On the 14th, the United Nations Security Council staged a scene of “humiliation” for the United States. The draft resolution on extending the arms embargo on Iran submitted by the United States was defeated due to the support of only two votes. The western media said that “the United States has suffered an embarrassing diplomatic fiasco” and is increasingly isolated by the international community. < / P > < p > the unprecedented isolation does make the United States a bit “bereaved”: China and Russia unanimously oppose it, Europe collectively runs for votes, and Iranians show us secretary of state pompeio covering his face on twitter, full of irony. However, if you think Uncle Sam will “pull out of the woods,” you are wrong. U.S. President trump has said that as early as next week, the “rapid resumption of sanctions” mechanism will be activated against Iran, and a difficult and chaotic battle is expected to start again. Analysts believe that there is no legal basis for the United States to launch the “rapid recovery of sanctions” clause, and even its allies strongly oppose it. Therefore, it may be more difficult to pass than the draft resolution. The risk of diplomatic confrontation is likely to weaken the authority of the Security Council and damage the global role of the United States. Trump’s holding on to Iran is essentially to please the domestic Jewish forces and evangelical voters and build momentum for the general election. This kind of bullying, which puts its own interests above the common interests of the international community, is by no means the right way to solve the Iranian nuclear issue. The result can only be “self humiliating”. The United States and other six countries on the Iranian nuclear issue reached a comprehensive agreement with Iran in 2015. The security council then adopted resolution 2231, which approved the Iran nuclear agreement and decided to terminate the arms embargo on Iran on October 18, 2020. However, after the trump administration unilaterally withdrew from the Iran nuclear agreement in 2018, it restarted and increased sanctions against Iraq, and sought to promote the UN’s indefinite extension of the arms embargo against Iraq. < / P > < p > if the embargo is terminated, it means that Iran will be able to legally replenish its arsenals, which the trump administration does not want to see. For this reason, the United States submitted a draft resolution to the Security Council, calling for the cancellation of this “sunset clause”. “We can’t allow the world’s biggest supporter to buy or sell weapons.” “I mean, it’s crazy,” pompeio said before the vote Of the 15 members of the Security Council, only Dominica stood with the United States and voted for it. A total of 11 members including Britain, France and Germany, the main allies of the United States, abstained, while Russia and China voted No. According to the rules of procedure of the Council, the adoption of a resolution requires at least nine votes in favour and no one of the permanent members can vote against it. This means that the United States’ attempt to push for pressure on Iraq ended in a “fiasco”. After the US draft resolution was rejected, Iranian President Rohani said, “the US conspiracy failed in disgrace.” “The United States has never been so isolated in the 75 year history of the United Nations,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mousavi said on twitter He also distributed a picture of pompeio covering his face. In explaining Friday’s decision to abstain, U.S. European allies insisted that they were not without fear of Iran acquiring dangerous weapons, but wanted further negotiations on possible restrictions. In its explanatory statement, China said that the essence of the US draft resolution is to resume sanctions against Iraq, and is a continuation of the US policy of “extreme pressure” on Iraq. It is contrary to the spirit of the Iran nuclear agreement and inconsistent with the provisions of Security Council resolution 2231. It is not legally based and unreasonable. Although the United States staged “Waterloo” in the Security Council, it will not give up. According to O’Brien, assistant to the president for national security affairs, “it’s not over.” On the 15th, trump said that the “snapback” mechanism should be launched as soon as next week to promote the extension of the Security Council’s arms sanctions against Iran. According to Foreign Policy magazine, this mechanism is included in Security Council resolution 2231, which stipulates that any party of the six countries (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom) participating in the Iran nuclear agreement has the right to lodge a complaint against Iran’s violation of the nuclear agreement, and the Security Council must vote within 30 days on whether to allow the provisions of previous resolutions to continue to take effect. This may trigger snapback, that is, automatically resume the UN sanctions against Iraq before the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement was reached. < p > < p > < p > the New York Times believes that if snapback is triggered, it will have a devastating impact on Iran. This means that the United States can re-apply all sanctions against Iraq before it signed in 2015, and the sanctions are likely to be not limited to arms transactions, but also to oil sales and banking agreements. This is bound to trigger retaliation from Iran. Tehran has hinted that if the arms embargo is extended or sanctions are quickly restored, it may withdraw completely from the Iran nuclear agreement or even from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Hua liming, former Chinese ambassador to Iran, believes that trump was planning to extend the arms ban on Iran half a year ago in order to cater to Jewish forces and evangelical voters and “put extreme pressure” on Iran as the election approached. Moreover, knowing that China, Russia and Europe will resist, we still need to “fight” so that basic voters can see his toughness. The threat to start snapback also carries the above considerations. In Hua Liming’s opinion, activating snapback may be more