UN-Truth

So eager were they to pass a new resolution tightening sanctions against Iran, the members of the UN Security Council met even before the scheduled time, which was set for 3 pm.

The U.S. spoke in the Council after the vote about needing to counter the “Iranian regime’s continuing pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability” — a totally unproven assertion.

“The present procedure in Security Council I don’t believe would be helpful for (a) diplomatic solution. I mean, these procedures, resolutions after resolutions, embargos, expanding the embargos, will not be helpful for diplomacy and peaceful solution of the Iranian nuclear file”, Iranian nuclear intellectual Seyed Hossein Mousavian said in an interview in Geneva on 21 March.

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not make it to UNHQ/NY as he had said he wished — Iranians blamed the U.S. for not processing his entourage’s visas on time; American officials said this was not true.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told the Security Council after the vote that “Iran has been saying time and time again, Iran’s nuclear program is entirely peaceful”.

At this point, British Ambassador Emyr Jones Perry, shifted impatiently in his seat at the Council’s horse-shoe shaped table, and exchanged a knowing glance with the French Ambassador.

The resolution aims at depriving the Iranian people of their inalienable rights, rather than at addressing any proliferation concerns, the Iranian Foreign Minister continued.

He spoke of Non-Aligned support for Iran’s position — but the Security Council vote today was unanimous, and South Africa, Qatar, and Indonesia — who had all tried to move amendments to the draft resolution before Friday — all voted in favor of this draft.

This new resolution is number 1747; the previous resolution –the first one imposing sanctions on Iran, which was adopted on 23 December — is number 1737; an earlier resolution warning Iran that it should suspend its nuclear program is number 1639.

When Iraq invaded Iran in 1980, the Iranian FM said, the SC waited seven days to intervene, allowing Iraq to occupy 30,000 square kilometers of Iranian territories — and then asked only for a cessation of hostilities, but not for a withdrawal.

During that war, the Iranian Foreign Minister told the SC Saturday, the US, Germany, France and others on the Security Council supplied Saddam with military assistance, including materials that helped the development of chemical and biological weapons.

He said the UN SC is bound by law, and should act in conformity with the principles of its Charter and international law.

Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities cannot be viewed as a threat to international peace and security by any stretch of fact, reason, or logic, the Foreign Minister told the Council. Iran has carried out all its obligations and cooperated to the fullest extent possible, he said, and even beyond those required by the NPT and by Iran’s safeguards agreements with the IAEA.

IAEA inspectors even made over 20 visits to Iran’s sensitive military sites that have nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear program — will any other member do the same? IAEA inspectors have conducted over 2100 person-days of inspections to date, and have confirmed that there is no evidence that Iran’s previously-undeclared materials were diverted to any military purposes. All the nuclear material has been accounted for, he said. And, he asked: Is there any other member of the UN SC that is prepared to declare how many centrifuge cascades it has?

This UN SC action is a gross violation of Article 25 of the UN Charter, and of the Iranian peoples’ right to development and to education, the Iranian Foreign Minister said.

This decision was taken in bad faith, and negates fundamental purposes and principles of the UN Charter, he suggested.

The vote shows that Iran’s compliance with the UN Security Council has now become more important than the issues of Iran’s compliance, or not, with the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA.

Does it need to be said that Iran’s position is again being described as “defiant”?

Filed under: Iran, UN Security Council