Security Council, Adopting Resolution 2231 (2015), Endorses Joint Comprehensive Agreement on Iran’s Nuclear Programme
The Security Council today coalesced around a sweeping resolution that endorsed the 14 July agreement on Iran’s nuclear programme, setting out a rigorous monitoring mechanism and timetable for implementation, while paving the way for the lifting of United Nations sanctions against that country.
Unanimously adopting resolution 2231 (2015), the 15-nation body endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action signed in Vienna by the five permanent members of the Council, plus Germany, the European Union and Iran.
The Council, through the 104-page text, including annexes that detailed the sanctions-related provisions and listings, requested the International Atomic Energy Agency to undertake verification and monitoring of Iran’s compliance. It reaffirmed that Iran should cooperate fully with the Agency to resolve all outstanding issues. Upon receipt of a positive report from the Agency, the Council would terminate sanctions set out in resolutions adopted between 2006 and 2015.
Furthermore, the Council decided that the resolution’s provisions should, pending confirmation of implementation, expire 10 years after its adoption, and with that, it would remove the Iranian nuclear issue from its agenda. At the same time, the text outlined the process for automatically reinstating the sanctions in the event of non-compliance.
Following the adoption, the representative of the United States, whose delegation had submitted the text, said that the agreement cut off Iran’s pathways to fissile material for a nuclear weapon, while ensuring the vigorous inspections and transparency necessary for verification. The accord, said the representative, would reduce the number of Iran’s centrifuges by two thirds and eliminate 98 per cent of its enriched uranium, going from a quantity enough to produce 10 nuclear weapons to a fraction of what was needed for a single nuclear weapon.
“Implementation is everything,” she said, stressing that the tasks were far from over and that the resolution included a “snap-back” system triggering reinstatement of the sanctions in the event of non-compliance. The United States would maintain its own sanctions against Iran, which it says supported terrorism, destabilized the region and continued to violate human rights.
Iran’s delegate said that the agreement and today’s resolution provided for the termination of sanctions unjustifiably placed on Iran for the exercise of its right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Nobody had ever presented any proof indicating that Iran’s programme had been anything but peaceful, he said, expressing hope that the agreement and the resolution would herald a new chapter in the relationship between Iran and the Security Council.
Iran was willing, he said, to comply fully with its commitments and it was already committed to its Supreme Leader’s declaration against all weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons. The nuclear warheads stockpiled by the Israeli regime, which had worked to sabotage the agreement, was a grave threat to peace and security in the region, which the Council should take necessary action to neutralize. It was ironic that the speaker from the United States, which had invaded two countries in the region, had accused Iran of destabilizing it.
Murray McCully, Minister for Foreign Affairs of New Zealand, who presided over today’s session, said in his national capacity that the agreement represented a triumph of diplomacy and cooperation over confrontation and mistrust. That message, he stated, should guide the Council in tackling the extraordinarily difficult challenges in the Middle East — in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya.
Also delivering statements were the delegates of China, France, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, Spain, Jordan, Chile, Venezuela, Malaysia, Nigeria, Angola, Lithuania, Chad and Germany. The representative of the European Union Delegation also spoke.
The meeting began at 9:05 a.m. and ended at 10:35 a.m.
Statements
Following the resolution’s adoption, SAMANTHA POWER (United States) said that the basic tenets of the agreement reached in Vienna cut off Iran’s pathways to fissile material for a nuclear weapon, while ensuring the vigorous inspections and transparency necessary to verify that it could not pursue a nuclear weapon. It would reduce the number of Iran’s centrifuges by two thirds and eliminate 98 per cent of its enriched uranium, going from an amount high enough to produce 10 nuclear weapons to a fraction of what was needed for a single nuclear weapon.
She went on to hail the essential role of diplomacy and the unity of the Council in the process leading to the agreement. This year, the United Nations marked the seventieth anniversary of its founding. Lessons learned from the negotiations included that it was not enough to agree on global norms; those must be enforced, and the sanctions regime for Iran played an important role in that regard. Any party could have walked away as negotiations were gruelling and the distances were too great to bridge.
