Posted on 03/10/2006 6:14:59 PM PST by blam
Britain, US and France push for timetable to make Iran reveal atom secrets
By Anton La Guardia in Vienna
(Filed: 11/03/2006)
Britain, America and France were pushing last night for Iran to be given a quick timetable to come clean about its nuclear programme or face "targeted" United Nations sanctions.
Western countries have long sought to reassure sceptics that they only want a "gradual" process of building up pressure on Teheran to co-operate fully with nuclear inspectors. But at a meeting last night with Russia and China, the three western members of the UN Security Council were pushing for Iran to be given just a few weeks to comply.
Heavily-guarded Natanz uranium enrichment facility
As President George W. Bush said Iran posed a "grave national security concern", the five permanent Security Council members discussed a joint British-French draft "presidential statement", telling international nuclear inspectors to report within 14 days on Iran's co-operation. British officials have said they could accept a 30-day deadline. But one senior western source said: "We are eager to move forward. This is a matter of weeks, not months. "
If Iran does not comply with this political exhortation, the next step would be a formal resolution making full co-operation mandatory and strengthening the powers of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
This could be followed by "targeted sanctions" if Teheran still refuses to co-operate.
America and European countries are playing down talk of sanctions, for fear of alienating Russia, China and developing countries.
Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, hoped a diplomatic solution would be found, and would not discuss sanctions.
Teheran has so far responded defiantly to the moves, with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad saying Iran would not be "bullied".
What kind of reporting is this????
I can't believe we got France to go along with this.
L
Germany is no longer a member of the Security Council. These are the ten non-permanent members right now:
Argentina
Greece
Qatar
Congo
Japan
Slovakia
Denmark
Peru
Tanzania
Ghana
A relatively good alignment for U.S., actually.
does anyone really expect them to tell the trooooth?
Oh yeah, Iran is going to "come clean". Hasn't anyone learned anything about their ability to lie?
It all depends on what is offered to whom.
Votes on the UNSC are bought, everyone knows that.
Red6
The only serious impediment I can see going forward would be a Russian veto. China at worse would abstain, as is their custom in non-Chinese affairs. Granted, a Russian veto would be a really serious impediment, so I guess we'll see.
PS. In fact, Peru & Argentina are almost certainly in the bag as well. It's probably no accident that Peru's President is visiting Washington right now. Moreover, we just signed a free trade agreement with them. As for Argentina, just this week we also signed up for several dual projects with them, including as it so happens a nuclear test monitoring station.
Let me explain how quickly things turn.
Iraq resolution 2002-
Mexico’s position: We'll vote for you as long as we can discuss boarder issues right now.
Cameroon: Hey France/Germany, disagree with Iraq? Let's discuss trade. And Fischer Villepin did.
The Iraq issue was in reality a side bar conversation. It was no more than a crow-bar, leverage that is used by diplomats to cut up that pie a little better in their advantage. The issue of human rights, WMD, long range missiles, terror links, no fly zone violations, UN inspectors being thrown out for all practical purposes and and and was all secondary.
These votes turn into: “What can you do for me if…….” issues.
Just my opinion-
I don't disagree with you. The key caveat in my comments above was France. If France falls off the wagon then all bets are off. However, even that won't make too much difference unless they can take Germany along with them (even though Germany's no longer on the Council - they've got the cash). Germany was the real lynchpin last time around. It's very unlikely that Germany will follow France's lead this time, and actually not very likely at all that France will fall out of line on this one to begin with.
Please clarify the position of Denmark. Are they the Chair?
And these were the Security Council members in 2003:
Angola
Bulgaria
Cameroon
Chile
Germany
Guinea
Mexico
Pakistan
Spain
Syria
China
France
Russia
United Kingdom
United States
That was a far, far dicier lineup. Cameroon and Guinea are effectively French puppets in such matters. Schroeder & Chirac were joined at the hip. Syria was hopeless and Pakistan dicey at best. The only reliable members were Spain, Bulgaria, and Chile.
No. This month's Security Council President is Argentina. Here's the rest of the year.
March: Argentina
April: China
May: Congo
June: Denmark
July: France
August: Ghana
September: Greece
October: Japan
November: Peru
December: Qatar
Thank you very much! Some speculation gets bantered about and repeated as "fact" to the point of confusion. You perform a good service. Thanks again.
You're quite welcome! I do make mistakes, but I try to keep them few and far between. :)
PS. And the UK of course was a reliable vote in 2003, but I was referring to the non-permanent members above.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.