S/PV.10130 Security Council

In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. Members of the Council have before them document S/2026/273, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. The Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it. I now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements before the voting. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Bahrain. (spoke in Arabic) The Kingdom of Bahrain, acting on behalf of the United Arab Emirates, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the State of Qatar, the State of Kuwait and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, hereby submits draft resolution S/2026/273 to the Security Council. This draft resolution addresses the security of maritime navigation in the Arab Gulf region and represents a decisive and responsible response to the grave developments affecting one of the most vital waterways for international trade: the Strait of Hormuz. The global significance of the Strait of Hormuz is underscored by the fact that it serves as a transit route for approximately 38 per cent of the world’s crude oil trade, 29 per cent of liquefied petroleum gas,19 per cent of liquefied natural gas and 20 per cent of refined petroleum products, including high-sulfur oil, which is an essential component in the production of fertilizers upon which developing nations heavily rely, particularly during agricultural seasons. Furthermore, the Strait facilitates the transit of approximately 30 per cent of global supplies of helium — an element vital to the electronic chip manufacturing industry — foodstuffs and pharmaceuticals essential to the lives of millions of people. Consequently, any disruption to the flow of these resources would not only affect energy markets; its repercussions extend to agricultural supply chains, global food security and vital sectors linked to advanced technology. Collectively, the member States of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf constitute the primary source of global energy supplies, entailing that the security of the Strait of Hormuz is a shared international responsibility that transcends the regional sphere and has a direct bearing on the stability of the global economy. Accordingly, we declare loudly and unequivocally before the Council, which is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security, that the Islamic Republic of Iran has no right to close this vital waterway to international navigation or to deprive the peoples of the world of these resources, which are essential for life. In doing so, it is violating international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and fundamental ethical and humanitarian principles. Should the Council permit the Strait to remain closed today, such a state of affairs would inevitably be replicated in other straits and waterways, turning the world into a lawless jungle, where brute force, arrogance, hegemony and disregard for international law prevail. The draft resolution currently before the Council comes at an extremely critical and sensitive juncture, as Iran persists in its unlawful aggression against our nations, launching thousands of ballistic missiles and drones to target civilian infrastructure, vital installations and the security of navigation. These actions constitute a flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the provisions of international law, especially international humanitarian law. They are also a direct threat to regional and international peace and security and a clear violation of resolution 2817 (2026), which was adopted only 30 days ago. It is also a violation of Human Rights Council resolution 61/1, adopted two weeks ago. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s disregard for international resolutions and its insistence on threatening the security of international navigation is not an emergency or a product of the moment. Rather, it is part of a well-documented pattern of negative conduct, and the Security Council has previously addressed threats to the security of navigation in the Arabian Gulf, unequivocally condemning them in its resolution 552 (1984). Furthermore, the international community remains acutely aware of Iran’s recurring pattern of resorting to economic blockades and threats regarding the closure and disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, rather than opting for diplomatic relations founded upon prioritizing mutual interests, mutual cooperation and the principles of good neighbourliness, as the region witnessed similar precedents in 2011, 2012 and 2019, with the targeting of oil tankers, and repeated statements in which the Strait of Hormuz was used as a political and economic bargaining chip. The draft resolution before the Council does not create a new reality. Rather, it constitutes a serious response to a pattern of recurring hostile Iranian behaviour, behaviour that must cease, in accordance with paragraph 6 of resolution 552 (1984). Some 42 years after the adoption of resolution 552 (1984), today we urge the international community, and the Council specifically, to take a firm, serious and resolute position against irresponsible practices that attempt, to no avail, to impose a unilateral economic blockade on the nations and peoples of the world. These practices and acts of aggression have transcended their regional impact, directly affecting the stability of the global economy and international food security. The World Food Programme has warned that the closure of the Strait has driven up the cost of fuel, transport and food. Furthermore, a continued closure of the Strait could push nearly 45 million additional people into acute levels of food insecurity, which demands urgent and responsible international action. In the light of the turmoil in the world today, it is no longer possible to ignore the fact that the obstruction of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz represents a systematic pattern of behaviour, one predicated on weaponizing this vital waterway as a tool for political pressure and leverage. Let us be clear. A failure to act today would entail grave consequences for the world and for humankind. It would embolden further violations of international law, undermine the credibility of the Security Council and send a negative message, namely that Security Council resolutions may be disregarded without consequences. The economic and humanitarian crisis confronting us today poses a fundamental question for the Security Council and the international community. Will the international community accept being held hostage by attempts at economic blackmail, by any party? Will the Council shoulder its responsibility to confront these blatant attacks, which contravene international law and show no respect for its resolutions, completely disregarding them? On the other hand, the adoption of this draft resolution by the Council today will send a strong and unified message: that we stand united in upholding international law; that we will protect civilians, global trade and food security; that we will safeguard vital supply chains for advanced technology, thereby ensuring continued global technological progress for the well-being of humankind; and that we will not permit vital international waterways to be threatened or blocked. The Kingdom of Bahrain’s non-permanent membership of the Security Council, coupled with our presidency of the Council during this current month of April, has placed us before a challenge of the utmost sensitivity, namely to protect the interests of our affected nations and of the entire world while simultaneously preserving the unity of the Security Council, ensuring that the Council remains united in its stances and resolutions. Consequently, and following continuous negotiations and extensive discussions, we have strived to ensure that this draft resolution is balanced, feasible and capable of achieving its desired objective: a united Council to ensure safe international maritime navigation. We therefore urge all members of the Security Council to support this draft resolution to ensure the Council’s credibility. The security and stability of our region, the growth of the global economy, the preservation of food security and technological advancement all depend on the decision of the Council. (spoke in English) I now resume my functions as President of the Council. I shall put the draft resolution to the vote now.