Citing Iran’s support for terrorism, destabilizing activities in the region and human rights violations, the United States, she said, would maintain its own sanctions, calling on Iran to release unjustly held Americans. The deal would make the world safer and more secure, but it was far from finished. The same rigour that had been needed to reach the agreement should apply to its implementation, which was everything. The resolution included a “snap-back” mechanism that triggered a process to reinstate the sanctions in the event of non-compliance. The deal gave Iran a chance to prove it was seeking a peaceful nuclear programme and a path out of isolation.
LIU JIEYI (China) said that, despite ups and downs over the past 10 years of negotiations, parties had finally come to an agreement. Stressing the importance of political commitment, he said the accord had far-reaching significance in that the international community turned a new page based on a win-win spirit. It was important to stay the course in seeking a political solution, which was the only viable way to address difficult issues. The plan of action was a good beginning, but its implementation over the next 10 years was more important, he said, urging all sides to fulfil all provisions of the agreement even though differences might arise along the course of implementation. It was essential to take stock of good practices along the way, he added.
FRANÇOIS DELATTRE (France) said the agreement laid the road map for building trust in the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear programme and bolstering international peace and security. It proved the success of the double approach of dialogue and sanctions, which France had pursued from the outset. The international community rallied behind that approach and demonstrated a spirit of constructive resolve. The negotiations had paved the way for a period of vigilance and oversight, buttressed by a robust inspection and monitoring system. Iran’s actions in making the agreement succeed would be watched carefully by the international community. The next few weeks would be decisive.
VITALY CHURKIN (Russian Federation) said the resolution not only turned a page, but a whole chapter, and he urged all countries to contribute to its successful implementation. By endorsing the agreement unanimously, the Council had provided a basis for a gradual approach to resolution based on reciprocity. A clear and transparent mechanism had been established to remove sanctions on Iran and there were reliable filters to resolve all disagreements arising in the implementation process. He expressed hope that the agreement with Iran would encourage other nations in the region not to take steps that would further destabilize a region wracked by multiple challenges and threats. The invaluable experience gained here must remain undiluted by ideological or geopolitical considerations and used to resolve other international challenges.
MATTHEW RYCROFT (United Kingdom) welcomed the adoption of the text, endorsing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. That agreement provided a concrete baseline by which to recalibrate the relationship with Iran as the country took on a proper role in bringing stability to the region. Given more than a decade of talks, it was a landmark achievement and a good deal for every party. Iran’s compliance would be verified by a monitoring mechanism and with transparency. Upon implementation of certain measures, Iran would be able to trade more freely and upon full implementation, the country would be treated in the same manner as other non-nuclear-weapon States. The Council maintained its oversight over the issue; it needed a novel working method to do so. With the accord in place, Iran could not develop a nuclear bomb, which made the world a safer place.
ROMÁN OYARZUN MARCHESI (Spain) said that focus on dialogue, rather than confrontation, made it possible for the negotiating parties to overcome an insurmountable challenge. The Council, when united, was the world’s most valuable guardian, able to help the international community in meeting future challenges. With a balanced agreement in place, the global community must seize the opportunity to bring it to its optimal conclusion. The implications were even wider; as the accord could help harness efforts to tackle the spectre of terrorism in the region. It would be a source of happiness to his delegation to see the “1737 Committee” disappear.
DINA KAWAR (Jordan) said her country had always called for a peaceful diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear file and supported all efforts to entrench peace and stability in the region. She expressed hope that the agreement would have positive repercussions on the lives of the people and on preventing an arms race in the region. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had an important role in monitoring the implementation of the agreement and the international community needed to extend its full support and cooperation.
