing.

“The proposal ahead of the UNSC vote on Resolution 2231 was not meant as a serious move,” Turkey-based analyst Ruhollah Rahimpour wrote on X.

Submitting such a plan just two days before the vote, he argued, meant “you have no sense of timing, or you only sought publicity.”

Last chance?

Some analysts believe the UN General Assembly next week could be Tehran’s final opportunity to resolve the standoff.

“The only chance remaining is that Iran’s proposals are submitted in writing and signed, and direct dialogue between Iran and the United States takes place when Pezeshkian is in New York,” Canada-based commentator Alireza Namvar-Haghighi told Iran International.

Both US and Iranian envoys said after the UNSC vote on Friday that the door is not shut to diplomacy. A negotiated way to avoid UN sanctions is still possible — but not probable.

The resolution, tabled by South Korea in its role as Security Council president, was a procedural part of a process launched last month after Britain, France, and Germany triggered the so-called snapback mechanism, declaring Iran in “significant non-performance” of the 2015 nuclear deal.

The decision not to lift Iran sanctions means all pre-2015 UN sanctions on Iran will automatically return once the 30-day snapback period ends on September 28, unless the Security Council takes further action.

Iran along with permanent Security Council members Russia and China lambasted the vote on Friday as a blow to diplomacy.

Algeria, China, Pakistan, and Russia voted to lift Iran sanctions. Denmark, France, Greece, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Somalia, Britain, and the United States voted against the resolution while Guyana and South Korea abstained.

Acting US Representative to the United Nations Dorothy Shea said the European troika was right to pursue sanctions given what she called Iran's clear violations.

“In July, the E3 offered to extend the snapback mechanism if Iran were to take steps to address concerns regarding its highly enriched uranium stockpile, comply with its IAEA obligations, and resume direct diplomacy with the United States," Shea said. "Despite suggestions to the contrary from Iran and others, Tehran has not yet fulfilled those conditions."

The resolution outcome does "not impede the possibility of real diplomacy,” Shea added, without elaborating.

'Unlawful'

Iran blasted the move, calling it “hasty, unnecessary, and unlawful”.

“Iran's safeguarded nuclear facilities have been attacked not in secret, but openly by Israel, the rogue regime, and by the United States,” Iran's ambassador to the UN, Amir Saeid Iravani, said.

He was referring to a 12-day surprise military campaign by Israel which was capped off by US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. “This reckless step undermines dialogue without aggression and sets a dangerous precedent,” Iravani added.

The Iranian envoy said Tehran never rejected diplomacy, presenting the recent agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to advance resumed international inspections of nuclear sites as evidence.

In a phone call with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi criticized what he called a politicized move that ignored Tehran's good faith approach.

“Araghchi stressed that Iran, as a responsible country, has always pursued the path of diplomacy and technical cooperation to resolve issues related to its nuclear program and rejects any political measures or unfair pressure that could escalate tensions,” his ministry added in a statement.

Britain's permanent representative to the United Nations, Barbara Woodward, questioned Iran's nuclear motives but said it was open to talks.

“The United Kingdom is committed to pursuing a diplomatic solution to ensure that Iran shall never seek, acquire or develop a nuclear weapon,” Woodward said.

“That is why, on August 28, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany notified this Council of Iran's clear and deliberate non-compliance,” she added.

Russia and China opposed

Moscow and Beijing have grown closer to Tehran as their relations with Washington have frayed in recent years. Their envoys castigated the Western position.

Fu Cong, China's permanent representative to the UN, raised doubts about the move by the three European countries, warning it might inflame the long standoff

“China maintains that under such circumstances, hastily pushing for a vote on the draft resolution might exacerbate confrontation further and is not conducive to the resolution of the issue,” Fu Cong said.

Despite defense and economic agreements with Iran, Russia and China offered little substantive support to Iran as it confronted Israel and the United States over the summer.

More willing to exert pressure on Iran at the time of the 2015 nuclear deal, the two superpowers have broken with Western countries by mending fences with another international atomic pariah, North Korea.

Russia's Permanent Representative to the UN Security Council, Vasily Nebenzya, said the sanctions bid violated a 2015 nuclear deal.

“Britain, France, and Germany grossly violated the procedure for the consideration of disputed situations we have under the JCPOA in particular,” Nebenzya said. “Here you have a very good illustration of the fact that our European colleagues do, in essence, reject diplomacy. They prefer the language of blackmail and intimidation.”

Long an advocate of more international pressure on Iran at the United Nations, Israel celebrated a diplomatic win.

Israel's Ambassador to the UN hailed the Security Council's decision, calling it “another step forward towards imposing sanctions on the Iranian regime.”

“It is good that the world has woken up and joined the fight against Tehran’s violence and terrorism toward the Western world. The State of Israel will not allow a nuclear threat from Iran,” Danny Danon said.