Sanctions on Iran: what’s the point?
As I said in my previous post, the US National Intelligence Estimate report prove a number of things, such as the UN sanctions against Iran were based on a false premise and are illegal, that American intelligence assessment should never be trusted, and that Ahmadinejad was telling the truth, and that Bush deliberately misled the American public and the other permanent members of the UN Security Council about Iran nuclear programme. Now that Iran has effectively been give a clean bill of health, it’s not only war that is off the table, it’s meaningful sanctions too.
Ahmadinejad was right in his assessment:
This is a declaration of victory for the Iranian nation against the world powers over the nuclear issue
The four States most vociferously pushing the anti-Iranian agenda: America, Israel, Britain and France, have just had the wind knocked out of their sails. Bush can say, “Iran was dangerous. Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon,” but the legal justification for the UN Security Council has just evaporated; Iran has an inalienable right under the NPT to a civilian nuclear programme. The New York Times quotes a European official saying: “Officially, we will study the document carefully; unofficially, our efforts to build up momentum for another resolution are gone.”
Convincing the Chinese and Russians to back any meaningful sanctions will be impossible, the Chinese ambassador to the UN, Guangya Wang, has already said: “I think we all start from the presumption that now things have changed,” and the Russian Ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin said that the reports backs what Russia had always been saying: “there is no proof they are pursuing nuclear weapons.”
The Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov went even further pouring scorn on the claims that Iran had a nuclear weapons programme in 2003:
The data possessed by our American partners, or at least the data shown to us, give no reason to assume that Iran has ever pursued a military nuclear program.
Even before this announcement Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi said that he was going to oppose European sanction against Iran, which he had “no confidence” in, and believed would hurt Europe’s interest, not Iran’s. He pointed out that even if the EU did adopt sanctions against Iran, other countries won’t and last year he said that he didn’t believe Iran had any intention of developing the nuclear bomb: he was proved right.
It’s now not even likely that the EU will pass meaningful sanctions against Iran, not when the public know that Iran poses no threat and is acting within the terms of the NPT: what would be the point?
steph
amie
rob
@ lwtc
Yeah we do disagree but I didn’t say that Bush and Cheney didn’t want to attack Iran, they did since 2001 but they’ve been blocked every year.
I’m not interested in their rhetoric because I don’t believe it, it’s just designed for a domestic consumption or to persuade Europe to back sanctions. Israel is not capable of attacking Iran on their own and could face a massive retaliation. I think Olmert would have no chance of convincing the Israeli armed forces that attacking Iran was a good idea.
One neocon said that Bush and Cheney should do the next administration a favour and start talking to Iran.
@ Stef (15).
We’ll have to disagree on your opening point.
Re: Nuclear threat. Lets say Iran did get a bomb. It would not be stupid enough to launch it at someone, as it would be vaporised in retaliation, so even if the acidic toxic lies of the USUK and the Zionist entity did happen, there is still no threat!
To me, this shows the talk against Iran nuclear (non)issue is simply a deception.
It is sad though that Russia and China despite saying Iran has no bomb-issue, that they have supported 2 rounds of sanctions as a result. Bit nasty politics really.
But actually, I think in the light that the existing powers deliberately break the NPT by refusing to give up their nuclear weapons (in fact they go one many steps backward and upgrade their nuclear weapons and support/delivery systems) then there is a very strong case to be made that Iran should in fact actually try to develop a deterrent force. After all, isn’t that what every nuclear state says it’s arsenal is for???
Why aren’t all states entitled to that deterrent?
Why is the US backing off? Analysis of the situation is hard to conclude, as I conclude it’s a ploy, you conclude it’s because they cant. But why weren’t they backing off 2,6,12,24 months ago? And please note, only this single US report has provided a temporary stumbling block, The Zionist entity, the main protagonists for widespread killing in Iran, haven’t backed off one bit nor are their (manipulated) “intelligence” reports going to put Iran in a good light. They’ll be the ones that attack Iran.
@ Stef (16)
I agree most people haven’t bought the propaganda. Humanity for once has shown it’s isn’t 100% stupid. But there is a very important word in that question and it’s “alone”. I wonder what responses (from what one can reasonably presume is a strongly pro-Iranian readership!) wold be if the question added “supported by the US”
I believe the case has been made for there being a couple of ways for BuSh to wage war without approval of Congress, the most visible being the basis of the ‘War OF Terror”
Hizbollah did excellent in repelling the army of Zion. I read reports of one particular battle where the soldiers of Zion were panicking like rats on a sinking ship, and while their defeat pleased me enormously, It wasn’t enough to stop my never ending thoughts to the 1000+ they killed (not least the kids) and the destruction (inc. APM munitions) left.
If Santa don`t manage to reach on your Christmas … :
http://djiin.wordpress.com/2007/12/08/merry-christmas-santa-claus/
~~~
IRAN`s nuke weapons are in “israhell`s” deeds :
http://djiin.wordpress.com/2007/12/08/irans-nuke-weapons-are-in-israhells-deeds/
@ Commiedyan
Thats really funny.
have a look at Amie’s blog post anti-bush (password= let me see)
@ LWTC
From Press TV
Israel was defeated by Hezbollah, who they outnumbered 20-1 in 33 days.
@ lwtc
As I’ve said, Iran doesn’t believe an attack is on the cards. There is just no way that Bush could do this in the next 12 months, Congress wouldn’t allow it. Bush couldn’t mount a coup because he doesn’t have the military, the public, the House or the CIA behind him
Merkel and Sarkosy don’t support military action and Germany has so far refused to back sanctions.
