‘All Options on the Table’: US Issues Stark Ultimatum to Tehran at Emergency UN Session

In a high-stakes emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, US Ambassador Mike Waltz declared Thursday that the United States is prepared to act if the Iranian regime’s “slaughter” of its citizens continues, while senior UN officials warned that external military intervention could ignite a regional conflagration. The United States warned the Iranian leadership that it will not remain a “bystander” to the lethal crackdown on nationwide protests that have left over 2,600 people dead, with Ambassador Waltz signaling a pivot from diplomacy to potential action by stating that President Donald Trump has placed “all options on the table” to stop the bloodshed.

The emergency session, requested by Washington, opened with a sobering assessment from Assistant Secretary-General Martha Pobee, who detailed the rapid evolution of the “Rial Rebellion” into a nationwide crisis with catastrophic human costs.

• Casualty Crisis: While the UN has not independently verified the figures, reports suggest that at least 2,615 people have been killed and over 18,000 detained since unrest began in late December 2025, making it one of the deadliest government crackdowns in recent Middle Eastern history.
• Communications Blackout: Pobee highlighted the regime’s use of a “digital kill switch,” urging the immediate restoration of internet access to prevent further violations from being masked by silence and allow independent monitoring of the situation.
• Maximum Restraint Appeal: UN Secretary-General António Guterres, through Pobee, urged “maximum restraint” from all parties, warning that the “external dimension” of potential military strikes adds dangerous volatility to an already combustible situation that could engulf the region.
• Verification Challenges: The UN acknowledged the difficulty of independently confirming casualty figures due to the regime’s information blackout, though multiple human rights organizations have corroborated the scale of the violence.

Ambassador Mike Waltz’s remarks were aimed directly at the Iranian representatives across the table, emphasizing a fundamental shift in American posture under the Trump administration from diplomatic engagement to credible threats of force.

“President Trump is a man of action, not endless talk like we see at the United Nations. He has made it clear that all options are on the table to stop the slaughter, and no one should know that better than the leadership of the Iranian regime.” — Ambassador Mike Waltz

• Dismissing the ‘Foreign Plot’ Narrative: Waltz rejected the regime’s claims that the protests are a “foreign plot,” asserting instead that the Iranian people are demanding freedom “like never before” in the Islamic Republic’s 47-year history.
• Trump Doctrine: The Ambassador’s characterization of Trump as a “man of action” served as a not-so-subtle reminder of the President’s track record of military intervention, from the Venezuela operation to previous strikes in the Middle East.
• Credibility Through Presence: The statement was backed by the continued presence of a US carrier strike group in the Persian Gulf, lending military credibility to the diplomatic rhetoric.
• Breaking UN Norms: The blunt language marked a departure from traditional diplomatic language at the Security Council, reflecting the administration’s impatience with multilateral processes.

Iran’s representative at the UN fired back, accusing the United States of using the Security Council as a tool for “political destabilization” and attempting to justify pre-planned military aggression.

• The Counter-Charge: Tehran claimed that the United States is the “direct architect” of the unrest, alleging that Washington is steering domestic economic grievances toward violence to justify a “pre-planned military intervention” designed to effect regime change.
• Decisive Response Warning: Iran warned that any act of aggression, direct or indirect, would be met with a “decisive, proportionate, and lawful response,” language that typically signals potential retaliation against US forces or regional allies.
• Sovereignty Argument: The Iranian representative framed the crackdown as an internal security matter and accused the US of violating the UN Charter’s principles of non-interference in domestic affairs.
• Regional Allies: The statement appeared designed to appeal to Security Council members, particularly Russia and China, who oppose US military intervention and support principles of national sovereignty.

In a rare move that underscored the extraordinary nature of the session, the Security Council heard directly from prominent Iranian dissidents Masih Alinejad and Ahmad Batebi, giving voice to the protest movement on the global stage.

• Alinejad’s Testimony: Addressing the Council, Alinejad claimed the regime had attempted to assassinate her three times in the United States. “You cannot kill all the people,” she declared, urging the Council to recognize the legitimacy of the street movement and the Iranian people’s demands for freedom.
• Batebi’s Appeal: Batebi, a veteran dissident who spent years in Iranian prisons, appealed directly to the international community not to “abandon” the Iranian youth, describing the current crackdown as a systematic attempt at a “judicial purge” designed to eliminate an entire generation of opposition.
• Unprecedented Access: The decision to allow dissidents to address the Security Council reflects the unusual nature of the crisis and Washington’s strategy to frame the conflict as one between the Iranian people and their government, rather than between nations.
• Moral Pressure: The testimony aimed to put moral pressure on Security Council members, particularly those hesitant to support US military action, by humanizing the costs of inaction.

While the diplomatic battle raged at the UN, the Trump administration added fresh economic pressure by targeting high-ranking Iranian officials involved in the crackdown.

• Treasury Action: The US Treasury levied sanctions on high-ranking security officials, including former chief Ali Larijani, for their roles in orchestrating and implementing the violent crackdown on protesters.
• Dual Track Strategy: The sanctions represent a continuation of economic pressure even as military options remain active, demonstrating a multi-faceted approach to increasing pressure on the regime.
• Limited Impact Question: Critics note that given Iran’s existing isolation under comprehensive sanctions, additional designations may have limited practical effect but serve important symbolic and legal purposes.

While US rhetoric at the UN reached a fever pitch, President Trump reportedly signaled a temporary “wait-and-see” approach following news that Tehran had postponed nearly 800 scheduled executions.

• The Calculation: Trump’s pause suggests he’s testing whether the threat of military action alone can moderate regime behavior without actual strikes, preserving the option while avoiding the risks and complications of direct intervention.
• Fragile De-escalation: The postponement of executions represents a tactical retreat by Tehran in response to credible military threats, but doesn’t address underlying issues or guarantee the safety of the 18,000+ detainees still in custody.
• Temporary Nature: The “wait-and-see” posture is explicitly temporary, with the carrier strike group remaining in position and “all options” still officially on the table if the regime resumes mass killings.

The emergency UN session crystallized the fundamental tension at the heart of the Iran crisis: the United States threatening military intervention to stop a humanitarian catastrophe, while the UN warns that such intervention could create an even larger regional disaster. Ambassador Waltz’s blunt ultimatum reflects the Trump administration’s impatience with diplomatic processes and willingness to act unilaterally, while Tehran’s defiant response suggests the regime believes it can weather international pressure if it moves quickly enough to crush the uprising. The 2,600+ dead and 18,000+ detained Iranians caught in the middle represent the human cost of this standoff, with their survival depending on whether Trump’s threats can continue deterring mass executions without triggering the regional war that UN officials fear. The coming days will reveal whether the pause in executions represents a genuine shift toward restraint or merely a tactical delay before the regime resumes its crackdown once international attention inevitably shifts elsewhere.

Also Read / ‘We’ll Start Shooting Too’: Trump Issues Direct Military Ultimatum to Tehran.