The draft resolution received 11 votes in favour, 2 votes against and 2 abstentions. The draft resolution has not been adopted, owing to the negative vote of a permanent member of the Council. I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements after the voting. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Bahrain. (spoke in Arabic) My country, the Kingdom of Bahrain, as well as the United Arab Emirates, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the State of Qatar and the State of Kuwait and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan deeply regret the failure to adopt the draft resolution before the Security Council today (S/2026/273). The Council has failed to take responsibility for an unlawful act that requires decisive action that cannot be postponed or delayed. We had hoped that the draft resolution would constitute a step towards a permanent solution guaranteeing international freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz as an international corridor through which no country has the right to obstruct navigation under international law. In this context, we reaffirm the voice of the international community represented in the Council and resolution 2817 (2026), which clearly expressed the imposition of obligations that cannot be interpreted or implemented selectively. Any failure to implement these obligations or any negligence in imposing them undermines the credibility of the Council and encourages further violations. We therefore call on the Islamic Republic of Iran to fully comply with these commitments and to cooperate constructively with the international community instead of continuing to pursue policies of escalation and firing ballistic missiles and drones on neighbouring countries. The Council has called for an immediate halt to these attacks, and we call on Iran to cease its constant attempts to impose a reality based on threats and economic pressure by impeding navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, with its repercussions on energy security, food and medicine supplies, international trade and the global economy. Broadly speaking, threats to freedom of navigation and regional security do not fall under the statute of limitations and cannot be treated as transient crises but rather ongoing challenges that require collective action and a decisive stance. From this point of view, we affirm that our countries will continue to work in coordination with their partners and allies to ensure freedom of navigation, protect international sea lanes and prevent the recurrence of these threats to safeguard global economic security and the interests of the international community. The draft resolution that was not adopted by the Council today reflects a necessary response to dangerous developments that have created a direct threat to freedom of navigation and have affected the safety and stability of international trade, energy markets and food and medicine supplies. The draft was also aimed at consolidating the principles of international law related to freedom of navigation and ensuring that sea lanes are not used as bargaining chips or blackmail tools. Failing to adopt this draft resolution today sends the wrong message to the peoples of the world that the threat to international sea lanes can pass without a firm collective response from the international organization responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security. The threat to close the Strait of Hormuz and using it as a means of applying pressure on the world is not new. Rather, it is a recurring behaviour that Iran has used for decades. Every time, it has had direct repercussions on global markets, energy security, food supply and the lives of the people of the region. We believe that the Council’s complacency in dealing with these repercussions decisively will only perpetuate the pattern of irresponsible behaviour that violates international law and widens the scope of its risks in a way that threatens the stability of the international system as a whole. The Arab Gulf region is not geographically or economically far from members’ countries, but rather it lies at the heart of their stability and prosperity, as its security is the security of all. The Gulf countries are not satisfied with securing the energy supplies that drive the global economy; they contribute to the stability of markets, support supply chains and are reliable trade and investment partners, particularly for developing countries and the countries of the global South, which find themselves on the front line of those affected by these crises and bear a disproportionate cost of any disruption to supply chains or energy markets. Our countries contribute to the development of future industries, including energy chains and associated technologies, and their communities embrace talent from around the world, with members’ children working alongside ours in an environment based on security, dignity, equal opportunities and a desired shared future. The failure to adopt the draft resolution today does not change the facts on the ground, protect civilian seas, secure global supply chains, guarantee the free flow of energy and trade or absolve those responsible for violations of international law from accountability. Rather, it raises serious questions about the Council’s ability to assume its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Let us be clear that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s constant attacks against commercial vessels and its attempts to obstruct legitimate transit through the Strait of Hormuz constitute flagrant violations of international law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and a direct threat to international peace and security. The failure to adopt this draft resolution does not legitimize these acts, which are harmful to the interests of the countries and peoples of the world. It does not weaken existing legal obligations and does not detract from the right of States to take all necessary measures, individually and collectively, to defend their sovereignty, security, stability, interests and the interests of the States and peoples of the region, consistent with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, as stated in resolution 2817 (2026). The Kingdom of Bahrain regrets that the Council has failed to rise to the occasion in the face of this grave crisis, adopt a unified stance and carry out the duties required by its legal responsibilities, despite the flexibility and cooperation we demonstrated regarding the amendments that some States requested be included in the draft resolution out of our concern for the Council’s unity. We reiterate that we will continue to work with our regional and international partners to protect maritime navigational freedom and civilian lives and to work with the Council to compel Iran to commit to the immediate implementation of the provisions of resolution 2817 (2026). The credibility of the Council is being put to the test today. That credibility is not merely an abstract concept; it is measured by the Council’s ability to take decisive action when the situation demands it. As for responsibility, it remains our duty, and the Kingdom of Bahrain will continue to shoulder this responsibility alongside all those who uphold international law and believe in justice and the right of peoples to live in dignity and equality, without fear of the future. (spoke in English) I now resume my functions as President of the Council.

I thank you, Mr. President, for your statement. In mine, I want to be very clear that the United States stands with Bahrain and with the people of the Gulf at this moment of reckoning. This is a time for choosing, and the countries that just opposed this draft resolution (S/2026/273), submitted by the Kingdom of Bahrain, have chosen to oppose Bahrain and the people of the Gulf. Just over three weeks ago, the Council adopted resolution 2817 (2026), which garnered a record-setting 136 co-sponsors, with no opposition in the Council. It was the most supported resolution in United Nations history. That resolution clearly demanded that Iran immediately cease its attacks and threats against neighbouring States and condemned its obstruction of safe civilian shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. As President Trump explained in his statement last week to the nation and the world: we are here because Iran’s tyrannical regime has persisted for decades in escalating its attacks against the American people, our allies in the region and the world’s commercial fleets, in flagrant violation of international law and nearly a dozen resolutions from the Security Council. Forty-seven years ago, the Iranian regime’s first act was to take dozens of Americans hostage. Now, it is taking the Strait of Hormuz hostage and, with it, is attempting to take the world’s economy hostage. Well, that may be its last act. We will see. Iran has laid mines in the Strait. They are firing upon civilian commercial vessels, which carry fertilizer, oil, medical supplies and other critical goods around the world. Iran is threatening the entire world with energy shortages, disrupted supply chains and possibly even famine. The Iranian regime has deliberately chosen to broaden its war to the Gulf by firing on our allies — not just United States military bases but shooting in all directions. Against the United Arab Emirates alone, Iran has fired more than 500 ballistic missiles, more than 2,000 drones and dozens of sophisticated cruise missiles — again, not against military targets, but against resorts, ports and hotels in civilian neighborhoods, in absolute and flagrant violation of international law. The Kingdom of Bahrain has sustained thousands more ballistic missiles, drones, cruise missiles — again, against civilian neighbourhoods. Iran has deliberately chosen to broaden its war even further. Iran’s Foreign Minister Araghchi has stated that the Strait of Hormuz is now Iranian territory — that is quite the pronouncement — and that it will treat the Strait as its own territory, again, holding the world’s economy hostage. It was Iran’s choice to deny the world the oil needed to heat homes, to deny African and South Asian States grain and fertilizer by not allowing these to pass freely through the Strait in time for planting season in spring. As we speak, right now, 80 United Nations and international humanitarian groups delivering medical aid, shelter, supplies and food to humanitarian crises in the Congo, in the Sudan and in Gaza cannot pass through the Strait. No one should tolerate that Iran is holding the global economy at gunpoint, but today, Russia and China did tolerate it. They sided with a regime that seeks to intimidate the Gulf into submission, even as it brutalizes its own people during a national Internet blackout for daring to imagine dignity or freedom. Now it seeks to punish the world as cynical leverage in its “death to America” approach to foreign policy. The blight Iran has inflicted upon us, other countries and its own people did not begin on 11 March. It did not begin on 28 February or even today. For nearly half a century, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s leading State sponsor of terrorism, has built its reason for existence on the violent exporting of a revolution. It has built its reason for existence on intimidation and terror. And I commend Bahrain and everyone who voted for this resolution for saying enough is enough. It has attacked American embassies. It has murdered hundreds of American diplomats, service members and civilians. It has bombed American barracks and businesses. It has tried to bomb our cities. It has even repeatedly conspired and failed to assassinate the President of the United States. The perpetrator of that Iranian plot was just convicted, right down the street in Brooklyn, in an American court. Thank God. This year alone, multiple agents of the Iranian Government were convicted and intercepted in other plots to kill the President and an American-Iranian dissident who spoke right here at the Council (see S/PV.10091), Masih Alinejad, all in clear violation of resolution 1373 (2021), which prohibits States from supporting acts of terror. For 47 years and counting, Iran has campaigned against peace in the region by any means necessary. Just this January, it slaughtered tens of thousands of its own citizens, as we discussed right here in the Council. The regime then promised no more executions of its citizens. But what is the regime doing instead? It is violating that promise by slaughtering, on average, one Iranian per day, for those who dare to protest their own Government. Iran has also armed terrorist proxies, targeted civilians, strangled shipping lanes and destabilized Governments. As a 2019 report of the Secretary-General (S/2019/373) affirmed, it has hidden and encouraged its proxies to hide behind civilians and civilian infrastructure to attack Americans and our allies. The Secretary-General himself affirmed that Iran hides military hardware in hospitals, schools and civilian neighbourhoods for propaganda purposes in the most sick and despicable way. Do not take that from me. Take that from the Secretary-General and his own report. Furthermore, according to UNICEF, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is openly recruiting children as young as 12 to be child soldiers. Right now, as their country suffers, the authorities are spending millions of dollars per day to enforce an Internet blackout on those same civilians and those same children whom they are executing for daring to protest. Why is all of this happening? Because regional peace is a threat to Iran. Apparently, it is also not good — or apparently it is bad — for China and Russia. It exposes the Iranian regime for what it is: a dictatorship punching at the kneecaps of its neighbours — neighbours who have realized a better future for their people. Just across the Strait of Hormuz, cities such as Dubai, Doha, Manama and Riyadh beckon the Iranian people towards a better future. That is the threat. That is what the regime does not want to see for its own people. Right across the Gulf, there is a brighter, better future and a different model. The regime will not have it, and it is attacking that model at every turn. I recently heard from an Iranian dissident, who has been repeatedly harassed and threatened and is in hiding. That dissident told me what the Iranian people fear the most — they fear that America will stop. They fear that we will stop too soon and that a new future — this is from the dissident — one that looks like what their Gulf neighbours have provided, will not come for them. Today, certain countries stood in the way of that future, whereas the United States voted to protect it. It is not lost on us that, as we speak, the Bahraini people, our allies across the Gulf and American service members in the region are under a barrage of Iranian missiles and drones. They have shown great bravery. It is sad and unfortunate that Russia and China have not. We have long known that those countries are capable of paralysing the Council through obstruction and manufactured confusion. Today’s veto marks a new low, and it shows just how frightening a safer, more secure and more united Middle East can be to them. The rejection of this draft resolution will be explained today. Members will hear a number of excuses. They will hear that this was part of a United States campaign to ensure that the world is free of Iran’s nuclear programme. I will note that today’s result does not restrict the United States from continuing to act in its own self-defence and in the collective defence of our allies and partners. President Trump will continue the actions necessary to defend our people and the free world. The request from Bahrain and from the region was not unreasonable; they engaged every member of the Council and took their inputs and thoughts on board. It was a simple draft resolution: Iran must stop attacking the Gulf, stop threatening its neighbours and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. I would note that Russia and China might have chosen better partners than Iran. They might have chosen to stand with our Gulf allies — with Manama, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait City and others. Instead, Russia has chosen to be a critical supplier of military equipment to Iran over the past year, in particular delivering combat aircraft, helicopters, armoured vehicles and other arms to Iran, some of which violate resolution 1929 (2010). Iran, likewise, has supplied Russia with hundreds of attack unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and UAV technology for use in Ukraine, including transfers made before October 2023 and therefore in violation of resolution 2231 (2015), which placed an arms embargo on Iran, as voted by the Council. Furthermore, in September 2024, Iran began delivering hundreds of close-range ballistic missiles to Russia. Meanwhile, China imports more than 80 per cent of Iran’s illicit oil, and Chinese entities have exported significant quantities of components intended for attack drones and technologies that could be used in ballistic missiles. Let us be clear: in the coming days, when critical shipments are delayed, when fertilizer fails to reach countries that need it for the planting season and when vulnerable populations face deepening food insecurity, the world will know exactly who chose obstruction over responsibility. Despite today’s outcome, let me reiterate two simple messages from the United States. First, the United States stands firmly with its partners in the Middle East. Secondly, the Strait of Hormuz is too vital to the world to be used as a hostage, to be choked or to be weaponized by any one State. Let me be frank: most Member States here need the Strait of Hormuz more than the United States does. Still, as the Council knows, the United States has consistently pursued a diplomatic resolution, even as we continue to achieve our objectives in Operation Epic Fury. We have put serious diplomatic proposals before Iran. The United States remains prepared for meaningful diplomacy, but diplomacy cannot succeed where defiance, delay and escalation remain Tehran’s only responses. We are grateful to our mediating partners for their continued efforts to secure a peaceful resolution, but Iran must choose one. Iran is a direct threat to international peace and security. It is responsible for its own thuggery, and it alone is responsible for the ramifications. In the book I live by, God has “provided a way out”. Even now, on the heels of Holy Week, Iran can also choose to reverse its decision, reopen the Strait, seek peace and make amends. Until then and afterwards, we call on responsible nations to join us in securing the Strait of Hormuz, protecting it and ensuring that it remains open to lawful commerce, humanitarian goods and the free movement of the world’s goods. The United States and its allies will protect our interests, our people and a better future for all, even while members of the Council, partnered with the Iranian regime, work to do the exact opposite.