The leading Scandinavian newspaper Helsinki Sanomat says:
The real issue that I think you’re missing here is why America is backing off – the military doens’t believe it can win! It has nothing to do with this intelligence report. This is a face saving exercise for the Republicans comming up to an election. Most of the people around him now have new masters.
Hi Steph.
I was never convinced that Bush was erect thinking about the blood of many more thousands of innocent people being slaughtered, this time being Iranians, because the Zionist propaganda tools, the MSM, persuaded me. Far from it. I drew the conclusion from doing a satisfying amount of research into US Imperialism and Israel from a political, economic and religious standpoint. That is why I still have the opinion Iran will still be attacked.
The Zionist media supported it, because of their usual hate of Muslims and people who don’t speak English but also as a way to try and drum up support. Things are far easier to do with a bunch of duped people standing behind you than they are without those people. (c.f. WMD) but they are not impossible to do without those same people either.
I’m not saying I’m right on the matter – nobody can say they know for sure unless you have the command of the armed forces under you or are capable of planting false flags to induce those commanders of force to act, and as I too have said before, I soncerely hope you are right and I am wrong.
I would suspect that Sun Tzu would give some good pointers on this.
I notice also that the price of oil is still v. high $88 pb and gold is stubbornly at $800 a few days after the NIE was released.
And we have heard NO commentary on ANY of the ‘warnings’ in the 2003-2007 interim or any rubbishing of this NIE. I conclude from this single fact that Bush will not harm the status of the NIE so that a new politicised NIE wrongly warning that Iran is a threat will carry equal clout which BuSh and the other sadistic slime will latch onto.
I have little reason to believe that BuSh will be able to handle his ejection from the White House easily. I think he has a power-freak complex. Assuming he wont declare martial law before he leaves, I think it’s likely this complex will see him strike Iran in some capacity.
We also have no progress on removing the Sanctions on Iran at this current time. Sanctions which if the NIE was sincerely being listened to would have been the subject of much scrutiny and would surely have ZERO legitimacy. In fact BuSh is calling for new sanctions!
ICH is still full of reports of BuSh falsely warning that Eye-ran is a threat and also today on the BBC I’ve just seen this…“German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy have said Iran continues to pose a threat.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7131703.stm
Sarkozy’s links with Israel have already been exposed and Merkel has that contemporary “perpetual guilt/enslavement syndrome” or ‘Gunthers disease’. Brown as we know is a pawn of the Israeli lobby, who will no doubt offer him sanctuary from his current woes if he pledged allegiance.
Thanks for providing such excellent discussions on your blog.
lwtc247
@ lwtc
Iran never thought it was likely, the pro Zionist media talking this up, would have gleefully supported an attack on Iran but who were there sources? The Bush admin.
@ lwtc
I’m sorry but I think the chances of Bush attacking Iran now are nil, and as I’ve said before, I’ve never thought they were high. Bush has being trying hard to sell this war but the American public don’t want to know and the Pentagon have told him it’s not even do-able.
Bushing saying Iran is dangerous means nothing, The Neo-cons are accusing the CIA of deliberately undermining him. No one that matters is listening. Russia and China have both said they don’t see the need for any other measures.
on Iran not being out of the woods yet…
<b?Iran still dangerous, insists Bush
5 Dec 2007,
Times of India
here: http://tinyurl.com/ypkqa3
taht meaning ‘that’ of course!
Sadly none of it matters. It was never the US taht was going to attack Iran in the first place. It is Israel taht will attack Iran (with US assistance of course) saying its I.S. (nobody can scruitinize it, unlike the US one; see 9-11, see Iraq) discovered some hidden program.
Iran retaliates, US and UK join in. No a ground war but severe naval and ariel one.
I so dearly want to be wrong but I’ve seen nothing to convince me so far, otherwise.
Anyone remember Blix/Ritter – No WMD yet, more time needed?
Joe Wilson – No Niger yellowcake procurement?
Intelligence community: No Prague meetings
What makes you all so confident that Bush and the rest of the killers in the US and UK actually care what this intelligence report says or will be handcuffed by its findings? What makes you think they wont make another report saying there IS evidence?
AlBaradei’s sacking was called for by Israel a few weeks back. They still say Iran will have enough Uranium for a bomb in a few years, Bush still says Iran is a threat.
Caution people! Caution!
@ Heather
I agree with all of that. It must be in the American national interest to restore diplomatic relations with Iran.
@ commiedyan
There must be some fall out – surely?!! (hoping)
@ Roberto
I think that’s something only Americans can do but I think Europe desperately needs to reconfigure our relationship with the US and the United Nations. I would like to see the European Union withdraw from the UN, especially in light of this fiasco.
@ i2tf
This post. I don’t agree that Iran will develop bomb, this a good rejoinder to that argument.
I had blogged about this before. Short summary I absolutely believe Iran has a right to a nuclear program.Russian support is no surprise since they have commercial and financial interests in working with Iran.They also have Iran more in their “back yard ” so they have a vested interest. I’m miffed other leaders didn’t look at that. I also don’t care if they build a bomb. I’d add that I believe Iran will attempt to make a bomb. That has as much to do with Israel having a hundred of them than anything else. The Nuclear Club is not a great one to belong to.
@alvarezgalloso..Will the pending election count ? Do you mean abandon democracy ? Theme related sarcasm ? I apologize if that is to off topic Steph.
Bush [as well as the Republicans and Democrats] should never be trusted. The world should exert pressure on America for a regime change.
Damn. Let’s see if the idiot suffers a political fallout from his nuclear hallucinations.
See, Bush knew all this when he gave that speech in October because he was told that Iran had no weapons program in August. I don’t see why he us even bothering with sanctions. They’re no threat to the US so we should being trying to mend diplomatic relations with Iran, they can help us get out of Iraq.