ID :
127510
Sat, 06/12/2010 - 15:41
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://www.oananews.org//node/127510
The shortlink copeid
A predetermined outcome at the Security Council
TEHRAN, June 12 (MNA) -- The UN Security Council approved the fourth round of sanctions against Iran in a 12-2 vote on June 9, but Brazil and Turkey, which brokered a nuclear fuel swap deal with Iran in May, voted against the resolution.
With every day that passes, Iran’s sincerity, truthfulness, and logic in its nuclear activities become more apparent.
The decision by Brazil and Turkey to vote no to the sanctions resolutions speaks volumes.
The fact that Brazil, an ally of the United States in the Americas which is geographically very far from Iran and which has no significant cultural, religious, or ethnic links with the Iranian nation, voted against the resolution should come as a wake-up call for the U.S., its European allies, and all the other countries that are blindly following Washington in the campaign to punish Iran, even though its nuclear activities are conducted in the framework of international regulations.
Brazil and Turkey did not approve of the resolution because they do not believe Iran should be punished.
Yet, it appears that permanent members China and Russia and almost all of the non-permanent members of the Security Council voted for the resolution against their will.
Some do not dare to express their opposition to the U.S. while others are trying to create a balance between their interests and their approach toward the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program.
On December 3, 2009, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said, "We have no information that Iran is working on the creation of a nuclear weapon."
But now the Russians have changed their tune on sanctions.
In addition, Chinese officials, who resisted the calls for sanctions against Iran but finally backed down, have never said they believe that Iran intends to produce nuclear weapons and have called for Iran to expand its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The anti-Iran measures of the three other permanent members of the Security Council, the U.S., Britain, and France, which, unfortunately, have a great influence over many other countries, are being taken due to animosity and greediness.
Thus, the Security Council must produce convincing evidence to justify its policy toward Iran.
Iran’s commitment and adherence to the nuclear safeguards agreement is clear. It froze its uranium enrichment activities for a time to prove that its nuclear program is peaceful, took corrective measures for some shortcomings, allowed surprise inspections, and provided reasonable answers to all the IAEA’s questions.
But now that all the questions have been answered and Iran has become a standard-bearer in non-proliferation and the nuclear disarmament campaign, the U.S. has resorted to fabricating bogus nuclear weapons studies to put pressure on Iran.
Finally, as another goodwill gesture, Iran agreed to the nuclear fuel swap deal. But this goodwill gesture was not welcomed and instead Tehran was punished rather than rewarded.
All this shows that the West was never negotiating in good faith.
With every day that passes, Iran’s sincerity, truthfulness, and logic in its nuclear activities become more apparent.
The decision by Brazil and Turkey to vote no to the sanctions resolutions speaks volumes.
The fact that Brazil, an ally of the United States in the Americas which is geographically very far from Iran and which has no significant cultural, religious, or ethnic links with the Iranian nation, voted against the resolution should come as a wake-up call for the U.S., its European allies, and all the other countries that are blindly following Washington in the campaign to punish Iran, even though its nuclear activities are conducted in the framework of international regulations.
Brazil and Turkey did not approve of the resolution because they do not believe Iran should be punished.
Yet, it appears that permanent members China and Russia and almost all of the non-permanent members of the Security Council voted for the resolution against their will.
Some do not dare to express their opposition to the U.S. while others are trying to create a balance between their interests and their approach toward the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program.
On December 3, 2009, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said, "We have no information that Iran is working on the creation of a nuclear weapon."
But now the Russians have changed their tune on sanctions.
In addition, Chinese officials, who resisted the calls for sanctions against Iran but finally backed down, have never said they believe that Iran intends to produce nuclear weapons and have called for Iran to expand its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The anti-Iran measures of the three other permanent members of the Security Council, the U.S., Britain, and France, which, unfortunately, have a great influence over many other countries, are being taken due to animosity and greediness.
Thus, the Security Council must produce convincing evidence to justify its policy toward Iran.
Iran’s commitment and adherence to the nuclear safeguards agreement is clear. It froze its uranium enrichment activities for a time to prove that its nuclear program is peaceful, took corrective measures for some shortcomings, allowed surprise inspections, and provided reasonable answers to all the IAEA’s questions.
But now that all the questions have been answered and Iran has become a standard-bearer in non-proliferation and the nuclear disarmament campaign, the U.S. has resorted to fabricating bogus nuclear weapons studies to put pressure on Iran.
Finally, as another goodwill gesture, Iran agreed to the nuclear fuel swap deal. But this goodwill gesture was not welcomed and instead Tehran was punished rather than rewarded.
All this shows that the West was never negotiating in good faith.
