UN Security Council may receive Iran complaint this month
UK premier told parliament earlier he aimed to secure international agreement to refer Iran to Security Council.
By News AgenciesThe UN Security Council may be asked to consider action against Iran this month after Tehran spurned international warnings and resumed nuclear fuel research, a key diplomat said on Wednesday.
An expected referral to the council from the governing board of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, would put the controversy in the hands of the 15-nation council, which could impose sanctions.
The timeline given by the diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, is the first concrete expectation after intensified statements of concern and a weekend protest to Iran by the five permanent council members - the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China.
An emergency session of nations on the IAEA governing board could be held within two weeks. This time the envoy expects a referral to the council, despite hesitations from China but less so from Russia.
Only days after the notes from the five powers telling Tehran not to proceed, Iran on Tuesday removed seals by the IAEA, the UN nuclear watchdog, at uranium enrichment facilities and resumed nuclear fuel research.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan, traveling with U.S. President George W. Bush on a brief trip to Kentucky, told reporters that if the European-led negotiations had run their course, then there was no other option but to refer to Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.
"I think that the Iranian regime has made another serious miscalculation by their latest actions, and we are engaged in some intensive diplomacy right now. We are talking with our European friends and others about how to move ahead and those discussions continue," McClellan said.
The U.S. State Department later said that it was now more likely than ever that Iran would be hauled before Security Council.
"It is more likely than ever that this will happen," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters, adding that first, "We still seek to change Iranian behavior through diplomatic channels."
If the issue comes to the Security Council, the first order of business would be to ask for another report from the IAEA, which might take several weeks, and then slowly attempt to ratchet up the pressure. The United States assumes the rotating Security Council presidency in February.
Sanctions, however, are difficult as China, at first reluctant to send the protest note to Iraq in Vienna, has usually been opposed to sanctions. Russia too is hesitant although it recently stepped up its criticisms of Tehran.
But being on the Security Council's agenda is serious for most countries and Iran has been trying to avoid this.
The main negotiations have been conducted by Germany, France and Britain on behalf of the European Union.
Iran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and aimed at producing electricity for its energy need. But it hid its nuclear program for nearly two decades and now pursues activities that U.S. and EU experts say have relevance for weapons development.
Blair: 'We don't rule out any measures at all' against IranBritish Prime Minister Tony Blair said earlier on Wednesday he aimed to get international agreement to refer Iran to the UN Security Council after it restarted research into nuclear fuel this week.
"I think the first thing to do is to secure agreement for a reference to the Security Council, that is indeed what the allies jointly decide as I think seems likely," Blair told parliament.
"Then .. we have to decide what measures to take and we obviously don't rule out any measures at all," he added.
Blair said Iran's decision to resume nuclear activities caused "real and serious" alarm across the world.
"The decision by Iran is very serious indeed," Blair said. "I do not think there is any point in people, or us, hiding our deep dismay at what Iran has decided to do."
The foreign ministers of Germany, France and Britain will meet in Berlin on Thursday to discuss the crisis caused by Iran's move to reactivate a nuclear fuel program mothballed under a November 2004 deal with the EU trio.
Also on Wednesday, German deputy foreign minister Gernot Erler said the European Union cannot continue negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program unless it pledges not to enrich uranium.
However, Erler cautioned on Deutschlandfunk radio against referring the dispute to the UN Security Council, saying it could further destabilize the Middle East.
"I don't know what the three foreign ministers will decide [at Thursday's meeting], but I believe they cannot continue to negotiate without an Iranian assurance that there will be no concrete enrichment activity," Erler said.
He cautioned that referring the matter to the Security Council would likely lead to the "threat of sanctions, and that can lead to an escalation that can get out of control."
"That is the risk, and that is how it was with the preparation for and the road to the Iraq war," said Erler. "That would be in no way reassuring given the other problems we currently have in the greater Middle East."
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
I hate to be the one to tell you this but you are certifiably an ignoramous and probably an anti-Semite. Have you ever in your life thought about why Israel exists? And was legally established by all nations? I don't think so.
Leave Iran alone! If you seriously care about a nuclear-free future, campaign against the nuclear weapons owned by ALL those countries which possess them in abunance. The world as a whole will not tolerate another Zionist-motivated attack. We are watching. We know who's driving the anti-Iran and anti-Syria agenda (and it isn't 'big oil'!) We are sick and tired of Zionist wars, Zionist assassinations, Zionist attacks on free speech, Zionist media-manipulation and other Zionist crimes. Israel SHOULD be "wiped off the map" - and replaced with a demcratic post-apartheid State - like what happened in South Africa.
