UN Security Council treads carefully as US-Israeli strikes on Iran draw scrutiny
By [Your Name], Chief International Correspondent
New York – An emergency session of the United Nations Security Council convened on February 28th to address the fallout from recent US and Israeli strikes within Iran, revealed a cautious international response, with most members stopping short of outright condemnation of the actions. The meeting, held just hours after the strikes, underscored a reluctance among many nations to publicly challenge Washington, even as concerns mount over escalating tensions in the Middle East.
The session was called at the request of both those critical of the strikes – including China and Russia – and allies of the United States, such as France and Bahrain, signaling a desire for dialogue amidst a volatile situation. Diplomats appeared keen to convene before the US assumed the Security Council presidency on March 1st, a move that could have potentially delayed, though not prevented, further discussion.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed regret that diplomatic opportunities with Iran regarding its nuclear program had been “squandered,” a sentiment echoed by some Council members. China and Russia delivered the most direct criticism of the US-Israeli intervention, joined by Colombia and Pakistan, who cited breaches of international law while also condemning Iranian actions against Gulf Arab countries.
However, the strongest signal came from the more measured responses of other Council members. The five European nations – France, Denmark, Greece, Latvia, and the United Kingdom – consistently framed the crisis by emphasizing Iran’s nuclear activities and its internal repression, while avoiding direct comment on the legality of the strikes.
Bahrain, having been targeted by Iranian retaliation earlier in the day, understandably focused on Tehran’s aggression, remaining silent on the US and Israeli response.
US Ambassador Mike Waltz defended Washington’s actions, referencing past Security Council resolutions and alleging Iran’s lack of constructive engagement. A tense exchange with Iranian Ambassador Amir-Saeid Iravani followed, with Iravani asserting Iran’s right to self-defense under the UN Charter and urging the Council to uphold international peace and security.
This hesitancy to openly criticize the US mirrors a similar dynamic observed in January following developments involving Venezuela, where US allies also avoided direct condemnation. While the Trump administration’s approach to international law often raises concerns among its allies, few appear willing to publicly challenge Washington’s actions.
The Crisis Group reported that Council members’ reluctance to offend the US reflects a broader trend of deference to Washington’s influence within the UN system. As one diplomat wryly observed, the US appears to wield significant sway over the Council’s agenda.
