U.S.: Iran to face consequences for nuclear defiance
IAEA, with rare Russian and Chinese backing, passes resolution rebuking Iran over nuclear cover-up.
By Reuters Tags: Iran IAEA Israel news Iran nuclearThe United Nations nuclear watchdog's vote to rebuke Iran on Friday should send a clear message that Tehran will face consequences if it fails to engage with major powers on the nuclear issue, a senior U.S. official said.
"We hope that the board of governors resolution reinforces the message that, you know, we're committed to putting together a package of consequences if we don't find a willing partner. We hope Iran takes note of that clear message," the official told reporters on condition of anonymity.
The International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors voted 25-3 to censure Iran for developing a uranium enrichment site in secret in a motion that gained rare backing from Russia and China, which have in the past blocked attempts to isolate Iran, a trade partner for both.
The U.S. envoy to the IAEA, Ambassador Glynn Davies, said in Vienna on Friday that international patience with Iran was running out and that "round after round" of fruitless talks could not continue.
Speaking to reporters in Washington later, the U.S. official said the vote showed "unity of purpose" among major international powers on Iran, and repeated that time was growing short for Tehran to come clean about a nuclear program that Western governments fear is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge.
The official declined to be drawn on what sort of consequences were being contemplated, although British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said harsher sanctions could be on the way if Iran ignored the IAEA vote.
U.S. President Barack Obama and European leaders have given Iran until the end of the year to begin talks on the nuclear stalemate.
The U.S. official said Russia and China, along with other negotiators United States, Britain, France, and Germany, were agreed on what should happen next if Tehran fails to respond.
"It is significant, as I said before, that both of those parties strongly supported this step in the board of governors," the official said, referring to Russia and China.
"They are fully committed to a two-track strategy ... we intend to take this very steadily and step by step."
Another U.S. official said China - seen as the most reluctant of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council to sanction Iran - had played a useful role in the IAEA discussion and even suggested language that was included in the final resolution.
"They had a certain degree of authorship," the official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said, calling final passage of the resolution "very much a collective effort."
The resolution was the first by the 35-nation governing board in almost four years. With rare Russian and Chinese backing, it sent a message of international exasperation with Iran's nuclear secrecy and defiance.
Most developing nations on the IAEA board, who are in a bloc that includes Iran, opposed the move, saying it would be provocative and counterproductive. Iran warned it would undermine its relations with the IAEA.
But supporters were provoked by the September revelation of a second enrichment site Iran had been building for at least two years, a subterfuge they said fanned suspicions of more secret sites that could be dedicated to making atom bombs.
The measure also signaled diminishing tolerance of Iran's reluctance to embrace an IAEA-brokered plan to provide it with fuel for a nuclear medicine reactor if it gives up enriched uranium that could be turned into bomb material if further refined.
The draft resolution urged Iran to immediately halt construction of the Fordow enrichment plant, located in a mountain bunker, and to clarify its original purpose and confirm it has no more hidden atomic facilities or clandestine plans for any. Iran denies it wants to build nuclear weapons, saying its atomic energy program is purely for peaceful purposes.
Iran's envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, called the resolution a "hasty and undue" step.
"Adoption of this resolution is not only unhelpful in improving the current situation, but it will jeopardize the conducive environment vitally needed for success in the process of Geneva and Vienna negotiations expected to lead to a common understanding," he said.
Developing nations argued in pre-vote debate that the resolution would be provocative and counterproductive.
But supporters were provoked by the September revelation of a second enrichment site that Iran had been building for at least two years, a subterfuge they said fanned suspicions of more secret sites that could be dedicated to making atom bombs.
Earlier Friday, Iran warned the IAEA not to use threatening language against Tehran.
"We recommend the IAEA not to refer to such methods and use the language of logic rather than force," the official IRNA news agency quoted Soltanieh as saying.
The Iranian envoy added that a draft resolution tabled at the IAEA's Board of Governors meeting in Vienna would be counterproductive.
"Resolutions, sanctions and threats have always made the issue more complicated," Soltanieh said.
The focus of the resolution drafted by the permanent UN Security Council members Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, as well as Germany, was Iran's new enrichment plant at Fordu, near the city of Qom.
Due to Tehran's refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment programs, the United Nations Security Council has already passed four resolutions against Iran, three of them with sanctions.
