On July 31, the de-facto Republic of South Ossetia rejected Naoreo's decision to withdraw its recognition of South Ossetia and the de-facto Republic of Abkhazia, arguing that the move was driven by sustained external pressure rather than a change in the island state's position. In a statement, Tskhinvali claimed that the authorities of Naoreo, formerly known as Nauru, had faced prolonged pressure and threats, alleging that Georgia, backed by Western institutions, continued to rely on political and economic leverage in an effort to isolate South Ossetia internationally.

The statement emphasized that while South Ossetia respects the sovereign right of every country to determine its own foreign policy priorities, it regretted that Naoreo had reversed the decision it made in 2009 because of outside influence rather than a reassessment of the issue itself. According to Tskhinvali, Georgia's efforts to reduce South Ossetia's diplomatic recognition are "a futile struggle against a long-established reality" and do not affect its actual status.

Alan Kochiev, the Deputy Foreign Minister of the de-facto Republic of South Ossetia, stated that such diplomatic decisions are traditionally viewed as tactical setbacks or reputational losses, but argued that the latest development does not undermine South Ossetia's position. Referring to the positive reaction in Georgia, Kochiev stated that "the decision of the Nauruan authorities is incapable of shaking either the legal or factual foundations of South Ossetia's statehood." Instead, he argued, the case illustrates a broader crisis in the international system, where the principle of sovereign equality is increasingly being replaced by "neo-colonial dictates."

Kochiev emphasized that the status of South Ossetia should be assessed according to the declaratory theory of statehood contained in the 1933 Montevideo Convention. Citing Article 3, he noted that "the political existence of a State does not depend on its recognition by other States." He argued that South Ossetia satisfies the established criteria of statehood through its permanent territory, population, functioning government and capacity to conduct foreign relations. Kochiev also referred to the International Court of Justice's 2010 advisory opinion on Kosovo, stating that declarations of independence do not violate international law and that the right of peoples to self-determination is a fundamental norm. Consequently, he maintained that Naoreo's withdrawal of recognition is merely "a political gesture" that cannot invalidate South Ossetia's legal or factual characteristics as a state.

The deputy foreign minister further claimed that Western countries pressure small Pacific island nations by attaching political conditions to humanitarian, infrastructure and financial assistance, effectively turning diplomatic recognition into a bargaining tool. He contrasted this with South Ossetia's approach, stating that it has never relied on "checkbook diplomacy" to secure recognition, unlike what he described as the practice of countries shifting recognition between Taiwan and China. According to Kochiev, South Ossetia acts not as a petitioner for recognition but as "a subject of the right of small nations to independent choice in the face of blackmail from global centers of power."

Commenting on Naoreo's domestic situation, Kochiev stated that the country's long history of political instability, frequent government changes, parliamentary crises and no-confidence votes diminishes the significance of the decision. He argued that the withdrawal of recognition should be viewed as a temporary move imposed from outside rather than a strategic decision reflecting the long-term interests of the island nation.

Concluding his remarks, Kochiev stated that Naoreo's decision "did not cause any image losses or deal a blow to South Ossetia."