CRISTIÁN BARROS MELET (Chile) expressed hope that the agreement’s robust verification regime would contribute to the wider non-proliferation regime in the Middle East. The agreement had reiterated the invaluable role of diplomacy and flexibility in resolving even the seemingly most intractable crises. Chile would contribute its utmost to ensuring the full implementation of the agreement and strengthening international peace and security.
RAEL DARÍO RAMÍREZ CARREÑO (Venezuela) said he voted in favour of the text, which would give a firm backing to the comprehensive agreement reached on Iran’s nuclear programme. It was a testimony to courage and political will, and proved once again that peaceful dialogue was better than bellicose actions. Iran could pursue its right to peaceful use of nuclear energy towards its energy independence. The accord marked the birth of a new diplomatic relationship between Iran and the other parties to the agreement. It would lift sanctions, which negatively affected the Iranian population. It also could have broader implications, namely for the Israeli-Palestinian issue and the situations in places such as Yemen, Iraq and Syria. The international community must support efforts to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, a key requirement to the region’s stability.
RAMLAN BIN IBRAHIM (Malaysia), while hailing the adoption of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action as a positive step, said his country remained convinced that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) regime continued to occupy a role of central importance in efforts to halt the proliferation of nuclear weapons, as well as being an essential foundation for the pursuit of general and complete nuclear disarmament. He called on all nuclear weapon States to reinvigorate efforts to implement their obligations under the disarmament pillar of the NPT regime.
KAYODE LARO (Nigeria), congratulating the parties to the agreement, said they had struck a strong victory for multilateral diplomacy and international cooperation. Moving ahead, all parties needed to implement all provisions of the accord in good faith and in the spirit of full transparency. The agreement also provided a clear affirmation of the right of States to the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
JULIO HELDER MOURA LUCAS (Angola) said the parties to the agreement deserved praise for their ability to build confidence in peaceful processes to resolve even the most intractable challenges. The negotiating process provided the opportunity to bolster trust among the parties in a way that could have positive repercussions on the other challenges confronting the region, such as the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant/Sham (ISIL/ISIS) and the crises in Syria and Yemen. The inauguration of new dynamics in addressing regional challenges would be the wider legacy of the agreement and resolution.
NIDA JAKUBONE (Lithuania) said that his delegation had co-sponsored the resolution. It welcomed Iran’s agreement to implement the Additional Protocol to its IAEA Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, as well as further transparency measures foreseen in the plan of action, which would provide the Agency with powerful tools to implement continuous monitoring and grant it extensive access to Iran’s nuclear sites. It also welcomed the road map agreed by the IAEA and Iran on 14 July, which provided a specific timeframe to clarify past and present outstanding issues by the end of 2015.
MAHAMAT ZENE CHERIF (Chad) said that the resolution, including annexes, exceeded 100 pages, representing the complexity of the issue. He praised the courage and wisdom of the negotiators in reaching a solution. His delegation was satisfied with the outcome and supported future efforts to implement it. He was convinced of the virtue of dialogue. The IAEA was expected to monitor compliance, including the road map agreed between it and Iran. That country was entitled to conduct nuclear research for civilian purposes. Chad adhered to the African nuclear-weapon-free zone Treaty.
MURRAY MCCULLY, Minister for Foreign Affairs of New Zealand, said the agreement reached in Vienna represented a triumph of diplomacy and cooperation over confrontation and mistrust. It was now crucial to ensure that the agreement was fully and swiftly implemented, and that small missteps and misunderstandings were not allowed to derail the process. The adoption of the resolution gave international legal force to the agreement and extended the obligations it contained across the broader United Nations membership. Today marked an opportunity to change the nature of the relationship between Iran and the international community, he said, stressing that even seemingly intractable issues could be resolved through diplomacy and dialogue. As the Council confronted the extraordinarily difficult challenges in relation to the Middle East peace process, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya, that message should be reflected upon.