Panama commends Bahrain’s leadership in presenting and guiding this negotiation process and the efforts it has undertaken to bridge the gaps between Council members. Panama recognizes the critical importance of safeguarding — by all parties and at all times — the protection of the civilian population and critical infrastructure and ensuring maritime security and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, which is an essential waterway for international trade, energy security and global economic stability. We reiterate our solidarity with, and support for, the Gulf countries and all those affected by attacks against civilian infrastructure and international shipping in that vital strategic region — attacks occurring within the context of an escalation that was neither initiated nor sought by those States and whose consequences they now face directly. Panama co-sponsored and voted in favour of resolution 2817 (2026), through which the Council condemned the attacks against the Gulf countries, reaffirmed respect for their sovereignty and territorial integrity and demanded the immediate cessation of such attacks. Panama also underscores and welcomes the restraint demonstrated by the Gulf States and others in the current situation. Despite having been subjected to attacks, they have chosen not to escalate the situation through the exercise of their legitimate right to self-defence, including proportionate responses, enshrined in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. Panama understands, from its own historical experience, what it means to suffer from actions that undermine a country’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, security and economic stability, and what it means to recognize that the Security Council is not always able to respond with the promptness and effectiveness required by such situations. The severity of the current escalation and the intensification of the strikes we are witnessing reinforce our firm belief that the Council cannot remain passive in the face of situations with direct implications for international peace and security. Panama reiterates that an essential first step to contain the escalation in the region is the immediate cessation of hostilities by all parties. This has been the consistent focus and demand of my delegation throughout the negotiation process for draft resolution S/2026/273 and remains so today. This position reflects our firm belief that there is no military solution to the current escalation and that no sustainable solution can be achieved without prioritizing dialogue, diplomacy and negotiation as the primary means of the settlement of international disputes. Panama welcomes the efforts made throughout the negotiation process to reflect the diverse perspectives of the Council members, in particular the inclusion of language on respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of States. We also note the substantive adjustments made following the conclusion of negotiations, clarifying the defensive nature of the measures contemplated — an element crucial to bridging positions among Council members. Panama stresses that any measures taken under this draft resolution must be implemented with this defensive purpose in mind and in strict accordance with international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, with full respect for the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure. Panama, as the sovereign owner and responsible operator of the Panama Canal and holder of one of the largest maritime shipping registries, views with particular concern any measure that could affect the security, stability and predictability of international navigation. These considerations have direct and tangible implications for our country, as escalation could also have harmful repercussions for other strategic routes. Given the urgency of the situation and the need for the Security Council to act, Panama decided to vote in favour of the draft resolution. Its final text reflects a tone that made our support possible, on the understanding that the mandate it establishes will be interpreted and applied responsibly by all parties. This vote reflects a responsible decision aimed at reducing risks to civilians and critical infrastructure, while helping ease tensions and safeguarding international navigation and global supply chains.

Colombia notes with deep concern the developments in the Middle East, now in their sixth week, without clear signs of de-escalation. My country regrets the loss of human life and condemns all attacks against civilians, civilian objects and essential infrastructure, including energy facilities, which are vital to the provision of basic services. At the same time, Colombia recognizes the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz for international trade and energy security. Disruptions to maritime security extend beyond the region, disproportionately affecting developing countries. For this reason, my delegation has actively engaged in the negotiations, putting forward proposals to help balance the text, clarify the scope of the proposed measures and avoid overly broad formulations that could lead to interpretations beyond ensuring the safety of navigation. Such efforts are in line with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. We recognize Bahrain’s efforts to address some of the positions and concerns expressed by Council members. Nevertheless, some substantive issues have not been fully resolved, and Columbia continues to have serious concerns in this regard. In particular, my delegation believes that the text remains selective, unbalanced and ambiguous. My country is also concerned that the lack of legal precision may give rise to interpretations beyond the intended objective, with broader implications for regional stability, including the risk of further escalation and the involvement of additional actors in an already highly volatile situation. For these reasons, and as it considers that the text under consideration today falls short of contributing to a negotiated solution, Colombia abstained in the voting. My country believes that, in the current context, the Council must send clear messages aimed at containment and the prevention of further escalation. Colombia also considers it essential to preserve space for ongoing mediation efforts. In this regard, measures that promote confrontation risk undermining those opportunities and hindering progress towards negotiated, sustainable solutions. We regret that the Security Council has missed an opportunity to deliver a unified response that could help ease tensions and open pathways to peace. We reaffirm our solidarity with our colleagues from Bahrain, the Gulf States and all countries in the region. We reiterate the urgent call for a cessation of hostilities, respect for international law and the prioritization of dialogue as the only path to resolving this crisis. Therein lies peace.