US comes and kills well over 200 000 pople in iraq in order to seize the oil. Israel comes and seize the land of Palestine and makes genocide, and keep killing innocent people every day. And these two bullies both have nukes. Iran wants nuclear energy and not wapen. And nobody including IAEA could find anything that proves otherwise. To me Iraq plot all over again. Exuse of WMD for invasion of Iraq was. Murder of Haririe for Siria and this for Iran. The world is full of idiots that thinks the sun could be coverd with mud.
i have just read through these responses and have come away feeling decidedly dejected, so many advocates for more war. Well its not war, just a bit of bombing, thats ok, terrible that irans leader should suggest that israel be wiped off the map, we can all get very up in arms about that, but bombing the iranians to rid us of this perceived threat? oh thats ok, we can bomb the arabs because they wear those headresses and they talk all funny and well they dont like us. Maybe if Israel wasnt occuping palestinian land and conducting its own state terrorism on the surrounding countries then it wouldnt have so much to fear from its neighbours. The israelis are nervous for good reason, somewhere in their concience they must see the hyporcisy in their actions. A brief look at history proves Israel as anything but a saint, the lavon affair, the uss liberty, Israel is capable of attacking its own friends if the end goal is right.
Bush and Blair have long been lusting for Tehran's huge oil reserves. This even more so, since their paranoid pet Israel is terrified of a regional power resisting US/UK domination. Off late, there is the added temptation of trying to fix their failed re-colonialisation of Iraq by removing Iran as a support base for the Iraqi Resistance. Regaining control over Iran would open the door for Bush's Plan B for Iraq, splitting it up between its neighbours. The Shi'ite provinces could be added to Iran, the Sunnit provinces to Kuwait or Saudi-Arabia and the Kurdish province could become a Turkish controlled Kurdish state. (What a wounderful PR stunt the latter would be!) With or without such a split up, gaining control over Iran would get rid of America's Iraq head-ache. Europe, Russia and China are obviously not interested in letting Bush and Blair off the hook that easily, nor do they want to let them gain full control over the world's largest oil reserves.
The un is a toothless tiger...evryone and everybidy violates their resolutions........why should Iran fear them........Take sertious measures, an economic and miltary embargo on Iran, show them we mean business.....and if all else fails send in the Marines!
"The Islamic Republic of Iran is a sovereign nation" This issue isn't whether or not Iran is a sovereign nation. The issue is that Iran openly calls for the destruction of another sovereign nation. The international community isn't worried about Pakistan's nukes as they aren't inciting hatred against any other country. As soon as Iran overthrows its repressive and hateful mullahs, the Iranians won't be considered a threat either.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1681852,00.html This link from "the guardian", shows that Britain had willfuly supplied radioactive material to the madman in Iran. Greed is what has and is creating the stattering in the European relactance to take any action against the mad mullahs. Bush is only too happy to let them take care of the issue as he's lost the appetite for another heroic war. Besides,he's clearly shown that he's more interested in minding the rip with his Arabs than worrying about a Jewish vote. I'll venture also that the Iranian decision to go ahead today with breaking the seals to their Nuclear sites is directly tied to Mr.Sharon incapacity. Its a typical Iranian move, they use simple basic instincts as dictated by their president.
The iraninan are digging their grave with their own hand. bunch of idiots.
The problem is not Iranian nukes, after all India, Pakistan and Israel all have nukes. The problem is Iran threatening to wipe other countires off the map, plus Iran having nukes. It's a simple equation...they have promised to destroy other countries and are aquiring the means to do so.
The point of no return is here. Iran, the 2nd largest oil producer on our crude guzzling planet, is going nuclear as we speak and couldn't care less about the UN, the UE, Russia or China think or do. They have no qualms about launching a first attack on Tel Aviv the second their bombs go online. Hezbollah has thousands of Iranian supplied Katyushas ready to launch from Lebanon. Hamas has thousands of Iranian designed Kassams that are being retrofitted with new high grade explosives that are pouring in from Sinai. Hamas' Mashal just received his terror orders last month from Teheran during his whirlwind VIP tour of Iran. Syria has redesigned scuds with biological and chemical warheads and just signed an attack pact with Iran. The next model Shihab has Europe and the US in the crosshairs. There is a tiny window of opportunity to snuff out this lunacy that is "Revolutionary (read radical)" Iran before it embarks on the next phase of its scrorched earth radical Shiite madness.
Pakistan tested N Korea nuke:N Korea can laugh and feel ok to say we are stoping our program: N Korea then sold Nukes to Iran: Iran can laugh at others.
who,s right is it to tell people what they can or cant do in their own country and to the morons who think they know what is going on in the world and relish the sight of innocent people getting bombed cause they didnt do what we ordered them to do in their home land because of the greed of the few;it is best you keep your mouth shut and let everyone think you are a fool than to open it and to prove them right come out of that barbaric era you are living in and join the civilized
With iran pulling the seals off is a major concern to the world. If iran didn't sponsor terrorism than maybe the world would not look at them as a country that sponsors terror. However the remarks that Israel should be taken of the map and the holocaust issue is very disturbing to the rest of the world. Iran SHOULD WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE AND REALIZE THAT THE POWERS SEE EVERYTHING THEY DO. THEY WOULD BE MUCH MORE RESPECTED IF THEY SCRATCH THE NUKE ISSUE.