GHOLAMALI KHOSHROO (Iran) described the resolution as marking a fundamental shift in the Council’s 10-year consideration of Iran’s peaceful nuclear programme. The resolution and the agreement also provided for the termination of Council resolutions that unjustifiably placed sanctions on Iran for its efforts to exercise its rights. Nobody had ever presented any proof indicating that Iran’s programme had been anything but peaceful. The solution arrived at was in the interest of strengthening the regime of nuclear non-proliferation in its entirety, he said, expressing hope that the agreement and the resolution would herald a new chapter in the relationship between Iran and the Council.
He said his country was both in a position and willing to comply fully with its commitments because it was already committed to its Supreme Leader’s declaration against all weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons. The nuclear warheads stockpiled by the Israeli regime, which had worked to sabotage the agreement, constituted a grave threat to peace and security in the region, and the Council should take necessary action to neutralize that threat. He said that it was ironic that the representative of the United States, which had invaded two countries in the region, had accused Iran of destabilizing it.
HERAL BRAUN (Germany) said the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action reached in Vienna was an important, and possibly historic, step towards ending the decade-long conflict surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme. The agreement reduced the risk of a nuclear arms race as Iran had committed itself to comprehensive technical restrictions and an unprecedented transparency regime. Additionally, it offered ample political opportunities for Iran. Fulfilling the agreement would enable the country to make improvements in civil liberties, human rights and the accommodation of regional security concerns. He hoped that the accord would have a positive effect on the relations between Iran and the European Union, and improve Iran’s regional and international relations.
THOMAS MAYR-HARTING, speaking on behalf of the European Union Delegation, said the agreement marked a conclusion to the long-running diplomatic efforts to reach a comprehensive and peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear issues. It was necessary for all parties to work together to achieve its full implementation. As agreed in Vienna, the Union would endorse the resolution adopted today, as well as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy would also continue her supporting and coordinating role during the entire implementation phase of the action plan.
Resolution
The full text of resolution 2231 (2015), not including annexes, reads as follows:
“The Security Council,
“Recalling the Statement of its President, S/PRST/2006/15, and its resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008) and 1929 (2010),
“Reaffirming its commitment to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the need for all States party to that Treaty to comply fully with their obligations, and recalling the right of States Party, in conformity with articles I and II of that Treaty, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination,
“Emphasizing the importance of political and diplomatic efforts to find a negotiated solution guaranteeing that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively for peaceful purposes, and noting that such a solution would benefit nuclear non-proliferation,
“Welcoming diplomatic efforts by China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and Iran to reach a comprehensive, long-term and proper solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, culminating in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) concluded on 14 July 2015, (S/2015/544, as attached as Annex A to this resolution) and the establishment of the Joint Commission,
“Welcoming Iran’s reaffirmation in the JCPOA that it will under no circumstances ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons,
“Noting the statement of 14 July 2015, from China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union aimed at promoting transparency and creating an atmosphere conducive to the full implementation of the JCPOA (S/2015/545, as attached as Annex B to this resolution),
“Affirming that conclusion of the JCPOA marks a fundamental shift in its consideration of this issue, and expressing its desire to build a new relationship with Iran strengthened by the implementation of the JCPOA and to bring to a satisfactory conclusion its consideration of this matter,
“Affirming that full implementation of the JCPOA will contribute to building confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear programme,
“Strongly supporting the essential and independent role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in verifying compliance with safeguards agreements, including the non-diversion of declared nuclear material to undeclared purposes and the absence of undeclared nuclear material and undeclared nuclear activities, and in this context, in ensuring the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear programme, including through the implementation of the “Framework for Cooperation” agreed between Iran and the IAEA on 11 November 2013 and the “Roadmap for Clarification of Past and Present Outstanding Issues”, and recognizing the IAEA’s important role in supporting full implementation of the JCPOA,