difficult than pushing forward the draft resolution. Western media also pointed out that in view of the strong opposition of US European allies to the launch of snapback, believing that the legitimacy of the United States is in doubt and endangering regional stability, trump will not be easy to succeed. Jin Liangxiang, associate researcher of Shanghai Institute of international studies, pointed out that UN resolution 2231 laid a legal foundation for the implementation of Iran’s nuclear agreement, and stipulated in the annex that the arms embargo against Iraq should be lifted on time. The United States not only takes the lead in violating international law and unilaterally fails to implement Security Council resolutions, but also demands that other countries “follow suit”. Obviously, it lacks legal basis and is unreasonable, so it is difficult to obtain the support of the international community. Now, as a renegade party to the Iran nuclear agreement, the United States is not qualified to ask the Security Council to launch snapback. This is also the consensus of the vast majority of Security Council members – several diplomats told Reuters that other countries would argue that, from a legal point of view, the United States has been unable to push for the resumption of sanctions against Iraq. Richard Cohen, an expert on United Nations affairs of the international crisis research organization, believes that if the United States promotes snapback, it may lead to the failure of all parties to reach an agreement on the status of UN arms sanctions, thus weakening the authority of the Security Council. “To be frank, we will soon be in the so-called” Council dreamland “: the United States claims snapback is in motion, and other countries refuse to accept it.” “No matter what the views of various countries on the issue of arms embargo, very few members of the Security Council are willing to act as a tool for the agreement to kill Iran’s nuclear weapons,” he said “< p > < p > < p > former U.S. State Department official Jarrett brown, who participated in the negotiations on the Iran nuclear agreement, also warned trump of the consequences of launching snapback:” the price will be a huge loss of the authority of the United Nations Security Council, and damage the global role of the United States in the foreseeable future – but the trump government is obviously not too worried about the damage to the United States, but worried that its ambition can not be realized. ”According to public opinion analysis such as Bloomberg, considering that the possibility of triggering snapback is slim, the United States may also focus on several other aspects: first, threatening to impose unilateral sanctions on weapon manufacturers, it is better to persuade Europe to follow suit. Second, the use of intermediaries to prove their point of view, especially the Arab countries and Israel, which are most worried about Iran acquiring other countries’ weapons. Third, the sanctions against Iran’s energy and financial industries should be increased and the implementation of previous sanctions should be strengthened. The Kremlin said on the 14th that President Putin proposed an online summit of permanent members of the Security Council and leaders of Germany and Iran. Putin said the Security Council’s discussions on the Iranian issue are becoming increasingly tense, and the summit will discuss how to “avoid conflict and escalation in the Security Council.”. < p > < p > for Putin’s proposal, French President Marco ó n is open-minded. But trump said on Saturday that he “may not” attend the summit and “I think we will wait until after the US election.” Russia’s “business man” believes that it is possible for lower level leaders to participate in discussions on the Iranian nuclear issue. Andre baklanov, vice president of the Russian diplomats Association, pointed out that Putin’s initiative was aimed at reversing the situation through diplomatic means, because Washington had gone too far in “extreme pressure” on Iraq, and Europeans also held the same position. Therefore, a new and comprehensive dialogue is needed – even if the meeting cannot be convened quickly, the Russian proposal is still necessary. Baklanov pointed out that the US counterparts are also highly concerned about the situation in Iran. For example, General Wesley Clark, a former NATO coalition commander-in-chief, said frankly that the situation in Iran was too extreme and very dangerous, and proposed to establish a military risk reduction center in Oman. This is similar to the roadmap proposed by Russia in 2019 to restore security in the Gulf region. In Jin Liangxiang’s view, Putin proposed the security roadmap for the Gulf region last year, which is a security dialogue mechanism jointly participated by regional countries and foreign powers, which is basically consistent with China’s diplomatic philosophy. As for the online summit initiative, China’s consistent position is to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue through dialogue, consultation and diplomacy. In particular, dialogue and consultation among relevant parties should be promoted through existing channels or new regional cooperation structures. Hua Liming pointed out that Russia has always been a senior player in geopolitics in the Middle East. If Putin can win over European countries to participate in the online summit, on the one hand, it will have greater influence, on the other hand, it will help to take the initiative in the Iran nuclear issue and further marginalize the “renegade” United States. On the other hand, if Europe’s nose is led by the United States and its political support for Iran is reduced, then Russia’s diplomatic process will be disturbed, and Iran’s “suspension of part of its nuclear agreement commitments” may also take a greater step. < / P > < p > “but now it seems that Iran has adapted to the dual effects of sanctions and the epidemic, and it can be said that the most difficult time has passed.” Hua Liming said that it is believed that before the US election, Iran and the United States will still play within a controllable range.