There is no hypocrisy involved. Israel is a democracy would only use nuclear weapons as a last resort for self defense. I doubt any reasonable persons hold the same opinion in regard to Iran.
Israel has a right to exist whether anti-Semites like it or not. I encourage Israel to use its whatever it has to on Iran to protect itself. Iran represents the biggest threat Israel has ever encountered and it does no good to listen to all these crybabies moaning about Iran's rights. It has no right to threaten Israel.
Written like a true inhabitant of Elbonia
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a sovereign nation and there are not reasons at all why other states have to interfere with its nuclear weapons program. It is amazing how biased is the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) about Israel's nuclear weapons program; nothing is discussed or condemned about the more than 200 nuclear warheads that the Jewish state already possesses. Israel practices a policy of hypocrisy by complaining about somebody else's nukes, while the Jewish nation keeps a significant nuclear arsenal. Jews and the State of Israel must remember what Abraham Lincoln once said: "If you once forfeit the confidence of your fellow citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem. It is true that you may fool all of the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all of the time; but you can?t fool all of the people all of the time" Perhaps they will realize that not everybody in this planet sympathizes with their hypocritical agenda.
Israel was invaded in 1947, 1967, 1973. In addition to these wars, in 1956 Israel was responding to Egyptian threats to blockade the Straits of Tiran and close the suez canal to Israeli traffic (Israel was also partly manipulated by the British) and in 1982, Israel was responding to attacks on its northern border which originated from Lebannon, so I don't think any fair minded student of history can state that there are countless examples of Israeli aggression and belligerency. Finally, you say that Iran hasn't threatened its neighbours- where have you been living for the 20 years, especially the last four weeks. Is saying that Israel should be wiped off the map not threatening a neighbour? Is denying the shoah not threatening? How about the statement of the 'moderate' Rafsanjani that it would take only one Islamic bomb (nuclear) to destroy the whole of Israel not threatening? You must be one (or a combination) of the following; 1. Anti-semetic. 2. Ignorant. 3. Asleep.
I would like to take issue with two of your assertions. First that Iran does not attack it's neighbours. This is only partially true. It has never begun a direct military conflict with one of it's neighbours however, it trains and operates terrorist factions who participate in military attacks against neighbouring countries, e.g. Israel, Iraq. Additionally Argentinian Judges have placed the blame for a bombing in Buenos Aires in 1995 squarely on the shoulders of Iranian intelligence. So no direct attacks on other countries but Iran funds and supports countless terror organisations who act on their behalf. This is a much safer strategy because if the attackers aren't wearing Iranian uniforms Iran can always claim to have nothing to do with it. Secondly you say "Israel has numerous examples of belligerent, aggressive strikes on their Muslim neighbors". Every war Israel has been involved in has been a defensive action, even the Lebannon war which most Israelis opposed. TBC
I find this whole business about Iran to be a huge hypocrisy. Why can Israel have nuclear weapons and other regimes have them, but Iran can't? In comparison, Iran has only had one modern major war (in self-defense, against Iraq), while Israel has numerous examples of belligerent, aggressive strikes on their Muslim neighbors. I don't buy the "Iran is a threat" mantra. So far, they haven't invaded or threatened anyone. Why the assumption that they will, and that they can't have nuclear weapons because of that? I'd think Iran has more to fear from its neighbors and the West. I find the Iranian theocratic regime to be condemnable and horrible, but that is no reason to apply different standards to them. If we can have nukes, so can they. And as long as they don't violate the UN Charter's prohibition on aggressive war (like we did in Iraq, and in other countless examples), they're a sovereign country in good standing (as far as foreign policy is concerned). Leave em alone.
everyone knows that the peace loving people of Iran and their revolutionary guards would not harm a fly who landed on a DUNG HEAP. Why is everyone so upset with Iran. They are a peaceful people. They do not interfere with their neighbours, they do not support terrorism, they are a country of honest hard working stiffs who only want nuclear power to light their cities and warm their hearths, and for no other or illegal purpose. Their Shahab 3 and 4 missiles are for peaceful use in the iranian space program where they hope tio send Ahmerdinejad to be the first nutbar on the moon. really folks. the world and Israel in particular has nothing to fear from a Nuclear Iran....absolutely nothing. temperatures today will reach 1700 Celsius, under an overcast sky with winds predcited to gust to 500 miles per hour. Long term forcast....not good
OK, is the EU populated by people who have cream cheese for brains or what? There is no longer anything to talk about here. The Iranians are laughing at the West and for good reason. It is time to put up or shut up. I say let's warm up the bombers and get this nasty business over with. And use nuclear weapons if needed to make it a total destruction of the threat.
"Read my lips" again