Soltanieh earlier told the German daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung that Iran would reduce its co-operation with the IAEA to a minimum if a new resolution was issued against the Islamic state.
He, however, backed down in his remarks to IRNA, by calling on the UN nuclear watchdog "to let the process be continued in a calm and constructive atmosphere."
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei on Thursday expressed disappointment with Iran and talked about a "dead end" as far as a breakthrough in the nuclear dispute with the country was concerned.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
ELBaradie, Why only now ? For over 10 years the Iranian Mullah regime has been fooling the world,with your tacit approval. Now that your job is coming to a close,you've suddenly woken up ? Was the 'Baksheesh' too insignificant for the loyal work you did in slumbering the world, while the Iranians were going full speed with their development of Nuclear power for the secret purpose of producing a N.Bomb ?
"The US learned to live with Soviet and Chinese nukes. We learned to negotiate, sometimes with some success." Comparing China and Soviets with Khamenei and Ahmadinejad is absolutely foolish. No one among the former was ever ranting as the latter do.
...And then they will blackmail the whole world and get whatever they wish. That's why the top mullah ordered to cheat the elections: to win, to get absolute power, in Iran and later in the world - Shiites uber alles! They are already raising and teaching a new generation, including about the pleasures after death ....
Iran has told the IAEA to go jump, Baradei asked how high Iran has been diddling lo these many years and getting away with it The UN & IAEA are useless
world is On the right track. The strat is good. Obama is playing the right cards. Every one can lauph and joke about Obama but if Iran does not come around there will be a united front to stand up to them that before was none existant. If action is eventually needed it would be a waste of time without such backing. So if the strat fails to bet Iran to move it does not fail as it gains the support needed to move forward. No one wants to take harsher actions but least this route takes that into consideration. Its the smart track. If Iran don't come around this way it only shoots itself in the foot!!!!
You haven't been following this have you? Iran's withdrawal from the NPT will constitute a "threat to international peace and security" under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and the UNSC will have to take action. Israel on the other hand will be handed its casus belli on a plate. If you think Iran can come out of that without being attacked then the tar fumes are going to your head.
excellent points. you only left out the triumph of russia and the nuclear race. people like mark think they can rule the world and be a superpower without any pain or responsibility. however, i get the impression that even nato is scared and disgusted. hopefully, this time, all the nato powers and some others will be on board seriously. enough is enough.
even if all you so openly claim is true, the situation is one of either or. either iran will be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons with the ability to deliver them, or else a coalition of the willing will have to pound iran's nuclear sites and all military infrastructures out of existence. there is no other choice. i get the impression that obama might be aiming to bring on board as many as possible so as to avoid being blamed for unilateralism. however, he cannot allow iran become a nuclear power. if you do not want u.s. troops jeopardised, then it would be best to pull all u.s. troops out of the middle east. then you will pay less taxes, and live on bread and water, if you are lucky.
The American cupboard is bare. With the anticipated new Afghan commitment, what's left to defend the US, if attacked? How many Aussie divisions are available? Where's the Aussie fleet? How many Israeli divisions are available? Is it important enough to strip the occupation out of the West Bank to provide troops? Not brigades, Divisions? About 20 Divisions would be needed. The US is not the world's police. Why haven't you recruited the Chinese and Russians. They say "no" and control the US' funding. How many $$ hundred billion can you raise? Our credit is about tapped out. The US learned to live with Soviet and Chinese nukes. We learned to negotiate, sometimes with some success.
...if you say so... and what do you call yourself?
...and if the US does nothing? *Iran will have a nuke. *Iran's nuke umbrella will extend to Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah and Hamas. *Iran will accelerate the arming of terrorist groups with impunity. *Iran will destabilise other countries in the region in their quest for Shiite hegemony. *Israel will act at some point to defend itself from the Iranian octopus. *The entire region will be brought into a massive war, maybe even a nuclear war. *You'll be paying $20/gallon for gasoline, the world economy will be in tatters, the 3rd world will starve. *The US will be rueing the day it sat on the fence and did nothing.