At the outset, let me reiterate Pakistan’s continued and unwavering support and complete solidarity in these challenging times with the brotherly Kingdom of Bahrain and other fraternal countries of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC) — the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Oman — as well as Jordan, which are not parties to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East but are directly suffering from its consequences. Pakistan supports the sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence and security of all brotherly countries in the region. The Strait of Hormuz is an important international shipping route for goods and energy. Pakistan calls for the security of ships and crew members, the swift and safe passage of civilian ships and the restoration of normal passage through the Strait. The situation in the Strait of Hormuz is adversely impacting countries around the world, including Pakistan. The consequences for the regional and global economy are evidently harsh. Ordinary Pakistanis are also suffering. South Asia, which is home to nearly a quarter of the world’s population, is suffering. The ongoing situation in the Strait of Hormuz has resulted in one of the largest energy supply shocks in modern history. The impact is felt not only in terms of energy flows but also fertilizers and other essential commodities, thus affecting food security and cost of living, and squeezing the livelihoods of the most vulnerable. If the military escalation and disruptions persist, the suffering will extend far beyond the region, translating into widespread economic hardship. We thank Bahrain for its hard work and extensive consultations on draft resolution S/2026/273. We agree on the urgency of the situation and the fundamental premise of the draft resolution, which is the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and normalization of the situation as soon as possible. This is an important issue not only for the GCC countries but also for all of the States in the region and beyond, including Pakistan. It is also logical that any discussion or arrangement related to the Strait of Hormuz will have to take into account the legitimate interests of the GCC countries. Pakistan supported resolution 2817 (2026), which was submitted last month by Bahrain on behalf of the GCC. We have consistently maintained that that resolution should be implemented in letter and spirit. However, we continue to believe that time and space must be allowed for ongoing diplomatic efforts to facilitate a return to dialogue and engagement. These efforts have been widely acknowledged and appreciated, including by the Secretary-General and members of the Council. We will continue to seek a durable diplomatic solution for the prevailing situation. This is the fundamental foundation of our ongoing diplomatic efforts, which we are determined to continue to pursue. At this critical juncture, restraint, diplomacy and dialogue must prevail. Pakistan has been actively engaged in diplomatic efforts towards that end, in concert with its partners in the region and beyond. The Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Pakistan, Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar, hosted the Foreign Ministers of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye in Islamabad last week to advance the pursuit of a peaceful resolution of the ongoing crisis through intensified diplomatic engagement. After the Deputy Prime Minister’s meeting with His Excellency, Mr. Wang Yi, the Foreign Minister of China, in Beijing last week, China and Pakistan announced a five-point initiative with a sequenced road map encapsulating an immediate halt to hostilities, the launch of inclusive peace talks, the protection of civilians and critical infrastructure, the restoration of maritime security in the state of Hormuz and a firm reaffirmation of the Charter of the United Nations and international law as the indispensable framework for a lasting political settlement. Our objective is clear: a permanent end to hostilities, containing the expansion of this conflict and preventing any further loss of civilian life or destruction of critical infrastructure. Pakistan remains committed to continuing to play its constructive role in promoting dialogue, fostering understanding and supporting all efforts aimed at achieving lasting peace in the region.

France regrets that that draft resolution S/2026/273, submitted by Bahrain, could not be adopted because of the veto exercised by two permanent members of the Security Council. We would like to thank Bahrain for the consultation efforts made during negotiations over the text, which deserved the support of the entire Council. France voted in favour of this draft resolution because freedom of navigation and maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz are essential for the stability of the Middle East and international stability and because, in the opinion of France, the text contains some of the means necessary for that end. For several weeks, Iran has essentially been blocking access to the Strait of Hormuz. France has condemned Iranian attacks on commercial ships and expressed concern over the risks of mining the Strait. This blockage is a violation of the law of the sea, as well as a threat to global energy and fertilizer supplies. The consequences are being felt by the entire global economy, especially by the most vulnerable populations. This closure must therefore end, and freedom of navigation must be restored. On 11 March, the Council adopted resolution 2817 (2026), which condemned indiscriminate strikes by Iran against Gulf countries and Jordan. We express our active solidarity with the States of the region, which were attacked even though they posed no threat whatsoever to Iran. This draft resolution, which France supported and co-sponsored, recalls that navigational rights and freedoms in the Strait of Hormuz must be respected. It is regrettable that the Council is now being prevented from supporting efforts to secure the Strait of Hormuz. The draft resolution that has just been rejected was intended to promote strictly defensive measures to secure the Strait, without setting off a spiral of escalation. It effectively reaffirmed the right of States to protect freedom of navigation, commercial vessels and crews, in accordance with international law, from attacks and provocations. The draft resolution also contained paragraphs calling for de-escalation in the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf, the cessation of attacks on civilian infrastructure and the resumption of diplomatic efforts, with a view to achieving lasting peace in the region. It is difficult to understand why two permanent members of the Council that claim to be committed to diplomacy and the peaceful settlement of disputes should veto these provisions. Finally, this text encourages States to coordinate their efforts to put in place initiatives to secure maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, for example through defensive operations. France regrets that this provision has not been adopted today. However, it intends to continue to work with its international partners to put in place an initiative to contribute to the security of maritime transport in the Strait when conditions allow. Resolution 2817 (2026) and international law already allow this. Although the draft resolution was not adopted, the efforts that we support must continue, including at the Security Council, to pave the way for de-escalation and a ceasefire, which is more urgent than ever; in order to restore freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz in accordance with the law of the sea; and beyond that, to address the multiple threats posed by Iran, including its support for the network of regional allies, of which Lebanon is currently the primary victim, or its nuclear and ballistic missile programme. France stands ready to contribute through the Council. France’s position has remained consistent for the past 20 years. Those threats cannot be resolved through military means but must be addressed through a negotiated agreement under which Iran would accept major concessions in order to address the legitimate concerns of the international community. France remains ready to contribute to efforts aimed at achieving that objective.

Greece voted in favour of draft resolution S/2026/273, presented on behalf of Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, reiterating its strong solidarity with the countries of the Gulf and reaffirming the importance of safeguarding freedom of navigation and maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz. On this occasion, I would like to thank Bahrain for its tireless efforts in drafting the text. We regret that its adoption was not made possible today. The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the most critical maritime routes and a vital artery for global international trade and energy supply. Any disruption to its normal functioning carries immediate and far-reaching consequences for international peace and security. Freedom of navigation constitutes a public good. We have repeatedly condemned Iran’s illegal and unprovoked attacks against the countries of the Gulf region and elsewhere. Any actions by Iran that jeopardize the unimpeded passage of commercial and merchant vessels through the Strait of Hormuz must cease immediately. Greece remains firmly committed to promoting maritime security and freedom of navigation in accordance with international law, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It was in that context that Greece voted in favour of the draft resolution, whose aim was and is to encourage the coordination of efforts, defensive in nature, to ensure the safe and unimpeded flow of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and to contribute to stability in global energy markets. All ships should enjoy the right of transit passage through the Strait of Hormuz in accordance with international law, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is rightly recognized as the constitution of the oceans and quantifies customary international law and is therefore binding upon all States. In conclusion, a de-escalation of hostilities remains of paramount importance, both with regard to the wider conflict and the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. All parties must exercise maximum restraint, prevent a further spiral of violence and urgently work towards reopening credible channels of dialogue. Our aim must remain to find ways to return to the negotiating table to reach a peaceful settlement in line with international law and the Charter of the United Nations.

