Baghaei: U.S. Representative’s Talk of Negotiations at the Security Council Is a Publicity Stunt
WANA (Dec 24) – Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has dismissed recent remarks by the United States’ representative at the UN Security Council about Washington’s willingness to negotiate with Iran, calling them a publicity exercise aimed at misleading public opinion rather than a genuine diplomatic initiative.
Responding to statements by Morgan Ortagus, the U.S. envoy to the United Nations, Baghaei said that contrary to Washington’s claims, the U.S. record shows neither goodwill nor seriousness when it comes to pursuing what Iran describes as “meaningful diplomacy.”
The remarks were made following a UN Security Council meeting held early Tuesday local time, convened to review the Secretary-General’s twentieth report on Resolution 2231 and the implementation of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA. The session exposed clear divisions within the Council, with Iran, Russia, and China openly opposing the inclusion of a resolution whose legal lifespan, they argue, has already expired.
UN Security Council Convenes/ Delegates Address Iran
WANA (Dec 23) – The Russian representative to the United Nations Security Council said that all provisions of Resolution 2231 have lost their legal validity on Oct. 18, 2025, marking the tenth anniversary of the adoption of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The UN Security Council convened a meeting under the agenda […]
During the meeting, the U.S. representative reiterated Washington’s position that it remains ready for formal talks with Iran, but only if Tehran agrees to what she described as “direct and meaningful negotiations.” She also restated the long-standing U.S. demand that Iran conduct no uranium enrichment on its own territory—a position Tehran considers incompatible with international law.
Baghaei rejected these remarks, saying they do not constitute a diplomatic proposal but rather a repetition of maximalist demands that have no basis in international law or in the global non-proliferation regime. He stressed that Iran, as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), has an “inalienable right” to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, including uranium enrichment.
The Iranian spokesperson described the U.S. narrative as an attempt to deflect responsibility, arguing that Washington should instead be held accountable for clear violations of international law, including military action against Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities and the use of force while diplomatic processes were still underway.
Referring to events in June 2025, Baghaei said that at a time when Iran and its Omani mediator were preparing for a new round of talks, the United States—alongside Israel—resorted to military action against Iranian territory. “Iran did not abandon negotiations; this process was destroyed by the United States’ resort to force,” he said, adding that Washington’s “betrayal of diplomacy” is both recent and undeniable.
Baghaei also addressed the legal status of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, emphasizing that all of its provisions expired on October 18, 2025, in accordance with its own termination clause. From that date onward, he argued, the Security Council no longer has the authority to consider Iran’s nuclear file, nor does the UN Secretary-General have a mandate to present reports on the matter.
According to the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson, the recent Security Council session was a politically motivated move by the European troika—Britain, France, and Germany—aimed at creating the impression that Resolution 2231 remains in force and at lending legitimacy to unlawful efforts to reimpose lifted sanctions. He noted that opposition from many Council members underscored the failure of this attempt.
Baghaei’s remarks highlight the deep and ongoing rift between Tehran and Washington over the future of nuclear diplomacy—one shaped not only by legal disagreements, but also by recent events on the ground and sharply conflicting narratives about responsibility for the current deadlock.