“Affirming that IAEA safeguards are a fundamental component of nuclear non-proliferation, promote greater confidence among States, inter alia, by providing assurance that States are complying with their obligations under relevant safeguards agreements, contribute to strengthening their collective security and help to create an environment conducive to nuclear cooperation, and further recognizing that effective and efficient safeguards implementation requires a cooperative effort between the IAEA and States, that the IAEA Secretariat will continue to engage in open dialogue on safeguards matters with States to increase transparency and build confidence and to interact with them on the implementation of safeguards, and in this case, avoid hampering the economic and technological development of Iran or international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities; respect health, safety, physical protection and other security provisions in force and the rights of individuals; and take every precaution to protect commercial, technological and industrial secrets, as well as other confidential information coming to its knowledge,
“Encouraging Member States to cooperate, including through IAEA involvement, with Iran in the framework of the JCPOA in the field of peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to engage in mutually determined civil nuclear cooperation projects, in accordance with Annex III of the JCPOA,
“Noting the termination of provisions of previous resolutions and other measures foreseen in this resolution and inviting Member States to give due regard to these changes,
“Emphasizing that the JCPOA is conducive to promoting and facilitating the development of normal economic and trade contacts and cooperation with Iran, and having regard to States’ rights and obligations relating to international trade,
“Underscoring that Member States are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations to accept and carry out the Security Council’s decisions,
“1. Endorses the JCPOA and urges its full implementation on the timetable established in the JCPOA;
“2. Calls upon all Members States, regional organizations and international organizations to take such actions as may be appropriate to support the implementation of the JCPOA, including by taking actions commensurate with the implementation plan set out in the JCPOA and this resolution and by refraining from actions that undermine implementation of commitments under the JCPOA;
“3. Requests the Director General of the IAEA to undertake the necessary verification and monitoring of Iran’s nuclear-related commitments for the full duration of those commitments under the JCPOA, and reaffirms that Iran shall cooperate fully as the IAEA requests to be able to resolve all outstanding issues, as identified in IAEA reports;
“4. Requests the Director General of the IAEA to provide regular updates to the IAEA Board of Governors and, as appropriate, in parallel to the Security Council on Iran’s implementation of its commitments under the JCPOA and also to report to the IAEA Board of Governors and in parallel to the Security Council at any time if the Director General has reasonable grounds to believe there is an issue of concern directly affecting fulfilment of JCPOA commitments;
Terminations
“5. Requests that, as soon as the IAEA has verified that Iran has taken the actions specified in paragraphs 15.1-15.11 of Annex V of the JCPOA, the Director-General of the IAEA submit a report confirming this fact to the IAEA Board of Governors and in parallel to the Security Council;
“6. Requests further that, as soon as the IAEA has reached the Broader Conclusion that all nuclear material in Iran remains in peaceful activities, the Director-General of the IAEA submit a report confirming this conclusion to the IAEA Board of Governors and in parallel to the Security Council;
“7. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, upon receipt by the Security Council of the report from the IAEA described in paragraph 5
(a) The provisions of resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008), 1929 (2010) and 2224 (2015) shall be terminated;
(b) All States shall comply with paragraphs 1, 2, 4, and 5 and the provisions in subparagraphs (a)-(f) of paragraph 6 of Annex B for the duration specified in each paragraph or subparagraph, and are called upon to comply with paragraphs 3 and 7 of Annex B;
“8. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that on the date 10 years after the JCPOA adoption day, as defined in the JCPOA, all the provisions of this resolution shall be terminated, and none of the previous resolutions described in paragraph 7 (a) shall be applied, the Security Council will have concluded its consideration of the Iranian nuclear issue, and the item “Non-proliferation” will be removed from the list of matters of which the Council is seized;
“9. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that the terminations described in Annex B and paragraph 8 of this resolution shall not occur if the provisions of previous resolutions have been applied pursuant to paragraph 12;
Application of Provisions of Previous Resolutions
“10. Encourages China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States, the European Union (EU) and Iran (the ‘JCPOA participants’) to resolve any issues arising with respect to implementation of JCPOA commitments through the procedures specified in the JCPOA, and expresses its intention to address possible complaints by JCPOA participants about significant non-performance by another JCPOA participant;
