Araghchi made the remarks in a letter addressed to the UNSC and UN Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday, following the notification submitted by the E3 – Britain, France, and Germany – seeking to activate the Dispute Resolution Mechanism, also known as snapback mechanism, and reinstate UNSC sanctions on Iran that were lifted under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and Resolution 2231.

The full text of his letter follows:

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

Excellency,

I have the honour to address certain false assertions contained in the letter dated 8 August 2025 of the Foreign Ministers of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom (hereinafter the E3), concerning the situation surrounding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2231 (2015). The letter, by misrepresenting facts, constitutes yet another attempt to lay groundwork for two courses of action that both are unjustified and set dangerous precedents in undermining credibility and integrity of the UNSC and its Resolutions.

E3’s misrepresentation of facts

I must reiterate that this conduct cannot be justified by reference to the fully legitimate and legal remedial measures of the Islamic Republic of Iran that were implemented, in a gradual and proportionate manner, and in full conformity with the relevant procedures and rights provided under the JCPOA. Ironically, however, the E3’s letter inadvertently reveals two fundamental flaws in their argument for a possible attempt to invoke the so-called snapback:

A)   Sequence matters. By falsely alleging that “Iran activated the Dispute Resolution Mechanism only in July 2020”, the E3 seek to delegitimize Iran’s remedial measures, misrepresenting the sequence of events, while concealing the fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran had formally activated the DRM in a letter on 10 May 2018. That notice led to meetings of Joint Commission and other steps foreseen for exhaustion of the Mechanism. Again, on 21 August 2018 Iran reaffirmed invocation of the Paragraph 36, saying that it had earlier “invoked the dispute resolution mechanism under paragraph 36 of the JCPOA to which end the Joint Commission convened at the level of political directors and Ministers of Foreign Affairs on 25 May and 6 July 2018 respectively”.

By raising the issue of the sequence, the E3 implicitly acknowledge that the order of DRM activation by different sides matters; and that the measures taken pursuant to Paragraph 36 of the JCPOA cannot justify reciprocal countermeasures by other parties. In short, the E3’s own reasoning admits that remedial measures cannot be invoked to against the other side’s prior remedial measures, and that such invocation is inadmissible and inapplicable.

B)    False claim that DRM activation needs recognition. Falsely asserting that “any other purported recourse to this mechanism was never recognized by the JCPOA’s participants, neither at the time, nor today,” the E3 suggest that validity of the DRM activation needs a consensus among Participants. By this very logic, the E3’s own attempt to activate the DRM or snapback lacks validity, since it has not been explicitly recognized by other participants.

If there is one DRM activation that was fully recognized and exhausted, it is the one triggered by the Islamic Republic of Iran on 10 May 2018. This was followed by an extraordinary Joint Commission meeting on 25 May 2018 and a Ministerial level meeting on 6 July 2018, both convened at Iran’s request. Following these meetings, Iran stated in several communications -including in letters dated 21 August 2018, 6 November 2018, and 7 April 2019- that it had invoked paragraph 36 of the JCPOA and that, should the significant non-performance of the other parties persist, it will exercise its rights and “gradually and based on a planned timetable [will] cease performing its commitments under the JCPOA.”

In fact, the E3’s letter is self-defeating. The E3’s attempt to activate DRM, which was followed by further non-performance on their behalf, amounted to an act of “remedy against remedy” which was neither recognized by all Participants nor fully exhausted.

As comprehensively detailed in the letter dated 29 January 2020 of the then Iranian Foreign Minister to the Coordinator of the JCPOA (attached herewith), the Islamic Republic of Iran had effectively and formally activated and exhausted the DRM, long before initiating its remedial measures, and only after it became evident that the issues arising from the US withdrawal and imposition of sanctions against Iran cannot be redressed by other Participants

It must be emphasized that the E3's invocation to the JCPOA Dispute Resolution Mechanism by referring to their letter dated 14 January 2020 in response to Iran's remedial measures of May 2019 onward, is totally misleading and irrelevant. As expressed in many communications, Iran's decision to cease performing its commitments was a lawful and legitimate response, according to its rights under paragraphs 26 and 36 of the JCPOA, to the U.S.'s unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA and the re-imposition of its unlawful sanctions. Therefore, it is absolutely illogical for E3 to describe their intention not to implement their commitments or trigger snapback as a reaction to Iran's lawful remedial measures taken one long year after U.S. unlawful withdrawal and the E3/EU's failure to implement their own obligations.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has expressly and formally communicated, on several occasions, to the Coordinator of JCPOA Joint Commission – and through him/her to other participants- that it triggered DRM under paragraph 36 of the JCPOA. In its letter dated 29 January 2020, in particular, Iran indicated that it had exhausted all recourses foreseen in Paragraph 36. The ministerial level Joint Commission meeting of 6 July 2018 recognized issues referred by Iran to the Joint Commission as “unresolved issues” and accordingly adopted a series of commitments in that regard. Those issues still remain "unresolved" today and no outcome has been agreed to the satisfaction of Iran as the complaining participant. The issues that are yet to be resolved to the satisfaction of Iran cannot constitute a basis for E3's decision to trigger snapback mechanism.

It should be noted that these facts in no way affect the exclusive rights of Iran under Paragraph 26 of the JCPOA, which explicitly states that Iran “will treat such a re-introduction or re-imposition of the sanctions… as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.”

Unlike the E3’s bad-faith conduct, Iran’s measures, taken in full conformity with its rights under Paragraphs 26 and 36, were intended to preserve the deal by compelling compliance, not to undermine it. Iran provided ample notice, engaged in good faith through multiple Joint Commission meetings, calibrated its actions to allow for reversibility, and maintained diplomatic engagement aimed at restoring full implementation of the JCPOA by all parties. The E3’s portrayal of these lawful measures as “non-performance” ignores their own culpability in provoking this legitimate recourse.

Resolution 2231 must end on Termination Day

In line with its policy of using snapback as a leverage to extract concessions from others, the E3 has “offered” a limited extension of the “relevant provisions of the UNSC 2231”, providing that Iran fulfills certain demands; however, the Islamic Republic of Iran strongly believes that the Resolution 2231 must expire according to the timeline foreseen therein.

Any other attempt would contravene realities, disregard the resolution’s purpose, set a bad precedent in the function of the Security council and deepen divisions within the Council. Needless to say, in such an unfortunate scenario, Iran will decisively and proportionately react, considering its supreme national interests.

Iran urges the Security Council to adhere strictly to the binding timelines enshrined in Resolution 2231, allowing its provisions to lapse as intended and paving the way for renewed diplomatic engagement in a more constructive atmosphere, free from coercion and threats.

Iran remains open to diplomacy

Iran firmly believes that diplomacy remains the most effective and potent avenue for resolving differences As stressed during the meeting of Iran’s Deputy Foreign Ministers with EU/E3 Political Directors on 25 July in Istanbul, the Islamic Republic of Iran remains committed to meaningful diplomatic engagement aimed at achieving a new agreement – one that respects Iran’s rights under the NPT while addressing all mutual concerns, including the unjust sanctions that have targeted the well-being and prosperity of the Iranian people.

We urge all Members to reject the unjustified political manipulations and to uphold the integrity of international law and authority of the Council. The path forward lies in mutual respect, not coercion.

I would be grateful if you would have this letter circulated as a document of the General Assembly and of the Security Council.

Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.