Denmark voted in favour of draft resolution S/2026/273. We did so with a grave sense of responsibility and a firm commitment to supporting all efforts to ensure freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and to bring the hostilities in the Middle East to an end. Denmark is deeply concerned about the continuous escalation across the region. For five weeks this conflict has raged, bringing with it more death and destruction by the day and further destabilization of the already volatile and tense situation. Our vote today reflects our belief in the urgent need to address those developments. Iran’s attacks against countries in the region and beyond continue unabated. Denmark strongly condemns those continued attacks, which must stop immediately, and we express our full solidarity with all the countries concerned. De-escalation and respect for international law, including international humanitarian law, are now more important than ever. All diplomatic efforts to reduce tensions must be pursued. We welcome any such efforts and call for negotiations to be resumed in good faith. In that regard, we welcome the Secretary-General’s appointment of Jean Arnault as his Personal Envoy to lead United Nations efforts relating to the conflict in the Middle East and its consequences. Many aspects of this conflict have sent shockwaves across the globe. This is particularly true for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, caused by Iran’s actions. This closure is not only a disruption, but a dangerous escalation, measured in lives and livelihoods lost. Global growth and development depend on the freedom of navigation. The repercussions for the global economy and, increasingly, for food security, in particular across developing countries, are enormous. As a great maritime nation, Denmark is committed to maritime security, to open sea lanes and to the safety of all seafarers. Iran’s actions near and around the Strait of Hormuz constitute a threat to international peace and security. Iran must immediately cease all attacks and any other attempts to impede lawful transit passage in the Strait of Hormuz. It is crucial to permanently restore safe passage and ensure freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, pursuant to resolution 2817 (2026) and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. That is why Denmark voted in favour of the draft resolution. While we strongly regret that it was not possible to adopt it today, owing to the vetoes of two permanent members, Denmark remains committed to safeguarding peace, security and stability in the Middle East.

Latvia voted in favour of draft resolution S/2026/273, submitted by Bahrain, and we express our regret that a positive outcome was not reached. It is profoundly troubling that certain members of the Council have chosen to obstruct a draft resolution designed to ensure the safety and security of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and to advance global stability. Just three weeks ago, the Council adopted resolution 2817 (2026), co-sponsored and supported by Latvia, alongside an unprecedented number of countries. In it, the Council called upon Iran to refrain from interfering with international navigation. In the days and weeks that have followed, Iran has doubled down and effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, shocking the global economy. The continued failure and refusal by the Iranian regime to comply with its obligations under international law, including its breaches of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, as well as its persistent non-compliance with binding resolutions of this body, not only constitute a breach of international order, but also leave the Council with a responsibility to act. We must ensure maritime security and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. It is categorically unacceptable for Iran, or any State for that matter, to use an international waterway as a bargaining chip and to hold the global economy hostage. Supply chains are being disrupted, global energy prices have spiked and acute food insecurity around the globe is growing at an alarming rate, especially among the most vulnerable. Iran is setting a dangerous precedent, which we cannot allow or normalize. We commend Bahrain for addressing precisely this crucial reality in its draft resolution. Finally, alongside the unprecedented closure of the Strait, the Iranian regime is continuing its unprovoked strikes against countries in the region. We condemn these attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure and reiterate our steadfast solidarity with our partners in the region. We repeat our calls for an immediate deescalation and the protection of civilians. Allow me to once more express my sincere appreciation to Bahrain for its efforts on this pressing matter.

The Russian Federation voted against the draft resolution (S/2026/273) submitted by Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia on the situation in the Strait of Hormuz and the adjacent waters. Our country’s position regarding the current crisis in the Middle East is principled, consistent and objective in nature. We condemn the aggression by the United States and Israel against Iran. We respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries in the region — be they the Islamic Republic of Iran or the other States of the Persian Gulf. We view the attacks on their civilian populations and civilian infrastructure as unacceptable. Russia has sought an end to such actions, including at the highest level, and continues to do so. We are striving for the swift restoration of peace in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East. However, the Russian Federation was not able to support a text that would have set a dangerous precedent for international law, including the international law of the sea, any peace efforts and the authority of the Security Council. Even when resolution 2817 (2026) was being discussed, we urged all our Council colleagues to take a balanced and objective approach. The Secretary-General has consistently conveyed similar even-handed messages, calling on the United States and Israel to cease hostilities and on Iran to stop attacking its neighbours. To disregard the root cause of the crisis in the Middle East, namely, the unlawful and reckless actions taken by the United States and Israel against Iran, is both impossible and unacceptable. At the time, the Secretary-General’s and our appeals fell on deaf ears. Nevertheless, we understood the predicament in which the States of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf and Jordan found themselves, and we abstained during the adoption of resolution 2817 (2026). That was not an easy decision for us. However, this time, our Bahraini partners and their like-minded allies have gone much further by presenting a fundamentally flawed and dangerous approach to the situation in the region. In essence, almost every paragraph of the draft they proposed was replete with unbalanced, inaccurate and confrontational elements. I will highlight only the key points. In the first preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 6, Iran’s actions were portrayed as the sole source of the so-called “destabilizing activities and regional tensions”. Yet there was not a single word about the real causes of the current crisis in the Middle East: the unlawful strikes by the United States and Israel against Iranian territory. This was despite the fact that in the third preambular paragraph, the authors themselves noted that threats to maritime navigation in the Strait of Hormuz began to emerge precisely on 28 February 2026. This, incidentally, contradicted their own assertions that the current initiative was intended to respond to supposedly decades of threats to freedom of navigation posed by Iran. In the sixth preambular paragraph, attempts to impede the passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz were categorically characterized as a threat to international peace and security. The fact that a significant part of the Strait of Hormuz falls within Iran’s territorial waters was deliberately omitted. In the seventh preambular paragraph, threats to merchant vessels and interference with freedom of navigation were cited as the sole cause of disruptions to energy supplies. Once again, no reference was made to the root causes of the crisis about which the United States President himself has spoken quite frankly, having publicly acknowledged that a cessation of hostilities would lead to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The ninth preambular paragraph and operative paragraphs 1 and 4 contained references to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This international legal instrument does not apply in situations of armed conflict — a point we repeatedly emphasized throughout the negotiation process. The tenth preambular paragraph noted that, in the context of the current crisis, Iran itself was the source of threats to international peace and security. The removal of references to Chapter VII from this paragraph was not a panacea. In essence, such wording could still be interpreted by unscrupulous States as legitimizing the use of force. Operative paragraph 2 speaks for itself. It proposed that the Security Council give a “green light” for the use of certain protective measures, whose scope remains unknown to us, under the pretext of ensuring safety of navigation and in utter disregard for the sovereignty of coastal States. The caveats about the strictly defensive nature of these efforts do nothing to change the substance of the matter. This holds particularly true in that the authors themselves made it clear that force was at issue. This was made plain from the wording of operative paragraph 3, which emphasized that States acting according to paragraph 2 must comply with the requirements of international humanitarian law. Operative paragraph 7 stated that the Security Council was ready to consider “further measures” against those who undermine navigational rights and freedoms. This constitutes an undisguised allusion to attempts to exert pressure through sanctions, irrespective of whether or not this was explicitly stated. Operative paragraphs 7 and 8 referred not only to the Strait of Hormuz but also to the Bab al-Mandab strait. In other words, the authors deliberately expanded the geographic scope of their draft, thereby providing even more grounds for construing it broadly. Operative paragraph 9 despite its sound premise — an appeal for diplomacy — referred exclusively to the cessation of hostilities in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman regions, as well as in the Strait of Hormuz. Not a single word was said about the need for an end to the United States-Israeli aggression. Ultimately, no matter how hard the authors sought to cloak the text in vague generalities, its essence remained unchanged: it grants carte blanche for aggressive actions and escalation to continue. We understand perfectly well the ramifications from a legal standpoint and for the situation on the ground, particularly at a time when we are hearing statements from the United States President about readiness to “destroy” Iran should the Strait of Hormuz not remain open. We are compelled to remind Council members, once again, about how resolution 1973 (2011) on Libya was twisted and where the consequences of the expansive interpretation thereof ultimately led. Trust in States that promote the use of force under noble pretexts and through vague wording was already exhausted back then. We have already witnessed how the United States sought to justify its strikes against Iran by invoking the right to self-defence under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations and engaging in a preemptive interpretation thereof. While we stand in full solidarity with the Arab States, which have been set up by Washington and have fallen victim to the tragedy unfolding in the region, we cannot fail to note that any attempt to impose rules of the game in the Strait of Hormuz would play directly into the hands of those seeking to further undermine security and stability in the Middle East and beyond. Measures to protect the vessels, or any other property, of the Member States of the United Nations, do not require Security Council resolutions. References to Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, which grants the right to self-defence under virtually any circumstances, are all that are needed. The spread of security operations in the Strait of Hormuz, without the consent of littoral States, is yet another reason for which we were unable to accept and vote in favour of the draft from Bahrain. The adoption of such a document, which disregards the broad context of the situation, would further antagonize Iran, which has been enduring daily United States and Israeli strikes. Vast numbers of civilians are perishing in Iran. Nearly 2,000 civilians have now died, one quarter of whom are women and girls. The Supreme Leader has been killed, as have many of the country’s leadership. Civilian infrastructure, including schools, hospitals, universities and energy and nuclear facilities, including the Bushehr power plant, is being attacked, threatening catastrophic humanitarian repercussions for Iran and for the entire region. We wish to underscore that the Security Council did not agree to produce a single line assessing these violations of international law. (spoke in English) Ambassador Waltz will hear no excuses from us today. (spoke in Russian) I will not dwell on the egregious double standards of this approach. However, it is completely illogical, even from the standpoint of simple pragmatism. The adoption of such a one-sided draft resolution would undermine any prospects for the resumption of negotiations with a view to resolving the crisis and would also obstruct important and useful peace initiatives currently being undertaken by a number of States, including China, Pakistan and Türkiye. If the Security Council were to adopt the position imposed on it, there would be no incentive whatsoever for Tehran to engage in contact in any form with Washington, which twice previously betrayed diplomacy, in June 2025 and February 2026, and began to conduct large-scale strikes against Iran at the height of the negotiating process. From the very start to work on the document, together with our Chinese colleagues, we conveyed to the Bahraini authors and other members of the Security Council our very serious concerns regarding this initiative. We did not see leeway for corrections to the text, which is why we urged our Arab friends to refrain from promoting it. However, our views were not heeded and the draft was put to the vote regardless. Under these circumstances, we had no choice but to vote against it. Russia has consistently supported the provision of comprehensive security for maritime navigation, in all international waterways, in addition to the opening of corridors for Venezuela and Cuba and an end to attacks targeting the commercial vessels of any country. Similarly, we advocate unhindered navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. However, the only way to resolve this situation is with the participation of all littoral States bordering this important transport corridor. It is not possible to do so without Iran. We call upon our Arab and Iranian friends to resolve the issue of navigation and the movement of vessels directly. We stand ready to facilitate such contacts. We understand the concerns of our Arab partners vis-à-vis the question of freedom of navigation. We, together with China, are proposing an alternative draft resolution on the current situation in the Middle East, including from the point of view of maritime security. We are confident that providing for genuine freedom of navigation in the Strait, which is of such critical importance for countries in the region and the entire world, is possible only through the cessation of hostilities and through the achievement of a negotiated solution. Our draft will be concise and equitable and balanced, in accordance with the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations, in particular regarding the peaceful settlement of disputes. In this connection, we are putting the draft in blue forthwith, and we will report on plans for voting shortly. We trust that all members of the Security Council will provide their support.

