‘Iran Cannot Have Nuclear Weapon’: US Defends ‘Decisive Action’ at UNSC
At an emergency UN Security Council session on June 22 US Ambassador Dorothy Shea emphatically defended the United States’ airstrikes targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, stating that dismantling Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity was critical to preventing it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. She stressed that the US acted not only to defend its ally but also “our own citizens and interests.”
Shea highlighted Iran’s repeated anti‑American and anti‑Israel rhetoric over four decades and the use of its proxies and ballistic missiles in regional attacks. “Iranian regime cannot have a nuclear weapon,” she declared, warning that any further aggression would be met with “devastating retaliation”.
Iran’s UN Ambassador Amir‑Saeid Iravani forcefully rejected the strikes as a breach of international law and the Nuclear Non‑Proliferation Treaty, accusing the US and Israel of destroying diplomatic avenues and manipulating nuclear safeguards. He insisted Iran’s nuclear activities are peaceful and called on the UNSC to condemn what he termed a “blatant crime.”
UN Secretary-General António Guterres labelled the strikes a “perilous turn” and urged immediate efforts to resume negotiations. The IAEA’s Rafael Grossi warned that underground damage at Fordow remains unassessed, though no off‑site contamination has been reported.
Global reactions were sharply divided.
- China’s UN envoy Fu Cong joined Russia and Pakistan in calling for an “immediate, unconditional ceasefire.” He said forceful interventions violate the UN Charter.
- UK’s Barbara Woodward urged Iran to show restraint and stressed a diplomatic route as the only viable path forward.
- Australia voiced cautious support, backing action to prevent a nuclear Iran while urging de-escalation.
The military strikes represent the most forceful Western intervention against Iran since 1979, significantly heightening regional risks. With the US asserting a right to defend allies and prevent nuclear proliferation, and Iran pledging legal and military response, the likelihood of broader conflict looms—potentially drawing in regional proxies and destabilizing global energy and security dynamics .
