Resolution 479 was the first UN Security Council resolution concerning the Iran-Iraq War, which was issued in September 1980.

On September 23, 1980, one day after Iraq’ s attack on Iran, UN Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim requested the Security Council to convene a meeting due to the risk of escalating hostilities between Iran and Iraq.⁠[1]

The Security Council— comprising the five permanent members (United States, Soviet Union, China, United Kingdom, and France) and ten non-permanent members (Bangladesh, East Germany, Jamaica, Mexico, Niger, Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Zambia, and Tunisia) — held an informal meeting on the Iran-Iraq situation.⁠[2] At the end of the meeting, the Council President issued a statement⁠[3] urging Iran and Iraq to refrain from all armed activities and all acts that may worsen the present dangerous situation.⁠[4]

As the war continued, the UN Secretary-General, in a letter dated September 25, 1980, urged the Security Council to treat the Iran-Iraq conflict as a matter of urgency. On September 26, the representatives of Mexico and Norway jointly requested an immediate Council session. That same day, the Council convened under the agenda item “ The Situation between Iran and Iraq”. The Iraqi representative asked to participate without voting rights, but Iran made no such request, and the session proceeded without an Iranian representative.⁠[5]

In this session, representatives from Mexico, Norway, and Iraq spoke.⁠[6] The one-hour meeting concluded in the afternoon of September 26, 1980.⁠[7] The session resumed on September 28, under the presidency of Taieb Slim of Tunisia.⁠[8] Representatives of Mexico, the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and Iraq made statements.⁠[9] The representative of Japan (a non-member of the Council) was also allowed to attend and speak, given the importance of Persian Gulf oil and its market to his country.⁠[10]

The final speaker was the representative of Tunisia (Council President).⁠[11] Ultimately, a draft resolution that had been prepared by the representatives of Mexico and Norway was adopted unanimously as Resolution 479.⁠[12]

Resolution 479 states:

“ The Security Council,
Having begun consideration of the item entitled ‘ The Situation between Iran and Iraq’;
Mindful as well that all Member States are obliged to refrain in their international relations from the threat of or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State;
Recalling that under Article 24 of the Charter, the Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security;
Deeply concerned about the developing situation between Iran and Iraq,

I. Calls upon Iran and Iraq to refrain immediately from any further use of force and to settle their dispute by peaceful means and in conformity with principles of justice and international law;
2. Urges them to accept any appropriate offer or mediation or conciliation or to resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their own choice that would facilitate the fulfilment of their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations;
3. Calls upon all other States to exercise the utmost restraint and to refrain from any act which may lead to a further escalation and widening of the conflict;
4. Supports the efforts of the Secretary-General and the offer of his good offices for the resolution of this situation;
5. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council within forty-eight hours”.⁠[13]

Security Council Resolution 479, without addressing Iraq’ s aggression or the occupation of Iranian territory and without calling for Iraqi troops to withdraw to internationally recognized borders, merely expressed deep concern about the developing situation between Iran and Iraq. It called on both countries to immediately refrain from further use of force and to resolve the dispute peacefully in accordance with principles of justice and international law, and to accept any mediation, conciliation, or recourse to regional organizations that would facilitate UN Charter obligations.⁠[14]

For the first time, the UN Secretary-General used the word “ war” in an official Security Council session, repeating it three times. Using the term “ war” imposes responsibility on the UN, but neither the Secretary-General nor the Security Council wished to act under Chapter VII of the Charter (Articles 39, 41, and 42) or label the agenda item as “ war”. That is why Iraq’ s aggression against Iran was titled “ The Situation between Iran and Iraq”.

In reality, the Secretary-General had to use the word “ war” in his explanations and, at the end of his remarks, urged the Security Council to fulfill its responsibility for maintaining international peace and security— not only according to the UN Charter but also in light of global interests.⁠[15]

In effect, the UN Security Council, instead of taking decisive action against Iraq’ s attack, referred to its military aggression as “ The Situation between Iran and Iraq” and issued a legally neutral resolution. Rather than using terms like “ aggression” or “ conflict”, it employed the vague word “ situation”, which does not imply a state of war. This resolution was in no way favorable to Iran. On October 4, 1980, Iranian President Abolhassan Banisadr responded to the resolution by stating that as long as Iraq’ s aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran continues and Iraqi forces inside Iranian territory persist in aggressive and sabotage actions, Iran would not accept the Secretary-General’ s proposals or the Security Council resolution. Iraq, however, immediately appreciated the Security Council and accepted the resolution and ceasefire. This came at a time when large parts of Iranian territory remained under Iraqi occupation, allowing Iraq to use the situation for bargaining.

In practice, UN Security Council Resolution 479 failed to take any meaningful step toward halting Iraq’ s aggression or ending the imposed war against Iran.⁠[16]