The month-long conflict in Iran and its spillover effects continue to spread, dealing a heavy blow to regional and global peace and stability. It is gravely affecting the global economy, causing increasingly widespread disruptions. This is not in the common interests of the countries of the region and beyond. The ins and outs of this conflict are crystal clear. The United States and Israel, without authorization from the Security Council and while negotiations between Iran and the United States were under way, launched military strikes against Iran, in clear violation of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the basic norms of international relations. Meanwhile, the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Gulf States must be fully respected. Civilians and non-military targets must be given necessary protection. The safety and security of shipping lanes and energy infrastructure must also be safeguarded. China does not go along with Iran’s attacks on Gulf States, nor does China condone the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Like all parties, China hopes that peace and stability will be restored to the Strait as soon as possible and that navigation will resume. China attaches great importance to the draft resolution (S/2026/273) submitted by the representative of Bahrain, on behalf of the Gulf States. We fully understand their serious concerns, and we are committed to solving the issue properly. We participated constructively in the consultations. Under the current circumstances, this draft resolution should clearly identify the root causes of this conflict, seek appropriate solutions to address the root causes, ensure the safety and security of shipping lanes and strive to promote dialogue and achieve peace. It is regrettable, however, that the draft resolution fails to capture the root causes and full picture of the conflict in a comprehensive and balanced manner. It contains one-sided condemnation and pressure, refers to the situation as a threat to international peace and security and mentions the use of armed escorts. Such language is highly susceptible to misinterpretation or even abuse. At a time when the United States is openly threating the survival of a civilization and when the current war imposed on Iran is very likely to escalate further, the draft resolution, had it been adopted, would have sent the wrong message and had very serious consequences. The Security Council has recent lessons to learn from issues such as Libya and the Red Sea, and such past mistakes must not be repeated. The Security Council’s actions should be aimed at de-escalating the situation and cooling the temperature. They must not provide legitimacy for unauthorized military operations. The Council’s actions must not grant a licence to use force and further exacerbate tensions and add fuel to the fire, thereby leading to an escalation of the conflict. The Security Council should not rush to vote on draft resolutions when serious concerns have been raised among members. In the light of the above, China had no choice but to vote against the draft resolution. This is a war that should never have happened. As it continues, it will cause immeasurable harm. At present, the situation in the Middle East continues to deteriorate and hostilities are escalating. The fundamental solution to ensuring safe passage of ships through the Strait is to achieve the cessation of hostilities and of fighting as soon as possible. The United States and Israel are the instigators of this conflict. The fundamental reason for the disruption of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz is the illegal military action taken by Israel and the United States against Iran. China strongly urges the United States and Israel to immediately cease their illegal military actions. Having heard what was said by our United States colleague, we are much more convinced now that China’s position is objective and impartial, reflecting the image of a responsible major Power that upholds international fairness and justice. Our vote will stand the test of time. At the same time, China calls on Iran to stop attacking relevant facilities in the Gulf, address the legitimate concerns of the Gulf nations, focus on the common interests of the global South and take corresponding positive measures to restore normal navigation in the Strait of Hormuz as soon as possible. China applauds the active efforts made by Pakistan, Egypt, Türkiye and Saudi Arabia to promote dialogue and negotiations and restore regional peace. China commends and supports the work carried out by the United Nations in mediation and alleviating the humanitarian situation and looks forward to these efforts yielding tangible results at an early date. Recently, China has made tremendous efforts to restore peace and stability in the Gulf and the Middle East. China has engaged in intensive consultations and mediation with the relevant parties. China and Pakistan have issued a five-point initiative on restoring peace and stability in the Gulf and the Middle East, calling for a cessation of hostilities, the prompt start of peace talks, the protection of non-military targets, the protection of maritime shipping lanes and the primacy of the Charter of the United Nations. The China-Pakistan five-point initiative is an open initiative and welcomes the responses and participation of countries and international organizations. Taking into account the need of all parties to resolve the relevant issues, Russia and China have jointly submitted a draft Security Council resolution. The text of that draft resolution is objective and fair, showing commitments to easing tensions, calling for dialogue and negotiations and upholding the rights and freedom of navigation. We hope that it will receive the support of the Security Council members. China is willing to work with all parties to make a greater contribution to the early restoration of peace and stability in the region.

