TMCnet News
Security Council remains stuck over statement on Iran nuke issue+(Japan Economic Newswire Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)NEW YORK, March 21_(Kyodo) _ The U.N. Security Council remained stalled Monday over the text of a statement on the Iranian nuclear situation. Monday's meetings lasted four and a half hours, starting with one attended by U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak, Foreign Ministry political directors John Sawers of Britain, Stanislas de Laboulaye of France, Michael Schaefer of Germany, and Chinese arms control director Zhang Yan. U.N. diplomats had described the meeting last week as one to cast an eye on a broader strategy to deal with Iran beyond the council statement, but the details of the text appeared to be a major part of the discussions. Further complicating matters Monday was an Associated Press report based on a letter allegedly sent by British political director Sawers to Burns, Schaefer and de Laboulaye. According to the AP report, the letter outlined a plan to resume negotiations with Iran, but with the threat of sanctions in a legally binding Security Council resolution if Tehran refuses to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency within the time frame the council statement dictated. The proposal would "ideally" be backed by Russia, China, the United States and the "EU-3" -- Britain, France and Germany, the report said. "Absolutely not," Burns said when asked by Kyodo News if Britain had proposed such negotiations. "That story is false." British foreign director Sawers, who chaired the meeting, said after the meeting that although it had been a good discussion, negotiations were a "continuing process" and would continue in New York, in Vienna where the IAEA is based, and between the capitals of council members. British Ambassador to the United Nations Emyr Jones Parry added that the council "built on the conclusions the ministers took in London in February and discussed the text of the proposed presidential statement in some detail. As a result of that, the French and the UK will now have another look at that text to see if we can define it a little bit more." Asked if he still wanted to see a statement released this week, Parry said, "Our desire remains the same. Whether or not we can execute it, we will see." "We all agree the Iranians have gone too far, that they should not have a nuclear weapons capability, that they should stand down in their nuclear program, and so the elements are there," Burns said. "But as so often in diplomacy we now search for the words to reflect that," Burns said, adding, "It may just take a couple more days." Chinese Ambassador to the United Nations Guangya Wang said that if the statement were to be "a short, brief, political statement," there would be an agreement. Discussions would continue in the council Tuesday, he said. Monday's meeting came after U.N. diplomats said last week there were signs of progress in reaching an agreement on a presidential statement regarding Iran's nuclear program. A major point of contention in the draft last week, which calls for Tehran to re-suspend its enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and comply with the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, was a call for Mohamed El-Baradei, IAEA's director general, to report to the Security Council within 14 days on whether Iran has demonstrated compliance. The number is written in brackets, which means that it is to be negotiated with the members. The issue of the time frame, as well as the possibility of individual sanctions, is a contentious one with China and Russia, both of whom support a more central role for the IAEA on the matter, as well as continuing diplomatic activity to deal with it. The text also urges Iran to "reconsider" its construction of a heavy-water reactor and ratify and implement the Additional Protocol for safeguards, which Iran signed in December 2003, and to implement transparent measures to cooperate with the IAEA. Britain and France, the co-authors of the elements, both signaled "flexibility" with the timing for Iran to comply with the IAEA last week. A statement issued by the president of the council requires approval from all 15 members. If the Security Council cannot reach a consensus on the statement, a legally binding resolution, requiring nine votes for approval, could be submitted to break the deadlock. Such a resolution can only be vetoed by one of the permanent Security Council members -- the United States, China, Russia, Britain and France. Iran says its nuclear program is aimed only at peaceful energy generation, but the United States and others allege Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. A special IAEA board meeting decided last month to report Iran to the Security Council due to its failure to comply with its obligations under an IAEA safeguards accord. |