The International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors on Wednesday referred Iran’s nuclear file to the UN Security Council for the first time in nearly 20 years, after approving a resolution accusing Tehran of failing to meet its nuclear obligations. The move came as tensions between Iran and the United States escalated and tensions rose in the Strait of Hormuz.
Voting details and grounds for the decision
The resolution accuses Tehran of violating its obligations under the safeguards agreement and the nuclear deal, withholding information about its facilities’ activities and preventing IAEA inspectors from entering nuclear sites. It also expressed concern over what it described as Iran’s continued non-compliance and called on Tehran to address the matter urgently, pointing to the possibility of further measures after the referral.
At the same time, the resolution called on Iran to return to political negotiations without preconditions, stressing that dialogue and diplomatic solutions were the preferred way to address the file.
Referral does not mean automatic sanctions
The referral does not automatically impose new sanctions, as that would require a separate Security Council resolution. Russia and China hold veto power there, which could block any subsequent punitive action.
The decision is linked to an earlier step taken by the Board of Governors on June 12 last year, when Iran was found to be in non-compliance. A new resolution was needed to refer the file to the Security Council over the breach cited by the agency.
The board previously took similar action in February 2006, when 27 members backed a resolution referring Iran’s file to the Security Council.
Iran rejects decision and warns of its consequences
Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations in Vienna, Reza Najafi, rejected the decision and described it as invalid and baseless, saying it would not produce results given Moscow and Beijing’s opposition in the Security Council. He said the move was an attempt to reimpose sanctions or activate the “snapback” mechanism, predicting it would fail.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry accused the United States and European countries of pressuring Board of Governors members to approve the resolution. It denied that Iran had failed to meet any of its commitments and warned that the move would harm the nuclear non-proliferation regime.
Diplomats, meanwhile, warned that the referral could lead to the closure of the remaining channels of communication between Tehran and the agency, particularly limited contacts related to inspections.
Diplomatic pressure and US threats
The decision reflects an escalation in Western diplomatic pressure on Iran, despite the possibility that any subsequent punitive action could stall in the Security Council. Researcher Liqa Makki said the referral did not automatically mean punitive action, but in his assessment it gave Washington greater political room to portray Iran’s nuclear programme as an international threat.
Researcher Abbas Aslani said the timing of the decision went beyond technical issues and was linked to recent military developments and an attempt to expand international pressure on Tehran.
The referral comes amid US threats to target additional Iranian sites. US President Donald Trump threatened last Friday to potentially target Mount Ras al-Fas, a site near the Natanz uranium-enrichment facility that contains two complexes of tunnels buried deep underground.