I thank you, Mr. President, for your leadership on this draft resolution (S/2026/273). No country should be allowed to hold the world economy hostage, yet that is exactly what Iran is doing by denying the right of transit passage — a key navigational right under international law, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Today, Russia and China chose to shield their ally, Iran, rather than join international efforts to open the Strait and avert risks to the global economy. We reject the claims made by Iranian Minister for Foreign Affairs Araghchi last week that the efforts by the Security Council to open the Strait will complicate the situation. It is Iran’s actions that have closed the Strait. This has already had dire consequences, and the longer this stranglehold continues, the worse the situation will get. In the past 24 hours, we have heard that only nine vessels have passed through the Strait of Hormuz — an international shipping route that would normally see up to 150 vessels a day. The World Food Programme has estimated that this hostile act could push 45 million more people into extreme hunger by June. We supported Bahrain’s initiative, and it is deeply regrettable that the draft resolution did not pass. The United Kingdom is already supporting its allies in the Gulf to defend themselves, in accordance with the existing and inherent right to individual and collective self-defence. We all want to see the de-escalation of tensions in the Strait, and we welcome the current diplomatic efforts under way and stress the importance of respect for international law, including the international law of the sea, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As my Foreign Secretary said last week, when the United Kingdom convened more than 40 countries in support of the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, we are determined to use every possible diplomatic, economic and coordinated measure to get the Strait reopened. We will not cease in these efforts.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

I congratulate Bahrain on its presidency for this month. The draft resolution put before the Security Council (S/2026/273) was factually, legally and politically flawed. The draft is entirely one-sided, biased and indefensible. It distorts the realities on the ground by falsely attributing responsibility to Iran, the victim of the aggression, while deliberately ignoring the root causes of the current crisis. The text unjustifiably and misleadingly portrays Iran’s lawful measures in the Strait of Hormuz, which have been taken in the exercise of its inherent right to selfdefence in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as threats to international peace and security. At the same time, the text seeks to legitimize subsequent unlawful actions by the aggressors and their allies on the pretext of safeguarding freedom of navigation and maritime safety in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. Iran’s lawful actions cannot be viewed in isolation from the broader context of the ongoing aggression against its territory and sovereignty. Attempts to portray them as threats to international peace and security are therefore legally unfounded and devoid of any credibility. The objective of this draft is obvious: to punish the victims for defending their sovereignty and vital national interests in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz while providing political and legal cover for further unlawful acts by the aggressors. Had this draft been adopted, it could have opened the door to dangerously broad and abusive interpretations that could be used to justify further use of force and unlawful actions, in clear violation of the United Nations Charter and international law. It is deeply regrettable that resolution 2817 (2026), this draft and the statements of certain Council members contain no references to the initiators of the aggression or their destabilizing conduct in the region or the root causes of the current situation. This clear omission reflects a persistent pattern of politicization and double standards within the Council. Let me be clear: this text would only embolden the United States and the Israeli regime to continue in their unlawful actions and atrocious crimes while shielding themselves from accountability. In substance, this was a United States draft introduced under other names. Today, the President of the United States again resorted to language that is not only deeply irresponsible but profoundly alarming, declaring that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back”. It is regrettable and alarming that while in full view of the international community, the President of the United States shamelessly and brazenly issues threats to destroy all civilian infrastructure in Iran, including bridges, power plants and energy facilities, by setting a deadline and openly reveals the intent to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. The penholder of the draft resolution and its supporters have rushed to bring forward such an entirely politicized text for a vote. Its adoption would have set a dangerous precedent, normalizing the use of force based on vague and unsubstantiated allegations, undermining the integrity of the United Nations Charter and highlighting the risk of broader regional and international escalation. For these reasons, we consider the draft legally indefensible, politically unbalanced and strategically destabilizing. We express our appreciation to China and the Russian Federation for their responsible conduct, for their constructive approach and for exercising the veto in a manner consistent with the principles of the United Nations Charter. Their action today prevented the Security Council from being misused to legitimize aggression. In fact, Russia and China ensured that the Security Council would not be instrumentalized to legitimize aggression and, by doing so, they stood firmly on the right side of history. We acknowledge and thank Pakistan and Colombia, who abstained in the voting, recognizing the serious implications that the draft would have had for regional peace and stability. By contrast, those who supported the draft resolution chose to put the blame on Iran while remaining silent on the ongoing war crimes and the criminal and terrorist attacks being perpetrated by the United States and Israel against civilians and critical infrastructure in Iran. Their position and their votes today reflect a clear double standard, exposing a stark gap between their stance — commitment to the United Nations Charter and international humanitarian law — and their conduct in practice. Such selective application of legal principles not only undermines their credibility but also calls into question the good faith of the invocation of international law and the United Nations Charter. We categorically reject all unfounded and politically motivated allegations against my country made in this meeting. These claims lack any legal basis and serve only to divert attention from the realities on the ground, namely the illegal and savage war launched by the United States and the Israeli regime against Iran. The purpose is clear: to whitewash the atrocious and vile crimes committed by the United States and the Israeli regime against the people of Iran and to obscure and deflect from the serious violations committed against the Iranian people. Having said that, I would like to make the following points. First, the Islamic Republic of Iran, as a responsible State committed to the United Nations Charter and international law, has consistently upheld freedom of navigation and maritime security in the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman. For decades, the Strait of Hormuz has remained open to all vessels, with freedom of navigation and maritime safety effectively maintained. Currently, the Strait of Hormuz remains open. However, the ongoing, unlawful and brutal war waged by the United States and the Israeli regime against Iran has created a dangerous situation that has directly affected maritime safety in the region. In accordance with its inherent right of self‑defence, Iran has taken necessary and proportionate measures to prevent aggressors and their supporters from using the Strait of Hormuz for hostile purposes. As a coastal State, Iran has restricted passage to vessels linked to those acts of aggression, in accordance with international law. Therefore, vessels associated with the aggressors do not qualify for innocent passage and will be treated in accordance with applicable legal frameworks. Non‑hostile vessels not involved in or supporting aggression may continue their safe passage, in coordination with the relevant authorities in Iran. Responsibility for any disruption or escalation in this vital waterway lies with the United States and Israel, whose actions have undermined regional stability and endangered freedom of navigation. Lasting stability depends on ending aggression and fully respecting Iran’s legitimate rights and interests. Secondly, Iran has consistently pursued efforts to resolve differences through political and diplomatic means, including with parties that have had serious disputes, in order to prevent escalation into conflict. This unjustified and unwarranted war was imposed on Iran by the United States and Israel. In June 2025, Iran was engaged constructively and in good faith in negotiations when it was attacked on the basis of unfounded allegations concerning its peaceful nuclear programme — allegations that were later followed by contradictory claims that such capabilities had already been destroyed. The current aggressions were likewise initiated by the United States and the Israeli regime at a time when Iran, for a second time, was actively engaged in negotiations and an agreement was within reach. Once again, diplomacy was undermined and, ultimately, betrayed by the United States. Claims regarding Iran’s nuclear programme are baseless and unsubstantiated. For over two decades, the Israeli regime has repeatedly alleged that Iran is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons. Yet no credible evidence has been presented to support this assertion. As a committed State party to the Treaty on the Non‑Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), Iran has consistently rejected nuclear weapons and has clearly condemned the use of all weapons of mass destruction. Iran has also accepted one of the most rigorous verification and inspection regimes of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), reflecting its stated position that its nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful. Yet, within nine months, two wars of aggression have been imposed on Iran by the United States, an NPT depository, and by the Israeli regime, which remains outside the NPT. In both cases, Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities were attacked. The Security Council, the IAEA Board of Governors and the Director‑General of the Agency have failed even to condemn these unlawful acts, let alone prevent their recurrence. This inaction has emboldened the aggressors. United States officials now openly speak of targeting nuclear facilities, with the United States Permanent Representative even stating that an attack on the Bushehr nuclear power plant is not off the table. Such reckless threats are direct consequences of international inaction and have severely undermined the credibility of the United Nations and the IAEA. Since the start of this unlawful war on 28 February, multiple attacks have been carried out against Iran’s nuclear facilities, including repeated strikes in and around Natanz, Bushehr, Arak and Ardakan. Particularly alarming are repeated attacks in the vicinity of the active Bushehr nuclear power plant. Any strike on nuclear facilities, notably the Bushehr nuclear power plant, would inevitably lead to irreversible humanitarian and environmental consequences. These unlawful actions constitute clear violations of international law, including resolution 487 (1981) and relevant IAEA resolutions, as well as fundamental principles of international law. However, the Council continues to defend silence, and today certain members point fingers at Iran. Thirdly, over the past 39 days of this brutal war against Iran, the United States‑Israeli aggressors have crossed all legal, moral and humanitarian boundaries, committing grave violations and war crimes. From the outset, they have deliberately and indiscriminately targeted civilian objects, including schools, hospitals, airports and sports facilities, such as a primary school in Minab. In full view of the international community, the United States has slaughtered more than 168 innocent girls at a school in Minab. More than 700 schools and educational centres, along with universities, healthcare facilities and cultural and historical sites, have been attacked, reflecting clear hostility towards Iran’s people, identity and development. Industrial and production facilities built over decades, despite severe sanctions, have also been struck. At the same time, United States officials have made threats to destroy infrastructure indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. Such threats, including the United States President’s call for widespread destruction of essential civilian infrastructure, constitute an incitement to commit war crimes and potentially genocide and must be explicitly condemned under international law. Fourthly, from the outset of this unwarranted and savage war, on 28 February, the United States utilized military bases and facilities located in countries of the Persian Gulf region. Evidence indicates that military movements and operational preparations were under way at these bases for the planning, preparation, equipping and execution of unlawful military attacks against the Islamic Republic of Iran, despite Iran’s prior warning that such unlawful actions were being planned. Iran has formally reported those developments with supporting documentation to the Security Council and the Secretary-General. Under international law, States are prohibited from allowing their territory to be used directly or indirectly to cause damage to other States. In addition, they must take all necessary measures to prevent foreign armed forces based in their territory from committing acts of aggression against other States and must not facilitate or support such acts. In the event of the breach of this fundamental obligation, they bear international legal responsibility. Fifthly, Iran welcomes the Secretary-General’s efforts, including the appointment of a Personal Envoy, to secure an immediate end to this brutal war and uphold international peace and security. Iran stands ready to engage constructively with all genuine diplomatic efforts, including those of Pakistan, Türkiye and Egypt, as well as those by China and the Russian Federation, and to support any credible initiative capable of bringing about a sustainable end to this unlawful and unwarranted war. In that regard, the Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy is currently en route to Tehran to pursue consultations. Iran categorically rejects a temporary ceasefire, particularly in view of the experience in June, when hostilities resumed under false pretexts. A ceasefire in that context served only to rearm and prepare for the continuation of further crimes. Any viable solution must ensure a definitive and irreversible end to the aggression and establish a just and durable peace grounded in credible and verifiable guarantees against any recurrence. The United States and the Israeli regime must bear full responsibility for the harm and suffering inflicted upon Iranian civilians, civilian objects and critical infrastructure, and must be held fully accountable. Individual criminal responsibility for serious violations of international humanitarian law, including war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Iran, must be pursued without exception in accordance with international law. The Security Council cannot remain passive. Instead of submitting a one-sided and politically motivated draft resolution, it must act to end this brutal war, demand the immediate and unconditional cessation of United States and Israeli attacks, and take decisive measures to ensure accountability for all their violations. Finally, with regard to the President of the United States’ explicit threat of massive war crimes and of targeting and destroying Iranian critical civilian infrastructure, that threat constitutes a flagrant and egregious violation of international humanitarian law and the most fundamental rules governing armed conflict. The United States should bear full and undeniable responsibility for committing a manifest war crime and crime against humanity. The Islamic Republic of Iran will not stand idle in the face of such egregious war crimes. It will exercise without hesitation its inherent right of self-defence and will take immediate and proportionate reciprocal measures. The Security Council regrettably has — from the outset of this war of aggression against my country — failed to uphold its primary responsibilities for the maintenance of international peace and security. That failure does not and cannot deprive Iran of its lawful right to act. Iran’s response is firmly grounded in international law. There must be no doubt that the Islamic Republic of Iran will take all necessary measures to defend its people, safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and protect its vital national interests with full resolve. The United States and the Israeli regime will bear responsibility for all subsequent regional and international consequences.

