On Thursday, 35 nations board of United Nations Security Agencyadopted resolution against Iran for what was said'lack ofcooperation and failure to clarify mounting global concerns about itsnuclear program'.From 35 nations, only Cuba voted against and three other countriesabstained to vote, including Egypt. The rest all unanimously voted in favor,including China and Russia who are deemed close friends of Tehran.
The resolution angered Tehran officials and Ali Larijani, theparliament's spokesman said that such moves raises doubt about thebenefits of signatory of nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty."If the path taken by the West and the United States is the adoptionof resolutions and sanctions against Iran, then why are they seekingnegotiations between Iran and Western countries? However, thesecountries must be aware that the result of the negotiations ispredetermined with the adoption of such an attitude," he noted.
Seemingly, the Western countries are really disappointed of diplomaticmeans to get Islamic Republic to suspend its nuclear Program inexchange to political and economic incentives in a quantity that they were ready to pay. Indeed for a long period, they used to seriouslytry to persuade Tehran to avoid building nuclear plants for anypurposes because, due to lasting mistrust, they view an unarmed regime with nuclear weapons but only attaining the nuclear technology is also dangerous. In other words, if Iran remains committed to NPT andpractice the conditions in the treaty one by one, seemingly, that also is not acceptable for many Westerners as well as neighboring countries.Why?
The reason is clear. In such scenario, the country would becomepotentially dangerous. It can produce nuclear weapons in no time. Itis hard for Iran to become country like Japan. Presently, Japan hasthe potential to build nuclear weapons in no time, yet no country inthe globe has any problem with its uranium enrichment Program andnuclear plants. It is largely due to deep national aversion of nuclearweapons after the incidents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The casediffers with theological regime like Iran.
It does not have the fame of a responsible country. Officialsfrequently have opposed sensitive issues like rejection of theHolocaust, the propaganda theory of holding 9/11 attacks by circleswithin the US administration, commitment to wipe out Israel from theearth map. So, a country with a commitment to wipe out another is hardly possible, if not impossible, to be trusted for not using thenuclear technology for military purposes.
On the other hand, Tehran has signed NPT and according tointernational law it has the right to continue its uranium enrichment program for civilian purposes. Perhaps, no body ignores that Tehran has the right to continue its uranium enrichment program and acquire nuclear technology. This iswhat the international community maintains too. And according to thevery treaty, member countries have the right to establish nuclearplant for civil purpose, the thing which Tehran constantly claims.
And presently the international community does not have the right toorder the country to suspend its nuclear program if the countrycooperates closely with IAEA's observers, the thing which is the mostcontroversial issue. Though the International Atomic Energy Agency'sobservers frequently visit nuclear sites, but they cannot tell withthe confidence that the program is for peaceful purposes. If Tehran cooperates closely and clarify the dominant doubts, it has the right tocontinue the program without worry possible military attacks.
Thus, because of doubts and mistrust, the international community wants Tehran to suspend its program in exchange of receiving economicincentive packages.As I said it becomes along time that they have become disappointed ofconsecutive diplomatic failures.
They decided to mount pressure inhope to force the country change its stance, though officials still emphasize that doors towards negotiation are always open. But thereality shows that they are really disappointed of the regime and onlyforce and pressure can undermine its ambition for achieving nucleartechnology.
Therefore, they have decided to ratchet up pressure. The EuropeanUnion recently approved to intensify sanctions against the country. Itshould not be noticed that the European and US sanctions are different and much harsher than those of the United Nations.
The United Nationstoo has yet approved four rounds of sanctions.Anyhow, in the meeting held on the issue in Brussels days ago, allmembers agreed to ban new oil contract with Islamic Republic, and endthe existing contracts till next coming six months. The time periodwas considered largely due to countries like Greece and Italy, the twobiggest Iran's oil importers in the EU, and nudges them to approve the sanctions.
It becomes a long time that the US and EU tightens the belt ofsanctions around economic activities of Tehran. Neighbors are also worried about its nuclear program. The Wikileaks release clearly showed how the neighbors are worried as some Arableaders asked the United States to wage war against Tehran nuclear Program.
In such situation, they are ready to instigate theinternational community to take tougher stance and they play out theirown role. Because one of the major problem ahead of countries to forma united front against Islamic Republic was/ is its energy which, ifcut out of the global market, has the potential to confront manycountries with deep economic challenges.
The second thing refers to European Union's serious concerns aboutIran nuclear Program. Some of the EU members expressed inflammatoryremarks and warned about its nuclear program. This stance supportedlargely due to last years' IAEA's report about suspiciousness of the uranium enrichment program. So, it means that European countriesworried in extent that they are ready to pay high price to mountpressure on Iran to suspend its nuclear program.