VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB
DE RUCNDT #0251/01 0871549
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 281549Z MAR 07
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1620
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 0656
UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000251
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL UNSC KNNP IR
SUBJECT: UNSC/IRAN: RESOLUTION 1747 UPS THE SANCTIONS; FM
MOTTAKI CALLS COUNCIL ACTION "UNLAWFUL"
REF: STATE 37801
1. Summary. On March 24, the UN Security Council unanimously
adopted a second Chapter VII Security Council Resolution
imposing sanctions on Iran for its failure to comply with its
obligation to suspend its enrichment, reprocessing and heavy
water activities and cooperate fully with the IAEA. Iranian
FM Mottaki responded to the Council's action with a 45-minute
diatribe that blamed the Council, and in particular its
permanent members, for decades of anti-Iranian actions.
Mottaki said suspension "was not an option". End Summary.
2. The Security Council voted unanimously on Saturday, March
24 to adopt resolution 1747 and impose additional sanctions
on the Government of Iran for its failure to comply with
previous Security Council resolutions, including resolutions
1696 and 1737, and the requirements of the IAEA Board of
Governors. In addition to imposing travel notification and
financial controls on an additional fifteen individuals and
thirteen entities linked to Iran's military, nuclear or
missile activities, resolution 1747 imposes a mandatory ban
on the export or transfer of any arms or related materiel
from Iran. The resolution maintains the structure of
resolution 1737, including a mandatory requirement for Iran
to suspend enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and
work on heavy-water related projects. It calls for a report
from the IAEA Director General within sixty days on whether
Iran has suspended its proliferation-sensitive activities,
and makes clear the Council's intent to adopt additional
measures at that time should Iran remain in non-compliance.
The full text of the resolution has been transmitted reftel.
Video coverage of the Council meeting can be found via the UN
website (http://www.un.org/webcast).
The four skeptics speak first...
... but end up in the yes column
--------------------------------
3. Indonesia, Qatar, Congo and South Africa spoke prior to
the vote. Each of these four delegations had expressed
concern about the draft resolution during the negotiations,
and Indonesia, Qatar and South Africa had proposed
amendments. Each of the four statements sounded similar
themes, noting the need for implementation of "all aspects"
of the NPT, including the disarmament provisions in Article
VI, and calling for a negotiated solution to the issue.
Qatar, which had sought language in the resolution calling
for the establishment of a "zone free of weapons of mass
destruction" in the Middle East, said the Council should use
the "same approach" to address non-proliferation issues with
"all countries that do not comply with their obligations
under the NPT, as well as towards those that do not respect
it in the first place." Qatar's Al-Nasser added, "We do not
doubt Iran's genuine intentions as regards the peaceful
purposes of its nuclear program." Of the four who spoke
prior to the resolution, only Congo explicitly called on Iran
to suspend its enrichment programs as called for by the
Council.
P-5 and others call on Iran to comply
-------------------------------------
4. Following the unanimous adoption of resolution 1747, UK PR
Jones Parry read the ministerial statement issued by the P-5
and Germany, which reaffirmed that the proposal made by the
six governments to Iran in June 2006 remains on the table as
the basis for a negotiated solution. The UK and France, in
their national statements, each emphasized the need for Iran
to make the choice to return to the path of negotiations via
suspension of its enrichment and reprocessing activities.
Both noted that the measures imposed by the Council were
incremental, proportionate and reversible, should Iran comply.
5. On behalf of the U.S., Ambassador Wolff said that the
Council was forced to take further measures against Iran
given the failure of the Iranian leadership to take the steps
necessary to overcome "more than twenty years of deception"
of the IAEA and the international community. The Council, he
said, would continue to act in a "careful and deliberate
manner" but needed to address Iran's failure to comply with
the demands of Council resolutions. The measures were aimed
at "Iranian institutions and officials that support Iran's
nuclear and missile programs" and "encourage the leadership
of Iran to choose a different path." Wolff rejected Iranian
claims that the Council sought to deny Iran access to
peaceful nuclear energy, noting that the six governments had
offered Iran help with civilian nuclear power in exchange for
the suspension of its proliferation-sensitive activities. He
said the international community should be "deeply troubled"
by Iran's rejection of this offer.
6. Russian PR Churkin said the Council's action had "sent an
unequivocal message to Tehran" on the need for full
cooperation with the Council and the IAEA. "It is clear that
the way the situation develops in the future will depend
largely on Iran's actions." Churkin emphasized that the
adoption of the resolution under Article 41 of the UN
Charter, "precludes the possibility of the use of force" to
resolve the situation.
7. China, said PR Wang, is "disappointed that the Iranian
side has failed to respond positively to the requests of the
of the IAEA and the Security Council." A solution to the
issue "requires all-around diplomatic efforts, especially
diplomatic efforts outside the Security Council." Wang added
all parties needed to "show full flexibility" to find a
negotiated solution. "The time-out proposal by IAEA DG El
Baradei and the establishment of a mechanism for talks that
include Iran also deserve our consideration."
8. Panama, Slovakia, Belgium and Ghana also spoke.
Panamanian PR Arias called for the resumption of negotiations
"by all parties" to resolve the conflict over Iran's nuclear
program. Slovak DPR Matulay called on Iran to provide
"maximum cooperation and transparency" and noted Slovakia's
support for targeted sanctions measures given "Iran's
continued failure to comply." Belgium PR Verbeke said that
his country "deplores the lack of cooperation and
transparency" by Iran. Ghana, said PR Effah-Apenteng, voted
for the resolution "because we believe in the
non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction," but called
on the Council to "pay attention to the issue of selectivity"
in attempting to check the spread of WMD.
Iran tries to change the subject...
... and remains defiant
-----------------------------------
9. Iranian Foreign Minister Mottaki had arrived at the UN
prior to the beginning of the Council session. However, he
and other members of the Iranian delegation did not enter the
Council until it was time for Iran to speak. (A lower-level
official had occupied the Iranian seat at the table during
the vote and the Council members' statements, presumably to
avoid being at the table when fifteen hands went up in
support of the resolution.) Mottaki delivered a forty-five
minute statement that declared the Council's resolutions on
Iran "unlawful, unnecessary and unjustifiable." The Security
Council, he said, "cannot pressure countries into submitting
either to its decisions taken in bad faith or to its demands
negating the fundamental purposes and principles of the UN
Charter." With regard to the Council's demand that Iran
suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities, Mottaki
said, "Suspension is neither an option nor a solution."
10. The core of Mottaki's statement was an attack on the
Security Council and, in particular, its Permanent Members.
Mottaki claimed that the Council sided against Iran during
the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. If Iran had complied with
the Council resolutions then, Mottaki argued, "We would still
be begging the Council's then-sweetheart, President Saddam
Hussein, to return our territory." He claimed that Iraq's
war against Iran "was designed by certain permanent members
and implemented through an endless supply of weapons and
petrodollars, missiles, Mirage and Super Etandard aircraft,
intelligence support and promises from the former United
States Secretary of Defense." Referring to the July 2006
Israel-Lebanon conflict, Mottaki claimed that "for more than
a month, two members of this Council, with full and prior
knowledge of the Zionist regime's intention to commit
aggression against Lebanon, prevented any decision in this
Council ... to put an end to that regime's atrocities."
11. In defense of Iran's nuclear program, Mottaki focused on
language in the recent IAEA report that said that the IAEA
"is able to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear
material in Iran." He did not address the many other aspects
of the report that criticized Iran's cooperation with the
IAEA or the IAEA's inability to provide assurances about the
peaceful nature of Iran's program. (The full text of
Mottaki's statement, along with the rest of the Council's
deliberations, is available via the UN document system
(document S/PV.5647).)
WOLFF