Copy in clipboard...
Arms used in Iran war part of Persian Gulf states’ arsenals: UN envoy
Iravani made the remarks in a letter addressed to Secretary-General António Guterres and Security Council President Jamal Fares Alrowaiei in response to a letter from Bahrain to the UN in which it had leveled accusations against the Islamic Republic.
“The Islamic Republic categorically dismisses as wholly unfounded and deliberately misleading the assertions claimed in said letter. In this regard, I am further instructed to place on record the definitive affirmation of the clear international responsibility borne by the same States as a consequence of their own internationally wrongful acts.”
Iravani detailed a response to a letter dated April 7, 2026, from Bahrain’s UN representative, which deliberately omits a “central and determinative fact”: an unlawful armed attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28, 2026, carried out by the United States and Israel.
The letter said that the attack was a flagrant violation of international law, including the prohibition of the use of force and the norm against aggression.
It further notes that the aggressors utilized the “facilities, territory and airspace of certain States in the region” for planning and executing these acts of aggression.
As a specific example, the letter cited “barbaric terrorist attacks against a school in Minab,” which resulted in the deaths of at least 168 primary school children and were launched from the territory of these states.
Monitoring data from Iran’s Armed Forces, according to the letter, indicates the repeated use of these states’ territories and airspace for “planning, preparation, arming and execution of unlawful military operations against the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
“Physical remnants from the weaponry used in the aggression, identified in multiple Iranian cities, confirm they were part of the arsenals of certain Persian Gulf states,” it added.
It further argued that this evidence demonstrates complicity and direct engagement in acts of aggression as defined by international law.
The letter emphasized that such conduct engages the international responsibility of these states, requiring them to make “full reparation, including, in particular, the provision of full compensation for the damage caused.”