US revises Iran resolution in bid to avoid security council veto

WEB DESK: Washington has watered down its latest United Nations resolution aimed at curbing Iranian activity in the Strait of Hormuz, though diplomats warn the move is unlikely to prevent a fresh showdown with China and Russia.

The revised draft, circulated to Security Council members on Thursday, follows a previous attempt by the United States to legitimise military action that was summarily blocked by Moscow and Beijing.

This diplomatic maneuvering comes at a delicate time for the White House, as President Donald Trump prepares for a high-stakes visit to China next week where regional stability will top the agenda, according to The Express Tribune.

Removal of chapter VII invocation

In a significant concession to international pressure, the updated text seen by Reuters has stripped away a clause invoking Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

This specific article is the legal mechanism that empowers the Security Council to enforce its will through economic sanctions or direct military intervention.

By removing it, Washington appears to be seeking a “middle ground” that acknowledges the severity of the mining and attacks in the Strait without immediately triggering the machinery of war.

However, the olive branch may be more cosmetic than substantive. Despite the omission of Chapter VII, the draft retains remarkably “tough language” against Tehran.

It explicitly states that should Iran fail to comply with the demand to halt attacks, the Council would be required to “meet again to consider effective measures,” a phrase widely understood in diplomatic circles as a placeholder for future sanctions.

Sovereignty and the right to defend

The primary sticking point for the Kremlin and the Great Hall of the People remains the resolution’s ambiguity regarding the use of force.

While the text stops short of an explicit mandate for combat, it pointedly “reaffirms the right of member States… to defend their vessels from attacks and threats.”

For Russia and China, this language is viewed as a “backdoor” authorisation that could allow the US and its ally, Bahrain, to escalate naval skirmishes into a full-blown conflict under the guise of protecting navigational freedoms.

Diplomats suggest that the original version of this resolution, co-authored by the US and Bahrain earlier this week, met with immediate and fierce resistance.

While the US has softened the legal framework, the core demand for Iran to cease its maritime operations remains non-negotiable.

With no date yet set for a vote, the Security Council remains deadlocked, caught between Washington’s desire for accountability and the strategic interests of the Eastern powers.