“11. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, within 30 days of receiving a notification by a JCPOA participant State of an issue that the JCPOA participant State believes constitutes significant non-performance of commitments under the JCPOA, it shall vote on a draft resolution to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph 7 (a) of this resolution, decides further that if, within 10 days of the notification referred to above, no Member of the Security Council has submitted such a draft resolution for a vote, then the President of the Security Council shall submit such a draft resolution and put it to a vote within 30 days of the notification referred to above, and expresses its intention to take into account the views of the States involved in the issue and any opinion on the issue by the Advisory Board established in the JCPOA;
“12. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, if the Security Council does not adopt a resolution under paragraph 11 to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph 7 (a), then effective midnight Greenwich Mean Time after the thirtieth day after the notification to the Security Council described in paragraph 11, all of the provisions of resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008) and 1929 (2010) that have been terminated pursuant to paragraph 7 (a) shall apply in the same manner as they applied before the adoption of this resolution, and the measures contained in paragraphs 7, 8 and 16-20 of this resolution shall be terminated, unless the Security Council decides otherwise;
“13. Underscores that, in the event of a notification to the Security Council described in paragraph 11, Iran and the other JCPOA participants should strive to resolve the issue giving rise to the notification, expresses its intention to prevent the reapplication of the provisions if the issue giving rise to the notification is resolved, decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that if the notifying JCPOA participant State informs the Security Council that such an issue has been resolved before the end of the 30-day period specified in paragraph 12 above, then the provisions of this resolution, including the terminations in paragraph 7 (a), shall remain in effect notwithstanding paragraph 12 above, and notes Iran’s statement that, if the provisions of previous resolutions are applied pursuant to paragraph 12 in whole or in part, Iran will treat this as grounds to cease performing its commitments under the JCPOA;
“14. Affirms that the application of the provisions of previous resolutions pursuant to paragraph 12 do not apply with retroactive effect to contracts signed between any party and Iran or Iranian individuals and entities prior to the date of application, provided that the activities contemplated under and execution of such contracts are consistent with the JCPOA, this resolution and the previous resolutions;
“15. Affirms that any application of the provisions of previous resolutions pursuant to paragraph 12 is not intended to harm individuals and entities that, prior to that application of those provisions, engaged in business with Iran or Iranian individuals and entities that is consistent with the JCPOA and this resolution, encourages Member States to consult with each other with regard to such harm, and to take action to mitigate such unintended harm for these individuals and entities, and decides if the provisions of previous resolutions are applied pursuant to paragraph 12 not to impose measures with retroactive effect on individuals and entities for business activities with Iran that were consistent with the JCPOA, this resolution and the previous resolutions prior to the application of these provisions;
JCPOA Implementation
“16. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, to review recommendations of the Joint Commission regarding proposals by States to participate in or permit nuclear-related activities set forth in paragraph 2 of Annex B, and that such recommendations shall be deemed to be approved unless the Security Council adopts a resolution to reject a Joint Commission recommendation within five working days of receiving it;
“17. Requests Member States seeking to participate in or permit activities set forth in paragraph 2 of Annex B to submit proposals to the Security Council, expresses its intention to share such proposals with the Joint Commission established in the JCPOA for its review, invites any Member of the Security Council to provide relevant information and opinions about these proposals, encourages the Joint Commission to give due consideration to any such information and opinions, and requests the Joint Commission to provide its recommendations on these proposals to the Security Council within 20 working days (or, if extended, within 30 working days);
“18. Requests the Secretary-General, in order to support JCPOA implementation, to take the necessary administrative measures to facilitate communications with Member States and between the Security Council and the Joint Commission through agreed practical arrangements;
“19. Requests the IAEA and the Joint Commission to consult and exchange information, where appropriate, as specified in the JCPOA, and requests further that the exporting states cooperate with the Joint Commission in accordance with Annex IV of the JCPOA;