I shall now make a further statement in my capacity as the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Bahrain. (spoke in Arabic) On behalf of the Kingdom of Bahrain, I wish to respond to the false allegations delivered by the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding attacks on foreign bases within the States of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC). The GCC States have declared with absolute clarity that they are not parties to this war and that those bases were not utilized in the attacks against Iran. Indeed, Iran was fully aware that those bases had been evacuated of military personnel. However, it launched thousands of ballistic missiles and drones against the GCC States without any justification. For more than a month, relentlessly and without pause, the Islamic Republic of Iran committed acts of aggression against GCC States during the holy month of Ramadan, showing no respect for the sanctity of this blessed month. The Islamic Republic of Iran attacked the GCC States during the days of Eid, despite being a Muslim State with which we share the bonds of neighbourliness, faith, culture and common history. Yet all those ties and connections were disregarded. The Islamic Republic of Iran claimed that it was targeting military bases, but are infrastructure facilities, power and water stations, civilian installations, ports, factories, refineries, universities, hotels and residential buildings considered military bases? Are residential areas — along with the citizens and residents within them, including women, children and the elderly — also considered military bases? The Islamic Republic of Iran has violated the Charter of the United Nations, international law, international humanitarian law, the law of the sea and the principles of good neighbourliness. Furthermore, the country has shown no regard for religious, ethical or humanitarian values. The Islamic Republic of Iran has failed to comply with resolution 2817 (2026), as well as Human Rights Council resolution 61/1. Moreover, that country has unjustifiably blocked the Strait of Hormuz — an international waterway that belongs to the world, not to Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran has held the global economy hostage in a terrorist manner. It has deprived nations worldwide of vital energy sources, food supplies and medicines; disrupted the flow of global trade; inflicted massive losses upon the world economy; and led 45 million people, particularly in the global South, to famine. In full view and earshot of the entire world, the Islamic Republic of Iran has committed acts of aggression against neighbouring States with which Iran shared cordial relations across economic, commercial, social and even tourism sectors. The GCC nations have exercised wisdom and patience in the face of the Iranian destructive missile attacks. The GCC nations have not fired a single bullet against Iran. Rather, those nations’ valiant national forces have acted solely to defend their sovereignty, security and stability, and to protect citizens and residents living on their soil. The GCC nations possess every right to defend their homelands and peoples in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations — a right further affirmed by resolution 2817 (2026). Today, however, the focus is not on the Islamic Republic of Iran’s deliberate acts of aggression against the GCC nations, but rather that country’s unlawful, terrorist act of closing the Strait of Hormuz, which has inflicted damage upon the global economy and places the lives of millions of human beings at grave risk. (spoke in English) I now resume my functions as President of the Council. The representative of the United States has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

We heard a lot today. We heard from the Ambassador of Iran a lot about the country’s issues with this ongoing conflict with the United States. But that is not what this draft resolution (S/2026/273) is about. This is not about Iran and the United States today. This is about Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council and Bahrain and the world. We also heard about some dangerous precedents. But what I want the world to understand is that a dangerous precedent was just set today by opposing this good faith effort from the Kingdom of Bahrain and the Gulf countries to ensure their shipping can flow freely. One can only imagine a future conflict in which a party to the conflict decides that it will impose collective punishment on the entire world and then use that as leverage in the conflict. One can only imagine a situation in which a party decides to shut down the Strait of Gibraltar or the Bering Strait or the Strait of Malacca to further its ends. One can only imagine conflicts in which a party decides to hold the rest of the world hostage because of a dispute. This is a situation the world cannot and should not live with, that the Gulf Arabs cannot tolerate. Freedom of navigation is fundamental to a nation’s sovereignty and survival. Therefore, Mr. President, the United States will support all measures for your country and for those affected to ensure it has freedom of navigation and freedom of transit in line with international law. My message to the Iranian regime is that, as people go hungry and as economies suffer, it is squarely on the regime’s shoulders.

The representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran has asked for the floor to make a further statement. I now give him the floor.

I think that once more this war has shown that the United States will not bring security and stability for the countries in the region. We have no hostilities with our neighbours. It is very clear that we are targeting United States bases, United States interests and United States assets in reciprocal action. In response to the representative of the United States, I want to refer to some remarks made by the United States President, who initiated this war of aggression against Iran. On 21 March, he threatened to hit and obliterate Iran’s power plants. On 30 March, he escalated these threats, wanting to blow up and completely obliterate critical infrastructure, including power plants, oil facilities, Kharg Island and desalination installations. On 1 April, he declared his intention to send Iran back to the Stone Age, explicitly threatening to strike all electricity generation facilities. On 5 April, he again openly threatened to target civilian infrastructure, stating that Tuesday will be power plant day and bridge day. There will be nothing like it. In two days, he resorted to language that is not only deeply irresponsible but also profoundly alarming, declaring that the whole civilization would die tonight, never to be brought back. Such rhetoric is unfitting for any political leader, let alone the head of a permanent member of the Council, entrusted with the maintenance of international peace and security.

There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers.