Iran Referred

[Annie]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060329/ts_nm/nuclear_iran_dc

UN Council powers agree on Iran deal

By Evelyn Leopold 19 minutes ago

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The five
U.N. Security Council permanent members agreed on Wednesday on a statement that would call on
Iran to suspend parts of its nuclear program that could be used to build weapons, Britain announced.

The new text, which makes concessions to Russia and China, is being referred to the full council for formal approval only hours before foreign ministers of the five powers and Germany meet in Berlin on Thursday to map out strategy on Iran.

The five veto-holding nations -- the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China -- have been negotiating for three weeks to complete the draft statement on how to rein in Iran's suspect programs.

"Our colleagues in the P-5 (permanent five) have reached an agreement on a text," Britain's U.N. ambassador, Emyr Jones Parry, announced to reporters.

Britain and France, backed by the United States, distributed a revised text late on Tuesday to all 15 Security Council members that made concessions to Russia and China. But it still called on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment efforts, which the West believes are a cover for bomb making.

Iran restarted its nuclear enrichment program earlier this year but insists its aim is to develop nuclear energy rather than weapons.

Jones Parry and French ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere, who drafted the text, backed by the United States, said one of Russia's key objections had been removed from the statement.

This was a provision, saying the council was responsible for international peace and security. Russia, in particular, fears such a statement may later be used as a basis for tougher action against Iran, including sanctions.

Negotiations have stretched over three weeks on the statement, which is nonbinding and threatens no punitive measures. But Russia, backed by China, is determined to prevent the possibility of future sanctions or other punitive measures against Iran and wants the
International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna to control the issue.

The IAEA referred the Iranian issue to the council on March 8 after Tehran resumed nuclear fuel work. This prompted European negotiators -- Germany, France and Britain -- to break off 2-1/2 years of talks.

The statement calls on IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei to report back on Iran's compliance within 30 days instead of the 14 days in the original text.

 

[theim]

The UN hath spoken! I sure feel better now!

 

[Annie]

The UN hath spoken! I sure feel better now!

I feel like it's IraqII. Can't wait for the resolutions.

 

[deaddude]

I am curious, what would you have them do. Seriously speaking what would your idea of an effective UN response be.

Just curious

 

[Annie]

I am curious, what would you have them do. Seriously speaking what would your idea of an effective UN response be.

Just curious

Seriously, the UN would bring all it's power down on Iran, to keep the US from acting unilaterally. They might actually be able to do that, but won't.

 

[deaddude]

What exactly does "all of the UN's power" entail? Sending in troops? Regime change? Harsh trade sanctions? All of the above?

 

[Annie]

What exactly does "all of the UN's power" entail? Sending in troops? Regime change? Harsh trade sanctions? All of the above?

Well in my way of thinking, their ability towards enforcement are nil, but that is where the US/coalitions could play a part. The strength possibilities of the UN lie in the idea that as a body, the world could come down on rogue nations. Not going to happen, not with an organization that has brought us the oil for food and rapists to guard and Syria in charge of human rights. Wish the world were different.

 

[deaddude]

The UN does tend to get bogged down in buracracy, however you did say that the UN could come down on Iran with a great deal of power (just that they won't), and in all actuallity I think that you are correct. The UN has the potential to flex the miltary capabilities of the US, the UK, and the Peoples Republic of China along with the economic capabilities of the US China and the whole of the European Union. This would require cooperation from each and everyone of those member countries (which is not likely).

Here is what I would like to see (there may well be a flood of problems with this idea but that is why I have you people to point them out to me.) UN peace keepers and funding sent in to help rebuild and stableize Iraq. This would alow the US military to divert manpower and resources to aiding Isrealies in finding and destroying Irans Nuclear Facilities via air strikes. Problem solved.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The UN does tend to get bogged down in buracracy, however you did say that the UN could come down on Iran with a great deal of power (just that they won't), and in all actuallity I think that you are correct. The UN has the potential to flex the miltary capabilities of the US, the UK, and the Peoples Republic of China along with the economic capabilities of the US China and the whole of the European Union. This would require cooperation from each and everyone of those member countries (which is not likely).