“20. Requests the Joint Commission to review proposals for transfers and activities described in paragraph 2 of Annex B with a view to recommending approval where consistent with this resolution and the provisions and objectives of the JCPOA so as to provide for the transfer of items, materials, equipment, goods and technology required for Iran’s nuclear activities under the JCPOA, and encourages the Joint Commission to establish procedures to ensure detailed and thorough review of all such proposals;
Exemptions
“21. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that the measures imposed in resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008) and 1929 (2010) shall not apply to the supply, sale or transfer of items, materials, equipment, goods and technology, and the provision of any related technical assistance, training, financial assistance, investment, brokering or other services, by JCPOA participant States or Member States acting in coordination with them, that is directly related to:
(a) the modification of two cascades at the Fordow facility for stable isotope production;
(b) the export of Iran’s enriched uranium in excess of 300 kilograms in return for natural uranium; and
(c) the modernization of the Arak reactor based on the agreed conceptual design, and subsequently, on the agreed final design of such reactor;
“22. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that Member States engaging in the activities permitted in paragraph 21 shall ensure that:
(a) all such activities are undertaken strictly in accordance with the JCPOA;
(b) they notify the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1737 (2006), and when constituted, the Joint Commission 10 days in advance of such activities;
(c) the requirements, as appropriate, of the Guidelines as set out in the relevant INFCIRC referenced in resolution 1737 (2006), as updated, have been met;
(d) they have obtained and are in a position to exercise effectively a right to verify the end-use and end-use location of any supplied item; and
(e) in case of supplied items, materials, equipment, goods and technology listed in the INFCIRCs referenced in resolution 1737 (2006), as updated, they also notify the IAEA within ten days of the supply, sale or transfers;
“23. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, also that the measures imposed in resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008) and 1929 (2010) shall not apply to the extent necessary to carry out transfers and activities, as approved on a case-by-case basis in advance by the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1737 (2006), that are:
(a) directly related to implementation of the nuclear-related actions specified in paragraphs 15.1-15.11 of Annex V of the JCPOA;
(b) required for preparation for the implementation of the JCPOA; or
(c) determined by the Committee to be consistent with the objectives of this resolution;
“24. Notes that the provisions of paragraphs 21, 22, 23 and 27 continue in effect if the provisions of previous resolutions are applied pursuant to paragraph 12;
Other Matters
“25. Decides to make the necessary practical arrangements to undertake directly tasks related to the implementation of this resolution, including those tasks specified in Annex B and the release of guidance;
“26. Urges all States, relevant United Nations bodies and other interested parties, to cooperate fully with the Security Council in its exercise of the tasks related to this resolution, in particular by supplying any information at their disposal on the implementation of the measures in this resolution;
“27. Decides that all provisions contained in the JCPOA are only for the purposes of its implementation between the E3/EU+3 and Iran and should not be considered as setting precedents for any other State or for principles of international law and the rights and obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and other relevant instruments, as well as for internationally recognized principles and practices;
“28. Recalls that the measures imposed by paragraph 12 of resolution 1737 (2006) shall not prevent a designated person or entity from making payment due under a contract entered into prior to the listing of such a person or entity, provided that the conditions specified in paragraph 15 of that resolution are met, and underscores that, if the provisions of previous resolutions are reapplied pursuant to paragraph 12 of this resolution, then this provision will apply;
“29. Emphasizes the importance of all States taking the necessary measures to ensure that no claim shall lie at the instance of the Government of Iran, or any person or entity in Iran, or of persons or entities designated pursuant to resolution 1737 (2006) and related resolutions, or any person claiming through or for the benefit of any such person or entity, in connection with any contract or other transaction where its performance was prevented by reason of the application of the provisions of resolutions 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1929 (2010) and this resolution;
“30. Decides to remain seized of the matter until the termination of the provisions of this resolution in accordance with paragraph 8.”
The complete resolution with annexes is available at www.un.org/en/sc/inc/pages/pdf/pow/RES2231E.pdf.