Bahrain’s UN proposal calling for ‘all necessary means’ to open Strait of Hormuz faces opposition

UN Security Council Faces Divided Response Over Strait of Hormuz Resolution

A United Nations Security Council resolution that would authorize countries to use “all necessary means” to keep the vital Strait of Hormuz open has encountered significant opposition from key member states, according to three Security Council diplomats familiar with the ongoing negotiations.

The draft resolution, proposed by Bahrain and obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday, seeks international authorization for potential military action to counter Iran’s growing control over the strategic waterway. Iran’s disruption of maritime traffic through the strait has caused global fuel prices to spike and threatens to further destabilize the world economy.

At the heart of the draft is language that would empower countries or naval coalitions to “repress, neutralize and deter attempts to close, obstruct or otherwise interfere with international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.” The resolution explicitly demands that Iran “immediately cease all attacks against merchant and commercial vessels” and stop impeding freedom of navigation in the region.

However, several council members have expressed serious concerns about placing the resolution under Chapter Seven of the UN Charter, which allows for enforcement measures ranging from economic sanctions to military intervention. According to one diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity, the draft is currently being reworked to address these concerns.

China and Russia, both permanent Security Council members with veto power, are reportedly among those opposing the current text. Their resistance could effectively block any resolution that explicitly threatens military action against Iran.

In a parallel diplomatic effort, France has introduced an alternative resolution that takes a more measured approach. The French draft reportedly avoids mentioning Iran by name and does not invoke Chapter Seven provisions. Instead, it calls on all parties to exercise restraint and pursue diplomatic solutions to the crisis. The French mission to the UN has not responded to requests for comment on their proposal.

Bahrain, which currently holds the Arab seat on the 15-member Security Council, has itself been targeted by Iranian drones and missiles since the outbreak of hostilities between the U.S., Israel, and Iran in late February. Two weeks ago, a separate Bahrain-sponsored resolution condemning Iranian strikes on its territory received broad council support, with only China and Russia abstaining.

The strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz cannot be overstated. Approximately one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passes through this narrow waterway, which connects the Persian Gulf to global shipping routes. Since the conflict began, Iran has effectively closed the strait to enemy shipping while claiming to allow safe passage for vessels from non-hostile nations. The attacks on ships have virtually halted tanker traffic, creating ripple effects throughout global energy markets.

The United States, which holds the Security Council presidency this month, previously attempted to forge a diplomatic solution by calling for a new international coalition to deploy warships to the strait. However, even America’s closest allies declined to participate, prompting President Trump to suggest the U.S. could address the issue unilaterally.

In recent days, Trump has made contradictory statements regarding U.S. involvement, first suggesting other countries would need to take over as America considers withdrawing from the conflict, then later indicating the waterway would somehow “open itself.”

Given the significant disagreements among council members, diplomats believe it is unlikely either the Bahraini or French draft resolutions will be put to a vote this week. The ongoing negotiations highlight the complex geopolitical calculations surrounding the Strait of Hormuz crisis, as world powers struggle to balance security concerns, economic interests, and the desire to avoid further regional escalation.