Most members of the United Nations Security Council avoided directly criticising the joint United States–Israeli military operation against Iran during an emergency session convened hours after the latest escalation began, according to a senior international analyst.
Dr Richard Gowan, Programme Director for Global Issues and Institutions at the International Crisis Group, said several countries either stayed silent or only indirectly addressed the initial strikes, while focusing their condemnation on Iran’s retaliatory attacks.
Speaking to SABC News, Gowan argued that many European and North Atlantic Treaty Organization member states appeared reluctant to criticise Washington out of concern for jeopardising long-standing security ties.
“The Europeans have been nervous about openly challenging the current US administration because they rely heavily on the American security umbrella,” he said.
The Council met with limited expectations of decisive action, amid criticism that it has struggled to curb conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan despite its mandate to maintain international peace and security.
Russia, China, Pakistan and Colombia openly criticised the US-Israeli intervention, describing it as contrary to international law, while also condemning Iran’s retaliatory strikes on Gulf states.
By contrast, three African members; Liberia, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo condemned only Iran’s response, urging all parties to comply with international law and the UN Charter.
Panama warned that the escalation could trigger unpredictable regional consequences, while Bahrain denounced being targeted in Iranian reprisal attacks.
Among European members, the United Kingdom, France, Denmark, Greece and Latvia stopped short of criticising the initial strikes, instead condemning Iran’s retaliation and calling for renewed diplomatic efforts.
Gowan said European governments have long pursued nuclear diplomacy with Tehran and were frustrated by years of stalled negotiations. While they may not favour military escalation, he suggested there was a perception in parts of Europe that Iran bore responsibility for the crisis.
He cautioned, however, that selective application of international law risks undermining its legitimacy.
“If you only apply international law when it relates to countries you like, it reduces the credibility of international law as a framework for diplomacy,” he said. “Many in the global South see parallels with Western responses to Gaza and Ukraine, and the narrative of double standards is only getting stronger.”
The divisions highlight the persistent difficulty facing the Security Council in presenting a unified response to major geopolitical crises.