Here is what I would like to see (there may well be a flood of problems with this idea but that is why I have you people to point them out to me.) UN peace keepers and funding sent in to help rebuild and stableize Iraq. This would alow the US military to divert manpower and resources to aiding Isrealies in finding and destroying Irans Nuclear Facilities via air strikes. Problem solved.

:rotflmao:

 

[Annie]

The UN does tend to get bogged down in buracracy, however you did say that the UN could come down on Iran with a great deal of power (just that they won't), and in all actuallity I think that you are correct. The UN has the potential to flex the miltary capabilities of the US, the UK, and the Peoples Republic of China along with the economic capabilities of the US China and the whole of the European Union. This would require cooperation from each and everyone of those member countries (which is not likely).

Here is what I would like to see (there may well be a flood of problems with this idea but that is why I have you people to point them out to me.) UN peace keepers and funding sent in to help rebuild and stableize Iraq. This would alow the US military to divert manpower and resources to aiding Isrealies in finding and destroying Irans Nuclear Facilities via air strikes. Problem solved.

I hate to disagree with your basic points, but RWA is correct in his :rotflmao:

there are no UN peacekeepers, and the US is not putting blue helmets on our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan. We did it in Bosnia and are still there, with little being done to bring an end to the problems. The UN could never 'free' the US for something else, much less Iran. The most we could hope for from UN is an enforcement/sanctions regarding their resolutions-which never happens.

 

[deaddude]

:rotflmao:

Ah RWA Your critisisim is always so constructive and useful

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Ah RWA Your critisisim is always so constructive and useful

And your idea is so good and plausible.

 

[deaddude]

I hate to disagree with your basic points, but RWA is correct in his :rotflmao:

there are no UN peacekeepers, and the US is not putting blue helmets on our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan. We did it in Bosnia and are still there, with little being done to bring an end to the problems. The UN could never 'free' the US for something else, much less Iran. The most we could hope for from UN is an enforcement/sanctions regarding their resolutions-which never happens.

Makes sense. I thought there would be problems with it. So that leads to the next question what will the UN do if not apply sanctions to Iran. Probably lots of rhetoric with little end result.

Which leads to the more important (non rhetorical) question, what will the US do. Defying the UN will be nothing new to us, but another occupation seems unlikely.

 

[deaddude]

And your idea is so good and plausible.

Probably not, however if all you are going to do is laugh and dance, than you aren't helping formulate a better and more plausible idea.

 

[Annie]

Makes sense. I thought there would be problems with it. So that leads to the next question what will the UN do if not apply sanctions to Iran. Probably lots of rhetoric with little end result.

Which leads to the more important (non rhetorical) question, what will the US do. Defying the UN will be nothing new to us, but another occupation seems unlikely.

I really don't know. Occupation, effective regular bombing, tactical nukes? My guess, all would be on the table.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Probably not, however if all you are going to do is laugh and dance, than you aren't helping formulate a better and more plausible idea.

blah blah bleee blewwdy blah blah you

 

[Annie]

blah blah bleee blewwdy blah blah you

Why would you expect something different? After what you posted?

 

[Bonnie]

Well in my way of thinking, their ability towards enforcement are nil, but that is where the US/coalitions could play a part. The strength possibilities of the UN lie in the idea that as a body, the world could come down on rogue nations. Not going to happen, not with an organization that has brought us the oil for food and rapists to guard and Syria in charge of human rights. Wish the world were different.

That's exactly it Kathianne, the UN has no crediblilty and everything they do is seen merely as endless debate. Iran knows this, Hussein knew this, Kim Jong Il knows it.

 

[dilloduck]

That's exactly it Kathianne, the UN has no crediblilty and everything they do is seen merely as endless debate. Iran knows this, Hussein knew this, Kim Jong Il knows it.

Another dog and pony show---the UN is impotent.

 

[deaddude]

That's exactly it Kathianne, the UN has no crediblilty and everything they do is seen merely as endless debate. Iran knows this, Hussein knew this, Kim Jong Il knows it.

And we know it which is why we tend to ignore the UN pretty often. The UN needs to be seriously reformed or torn down and rebuilt. Essentially somthing needs to be done to root out the level of corruption involved in the oil for food scandal, and the amount of red tape needs to be seriously cut down. Also the UN needs to actually be capable of action as well as diplomacy.