What are you on Peter? It must be good, no onew is permitted to make nuclear weapons. Not being an NPT member does not mean certain attack. Look at Israel, North Korea, India, and Pakistan, no one attacks their nuke sites Stay off the drugs Peter and take a dose of reality. The worm turns.... Now the Americans are calling for a return to the 1967 borders. Soon they will lead the world call for 67 borders. Then, just like South Afrika, Israel will become a more civilized state;
Tony let me take this slowly for you as you seem to be missing something. Iran is a signatory to the NPT. The NPT forbids Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Israel is not a signatory to the NPT. Israel is not forbidden from developing nuclear weapons. The only double standard that exists here is with the country that signs the NPT and then tries to develop nuclear weapons. IRAN.
AA:"-how many wars has Iran started in the last century? ZERO" They will start the next one Alfred, nothing is more certain.
You're a bit of a redneck maoriboy. Do you really think the rest of the world has it wrong and Iran has it right? If Iran pulls out of the NPT it will be attacked... that's why it won't pull out of the NPT. It prefers the dishonest underhanded method of getting a nuke.
Obama, like Bush before him, has an obligation to sometimes inhabit the real world. He doesn't have the luxury of the delusions of a Cheney or Netanyahu or Lieberman. The US has to work within the framework of diplomacy because: * we don't have the troops to mount a credible threat, * we don't have the credit to wage another war, * we don't have the allies to move with us, * we would create more enemies by acting precipitously or militarily than by not doing anything, * we would endanger half a million Americans in the area, and * we could not assure success. These are objective conditions brought about by US foreign policy over decades, by primarily over the 8 years of the previous administration.
Russia, China,United States, Britain, France, and Germany,let them wallow like pigs in their own hypocritical shit.They deserve each other.
I just want to throw something out there: -how many wars has Iran started in the last century? ZERO -how many wars have all the other countries with nuclear weapons started? quite a few, especially Israel and the US. Ergo, Iran would theoretically deserve nukes much more than the countries that already have them. (no, selling weapons to Hezbollah doesn't count as starting wars. If you want to criticize that, take a peek at what Israel did with apartheid South Africa and the US with the Taliban in the Cold War. ahem.) history 1 - anti-Iran 0
Israel hasn't said that South Eastern Europe was in range of their rockets, Iran boasted that it was Get the difference?
...the clock ticks for thee.
The US is no more important. Its economy is in shambles and the dollar is headed in to a complete collapse. The US can not any more wage wars and it is gradually losing its influence over other countries while Iran is strengthening its relations with many major countries and building sophisticated weapons of its own. Today's IAEA message is very weak. It only tells the story about how weak the American influence over the world has become.
OyBama is as much a part of the problem as Iran!
Here is the difference.....Israel has not threatened to wipe Iran off the map. Infact, Israel has not threatened to wipe anyone off the map. Israel has had nukes for years.....never used them once. Is Iran capable of the same restraint? I doubt it. That nut case will sell to the lowest bidder and let them do his dirty work. It sad that I even have to explain this....
Of "Additional Protocol". Prove it, before endlessly repeating it.
This is just the latest in a long line of empty reassurances by Western and European governments.Iran has just been given another long term opportunity to continue with its nuclear enrichment in relative peace and quiet. Why would anyone see this as being a possitive step? Passing new sanctions, should they go forward, will allow the US to claim they have taken new steps in ensuring Iran is punished for its refusal to cooperate,allowing Iran to continue unabated.Iran sees each new Sanction as another year of progress.Now I fear that a military option is the only viable option and Isareli,US,and European leaders will have no one to blame but themselves.They let this happen.There will come a day when a decision must be made,I only pray that those who claim to lead us are capable of making that decision.2009 was a great year for Iran and it looks as though 2010 will be just as fruitful
Iran has not signed the Addional Protocol, so it is in its right not to abide with that. By a similar logic, Israel has not signed the NPT, so they are allowed to have nuclear weapons. You can't have it both ways. If Israel is not bound by treaties it did not sign, neither is Iran. Do as you would have others do unto you. Israel is in exactly the same position as Iran on non-declaration of nuclear sites, so what is good for the goose
Blundering fools is the best description for this vote. How can any self-respecting nation comply with this sort of provocation? There will now be no cooperation for months. I have noticed, incidentally, there does not seem to have been any Israeli response to the recent massive Iranian military manoeuvres designed to deal with an Israeli attack.
This doesn't meant that is a green light for a pre-emptive or defensive attack fgrom Israel. This is merely a slap on the wrist for not telling the world or its trigger happy neighbours that they were trying to develop nuclear enrichment in secret