Ahmadinejad's sentence added

Russia helped the UN Security Council maintain unity

The Iranians, increasingly counting on support from Russia and China and in recent days trying to enlist the help of less influential developing countries, have failed to split the UN Security Council . Despite heated debate, the 15 members of the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1747 on Saturday, March 24, imposing tougher sanctions on Tehran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment as long as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) remains doubtful about the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear war. nuclear program.

The fate of the resolution hung in the balance not so much because of the usual and eventually overcome disagreements between the five permanent members of the Security Council (Russia, USA, China, Great Britain, France), but because of the unexpected proposal of South Africa, which is chairing this month, to soften measures against Iran as much as possible . The Iranian brothers were supported by two more states that are now among the ten non-permanent members of the UN Security Council: Muslim Indonesia and Qatar demanded that the Middle East be mentioned in the preamble of the resolution as a region that should be free of nuclear weapons. This was a hint that it would be a good idea for the Security Council to deal with Israel, which many suspect of secretly possessing an atomic bomb.

However, the five leading powers easily convinced the others not to oppose the resolution, once again proving who is in charge at the United Nations, for which the countries of the so-called Third World are increasingly calling for reforms. The unity of the Security Council was maintained largely thanks to Russia's persistence in promoting its long-standing idea that sanctions against Iran should be tightened gradually so that they are not excessive, in line with the real state of affairs.

But Tehran, irritated by the increasing rapprochement between the United States and Russia over the issue of its nuclear dossier , did not properly appreciate Moscow's efforts. “Iran is extremely dissatisfied with the resolution, considering it a violation of international law, and perceives it as a conspiracy of leading states, in which Russia played an unseemly role,” Rajab Safarov, general director of the Russian Center for the Study of Modern Iran, who is well aware of the sentiments of Iranian leaders, told Vremya Novostey. .

At the same time, Viktor Mizin, an expert at the Russian Institute of Strategic Assessments and Analysis, in an interview with Vremya Novostey, considered it natural that Russia supported new anti-Iranian sanctions. According to him, “Iran has long taken advantage of Russia’s desire to have good relations with this important power of the Islamic world and its southern neighbor,” but now for Moscow “fears have come to the fore that a new nuclear power may emerge on our borders.” . Iran stubbornly did not make concessions, and in Moscow, according to our interlocutor, “irritation naturally grew due to the fact that its efforts were hanging in the air”: “Russia supported the new sanctions not as punishment for Iran, but as an unambiguous signal to its leadership, that he needs to reconsider his position.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, who attended Saturday's UN Security Council meeting, said that the Security Council was the victim of “abuse” and “manipulation” by a number of its members. “Pressure and intimidation will not change Iranian policy. Suspension of uranium enrichment is not a solution to the problem,” the minister emphasized, thus rejecting Moscow’s initiative to suspend enrichment at least temporarily. “The main national idea of ​​Iran is at stake - the development of the nuclear program. The Iranians did not trust Russia before, but now they are finally convinced that there are no reliable partners in achieving high technologies. Serious competition arises here, and Tehran will want to achieve independence in this area even faster,” Rajab Safarov explains the position of the Iranians.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was planning to come to New York to speak at the meeting, never arrived at the UN headquarters. His assistants explained this again as intrigues on the part of the Americans, who delayed issuing a visa until the last moment. However, it can be assumed that Tehran realized that the development of a tougher resolution could no longer be stopped, and against the backdrop of the predetermined result of the vote, the Iranian’s passionate speech would look ridiculous.

Resolution 1747 tightens, although not as sharply as the United States wanted, the sanctions against Iran already imposed at the end of last year. Let us recall that before this there was resolution 1737 of December 23, 2006 , which gave the Iranians 60 days to suspend uranium enrichment work.

Since Tehran did not meet the demands of the international community, it increased sanctions while giving the Iranians another 60 days. If this time the Iranians do not respond to calls to be prudent, then after the corresponding report by IAEA Director General Muhammad ElBaradei, even tougher measures await them. But if Tehran “verifiably” suspends enrichment work, then sanctions can be suspended before the expiration of two months.

In the meantime, the financial assets of 28 organizations and individuals involved in Iran's nuclear and missile programs will be frozen, as well as the foreign accounts of one of the largest Iranian banks, the state-owned Sepah. The UN Security Council also introduced a ban on arms exports from Iran, and this point was especially welcomed by US Deputy Secretary of State Nicholas Burns. According to him, the arms embargo means a ban on the transfer of Iranian weapons to the Lebanese group Hezbollah, the Palestinian Hamas movement, Syria and “any state or terrorist organization.”

As for Indonesia and Qatar's demand to hint at Israel in the resolution, the clause on the Middle East was included only as a reference to last year's resolution of the IAEA Board of Governors. It states that resolving Iran's nuclear issue "should contribute to transforming the Middle East into a region free of weapons of mass destruction, including their means of delivery."

A number of provisions of the resolution are advisory in nature. This applies, in particular, to arms supplies to Iran. The document calls on all countries to “exercise vigilance and restraint” in the supply of “any battle tanks, armored vehicles, large-caliber artillery systems, combat aircraft and helicopters, military vessels, missiles or missile systems” to Iran. We must be no less vigilant regarding the travel of high-ranking Iranian nuclear and missile scientists. Finally, the Security Council called on all states and international financial organizations not to provide loans and other types of financial assistance to Iran. These restrictions do not apply to humanitarian assistance programs to Iran or to previously awarded contracts.

So the UN Security Council decision does not prevent Russia from completing the construction of the nuclear power plant in Bushehr, which Moscow considers its diplomatic victory. Nevertheless, Rajab Safarov, analyzing the Iranian reaction to the joint actions of Russia, the United States and other members of the Security Council, in an interview with our newspaper, predicts “a decline in Russian-Iranian cooperation in all areas.” And this despite the fact that it was Moscow that ensured that the provisions of the resolution were formulated in such a way that, as Russia’s permanent representative to the UN Vitaly Churkin promised, “trade, economic and other cooperation with Iran would not be affected.” The diplomat explained, for example, that “it was Russia that insisted on the inclusion of a provision” that “payment for previously concluded contracts must be carried out without interference,” “even if certain Iranian organizations or individuals were on the sanctions list and their accounts were frozen.” .

Elena SUPONINA, Petr ISKENDEROV