Security Council members were unable to resist tremendous US pressure and unanimously adopted a new resolution imposing stricter sanctions against Iran, Khaled Dawoud reports from the United Nations Last minute phone calls by US President George W Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have resulted in a sudden shift in the position of three non-permanent members of the UN Security Council -- South Africa, Indonesia and Qatar -- who agreed to join the consensus in adopting a new resolution imposing more sanctions against Iran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. Only 48 hours before the vote on Resolution 1747 on Saturday, Dumisani Kumalo, South Africa's representative and president of the Security Council for March, lashed out at the veto- yielding five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany who tabled the resolution, saying they refused to look into any of the amendments proposed by his country in order to make sure the stricter sanctions would not block the door to a negotiated settlement. Kumalo openly said he was "deceived and misled" by the six sponsors of the resolution. Encouraged by the defiance of the South Africans, Indonesia and Qatar earlier hinted they might abstain on or vote against the resolution if their views were not taken into consideration. The two countries said they wanted the new resolution to include in its operative paragraphs a statement making clear that dealing with the Iran issue should be a first step towards creating a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, in a clear reference to Israel which until today has refused to join the nuclear weapons Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT), or allow International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors to visit its nuclear installations that are believed to contain scores of nuclear bombs. The US vehemently rejected this request, and insisted that the resolution had to deal with Iran alone. After two intense days of negotiations, during which UN representatives clearly received instructions from their capitals, the United States agreed to include a paragraph in the preamble of 1747 that "recalled" a resolution adopted by the IAEA last year, "which states that a solution to the Iranian nuclear issue would contribute to global non-proliferation efforts and to realising the objective of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, including their means of delivery." Out of three pages of amendments introduced by South Africa, the sponsors of the resolution agreed to include only one paragraph, "reiterating" the determination of the Security Council to reinforce the authority of the IAEA "which is internationally recognised as having authority for verifying compliance with safeguards agreements, including the non-diversion of nuclear material for non-peaceful purposes." A diplomat who took part in the negotiations told Al-Ahram Weekly that in the last few hours before the vote, even the closest US partners, namely Britain and France, were not involved in efforts to convince South Africa, Indonesia and Qatar to change their stance. "The entire process was led by the United States alone. Even the US representative did not know what was going on and he was awaiting instructions from the State Department in Washington. The French and British were coming to us and asking what was going on," said the diplomat who did not want his name or country mentioned. Thus it was ironic to listen to the speeches delivered by representatives of South Africa, Indonesia and Qatar on Saturday ahead of voting in favour of the resolution. All three countries said they were not happy with the text, and that the sweeping sanctions it included disappointed them, going far beyond the declared US target of preventing Iran from possessing nuclear weapons. However, they still voted for it. "We are deeply saddened that the Security Council is being forced to impose new sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran," said Nasser Abdel-Aziz Al-Nasser, Qatar's representative at the Security Council. "Addressing non-proliferation issues, which is the basis for the positive vote to be cast by Qatar, should not be done selectively. In our view, the council is required to follow the same approach towards 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," he added in reference to Israel. Resolution 1747 imposes an embargo on Iranian weapons exports and calls upon all states "to exercise vigilance and restraint" in supplying Iran with heavy weapons. It also calls upon all states to monitor the movement of individuals engaged in Iran's nuclear activities, expands a list of Iranian individuals and entities who would be subjected to an asset freeze, and demands that states and financial institutions not provide Iran with any new grants, loans or financial assistance. Finally, in case Iran fails to comply with the request by the Security Council to suspend uranium enrichment in 60 days, the UN body will adopt further economic sanctions. UN diplomats pointed out that what added to fears that the United States was not just targeting Iran's nuclear activities, was the fact the new list of 28 entities and individuals annexed to Resolution 1747 that would be subject to an asset freeze and travel restrictions, included seven key leaders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRG) as well as three entities run by the IRG. The United States has repeatedly accused the IRG of backing groups like Lebanon's Hizbullah and Palestine's Hamas and Jihad. In recent months, Washington also charged that the IRG provided radical Shia groups in Iraq with sophisticated bombs that were used in targeting US occupation troops there. Following the unanimous vote, Sir Emyr Jones Parry, the UK representative read out a statement agreed by the six sponsors of the resolution, stating that the door remains open to suspend the sanctions if Iran agreed to suspend enrichment. Alejandro Wolf, the acting US representative at the UN, used his speech to repeatedly warn Iran that more sanctions would be adopted in two months if it did not comply. He also recalled statements made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in which he called for "wiping Israel off the map" said that was further proof that "Iran posed a threat to international peace and security." Iran's Ahmadinejad was supposed to take part in the Security Council vote in New York, but had to cancel plans at the last minute, apparently due to an intentional US delay in issuing him and his delegation the needed visas. Instead, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Motaki delivered a defiant speech in which he insisted that his country would never give up his country's right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. Speaking in Persian, and reading from a seven-page speech, Motaki said that, "if certain countries have pinned their hopes on the possibility that repeated resolutions would weaken the resolve of the great Iranian nation, they are once again subject to a catastrophic intelligence and analytical failure vis-à-vis the Iranian people's Islamic Revolution." He also charged that the US and its allies "have taken advantage of their substantial economic and political power to pressure and manipulate the Security Council to adopt three unwarranted resolutions [against Iran] within eight months." Referring to recent statements by former US representative at the UN, John Bolton, who admitted that his country intentionally delayed action at the Security Council during last year's Israeli aggression against Lebanon in order to give it time to destroy Hizbullah, Motaki said: "Who among you does not know -- and rest assured, international public opinion does know -- that for more than a month, two members of the council [the US and Britain], with full and prior knowledge of the Zionist regime's intention to commit aggression against Lebanon, prevented any decision in this council?" However, the main concern among diplomats at the council remained that the Bush administration would abuse the series of resolutions adopted against Iran in order to justify military action before he leaves the White House at the end of 2008. Asked by the Weekly what would prevent this, Russia's representative Vitally Chorkin said that the new resolution clearly stated that any new measures would only be limited to economic and diplomatic fields, "leaving no room for military action". But Russia and China also made such assurances about a similar Iraqi resolution before Bush invaded and occupied Iraq four years ago.
