You have commented 340 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Security Council receives Iran draft
2006-05-04
Britain, France and the United States introduced a new UN Security Council resolution on Wednesday that could trigger sanctions against Iran unless it abandons uranium enrichment, despite objections from Russia and China. The text does not contain any sanctions but threatens to consider "further measures as may be necessary" to ensure Iran's compliance, a veiled way of saying the Western allies would attempt to enact sanctions if Tehran remained defiant.
Even though the League of Authoritarian Nations will still be against it.
It also calls on all nations to exercise vigilance in preventing the transfer of materials and technology "that could contribute to Iran's enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and missile programmes". The resolution is under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which makes it legally binding. It gives Iran another chance to comply with the council's demands prior to a deadline that has not yet been decided.
It just gives them more time to do what they've set out to do.
A Chapter 7 resolution allows sanctions or even war to enforce compliance but a separate resolution would be required to activate either step.
Posted by:Fred

#4  some quick notes.

China hasnt cast a veto since 1999, and has only done so on about 4 occasions since taking the seat from Taiwan.

Russia has last cast a veto in 2004, and has only cast a handful since the fall of the USSR.

On most occasions when a veto is cast, only one or two countries vetoes.

On ALL occasions in the history of the UN, when three powers vetoed together, the three powers were the US, the UK, and France.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2006-05-04 16:51  

#3  LH-Yep.

Old and new-relations all patched up.
Posted by: Jules   2006-05-04 15:12  

#2  further measures as may be necessary is stronger language than I had expected at this point.

I would have expected no explicit refer to sanctions, to minimize the likelihood of a veto.

Troubling thought - France WANTS Russia and China to veto, so they dont have to go through with sanctions. US wants Russia and China to veto, so we have a rationale to use military measures. Hmmmm.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2006-05-04 10:27  

#1  Do you feel a draft in here?
Posted by: Captain America   2006-05-04 01:58  

00:00