Shame, Not Sanctions, Initial UN Goal for Iran

Evelyn Leopold, Reuters:

If Europeans and the United States succeed in referring Iran's nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council, sanctions or other enforcement actions would be a long way off, if imposed at all. But at a minimum the West is counting on a political and diplomatic embarrassment for Tehran, which this month removed U.N. inspection seals on uranium enrichment equipment, deepening suspicions it is seeking nuclear arms. READ MORE

Otherwise Tehran would not be fighting a referral, diplomats and other experts say.

"Iranians are very proud and don't want to become a pariah state like North Korea," said Edward Luck, a Columbia University professor specializing in U.N. affairs. "I think they would find it very unattractive."

Russia, and especially China, are against imposing penalties on Iran, although Moscow has moved closer to Western views on a referral to the Security Council. Both nations, along with the United States, France and Britain, have veto power in the 15-member council.

Even if no oil embargo or blanket sanctions are enacted, the council could impose an arms embargo, a travel freeze on individuals or call on countries to reduce diplomatic ties, Luck told Reuters.

Other possibilities include granting the IAEA enhanced powers to conduct intrusive inspections in Iran.

Council diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case was still pending, envision a step by step approach that would slowly ratchet up pressure.

The first move probably would be an appeal to Iran to abide by recommendations from the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, which has sent inspectors to Iran. The council would also ask IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei to submit a report within a month.

RACHET UP PRESSURE

"Even a debate in the council, perhaps at the foreign minister's level, raises the ante and political tensions in capitals around the world that Iran is not meeting its obligations and appears to be developing an independent nuclear capability. It's not good news for Iran," Luck said.

Nevertheless there are risks involved, as in the case of North Korea, whose nuclear arms program was considered by the council in early 2003 but failed to lead to any U.N. action, although it spurred China into renewing six-party talks.

Iran has said its program is designed to produce energy only, its right under the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. But the scale of the program, built in secret over 18 years, has fed suspicions that it is a cover for weapons.

For U.S. Ambassador John Bolton, getting Iran on the Security Council agenda is itself a priority. "I think the issue of Iran's nuclear weapons program is a classic threat to international peace and security," Bolton said on Tuesday.

"This will be a test for the Council, and appropriately so, because the Iranian pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile delivery systems threatens their region and threatens the world as a whole," he told reporters.

The timing could not be better should the IAEA governing board at its next meeting make a decision on the Security Council. Bolton takes over the Security Council's rotating presidency in February and can influence the agenda.

Iran says its program is designed solely to generate electricity. But the United States is convinced Tehran is researching nuclear fuel for weapons-grade programs.

So far, the IAEA has not found proof of a weapons program, but Iran's cooperation with inspectors has been shaky, and many questions remain unanswered.

Do we really think Iran is afraid of being "embarrassed?"