World | Wed Apr 1, 2015 8:29am EDT 

Related:  <http://www.reuters.com/news/world> World,  
<http://www.reuters.com/places/russia> Russia,  
<http://www.reuters.com/subjects/united-nations> United Nations 


Ancient battle on UN Security Council 'trigger' bogs down Iran talks


LAUSANNE, Switzerland | By  
<http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=louis.charbonneau&;>
 Louis Charbonneau          

 

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (Reuters) - It is one of those concepts that is 
particularly odious to  <http://www.reuters.com/places/russia> Russia -- an 
automatic trigger mechanism under which the U.N. Security Council would be 
forced to do something.

Now a dispute over that issue threatens to wreck marathon negotiations on a 
preliminary political framework for a future comprehensive deal that would end 
the 12-year standoff over Iran's nuclear ambitions. The other major sticking 
point is Tehran's demands to continue pursuing nuclear centrifuge research and 
development 

The dispute is this. Negotiators from six world powers - the United States, 
Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China - and Iran are struggling to come up 
with plan under which Iran would curb its most sensitive nuclear activities for 
at least 10 years in exchange for a gradual end to United Nations, U.S. and 
European Union sanctions.

Suspending U.S. and EU financial and energy sanctions measures will be 
relatively easy, analysts and diplomats say. And such measures can be quickly 
reimposed in the event of non-compliance by Iran, Western officials close to 
the talks say.

It is a different matter with U.N. Security Council sanctions, a myriad of 
measures detailed in four legally binding resolutions from between 2006 and 
2010: a travel ban and asset freeze blacklist for individuals and entities, 
bans on trade in nuclear and missile technology, an arms embargo and other 
steps.

U.S. and European negotiators are willing to start suspending some U.N. 
sanctions if a deal is reached, possibly by initially removing some names from 
the U.N. blacklist. But they want any easing of U.N. sanctions to be 
automatically reversible -- negotiators call this a "snapback" -- if Tehran 
fails to comply with the terms of an agreement. And they will keep 
"proliferation-relevant" measures in place.

The problem is the snapback. It's the old battle of the "automatic trigger" 
mechanism for U.N. action that Russia has always opposed, because it would 
undermine its veto. Russia has never made any secret of its position on the 
issue.

Russia, which along with  <http://www.reuters.com/places/china> China, Britain, 
France and the United States is a veto-wielding permanent member of the 
15-nation Security Council. Traditionally Moscow guards its veto rights 
jealously, as do the other four. It is one of the main sources of Russia's 
leverage as a major global diplomatic power.

"Russia has never been ready to give up its veto power and the status that 
gives it," said Mark Fitzpatrick, of the International Institute for Strategic 
Studies in London.

"It doesn't want to forgo any future decision to play a role in either impeding 
American diplomacy or possibly playing a card positively in the future," he 
added. "They don’t want to give up leverage now that could be useful in the 
future."

It is a central issue in the case of Iran. If Tehran fails to comply with a 
nuclear agreement and Western powers decide that U.N. sanctions should be 
reimposed, if there is no trigger, a new Security Council resolution would be 
required. And sanctions resolutions can be a tough sell for Russia and China.

In such a case, Western diplomats say, Russia could, and most likely would, 
veto any attempt to restore U.N. sanctions on Iran. As a result, any so-called 
temporary relief involving U.N. nuclear sanctions or other U.N. measures would 
be permanent.

De facto permanence of U.N. sanctions relief would be a major problem for 
Republican-controlled Congress, who believe President Barack Obama's 
administration is going too far in offering possible sanctions relief to Tehran.

"Russia is now under U.S. and EU sanctions over its mischief in  
<http://www.reuters.com/places/ukraine> Ukraine and I can't see them being very 
helpful in the future on Iran if it breaks its obligations, something Iran has 
been known to do in the past," a Western official told Reuters.

U.S., British, French and German officials are pushing hard on the snapback 
issue. But Russia and Iran, backed by China, oppose automaticity. Western 
officials said they hoped for a compromise but offered no details on what a 
compromise formula could look like.

"U.N. lawyers have a lot of imagination and creativity," said one senior 
Western diplomat. "We have one solution in mind, but need to be sure the 
Russians are ok with it."

Past attempts by Western powers to insert automatic trigger clauses in 
resolutions on Iraq, Kosovo or Iran have failed in the face of Russian 
resistance.

The veto is vital for Moscow. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 
1991, the Russian Federation was eager to take over the permanent Soviet seat 
in the U.N. Security Council. Along with the status, Moscow inherited the 
considerable Soviet foreign debt, which proved to be a major burden in the late 
1990s when the Russian financial crisis erupted.

Over the years, Moscow has repeatedly used its veto power to protect allies, 
most recently in the case of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Russia, with 
China's support, has struck down three resolutions threatening Assad's 
government with sanctions and one calling for an International Criminal Court 
referral.

As Russia was moving to annex Ukraine's Black Sea territory of Crimea last 
year, Moscow vetoed a Security Council resolution that would have declared 
illegal an impending Crimean referendum on joining Russia. The result was that 
Crimea chose annexation, though Western powers condemned the vote.

(Additional reporting by  
<http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=john.irish&;> John 
Irish; Editing by  
<http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=giles.elgood&;> 
Giles Elgood)

-- 
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/01/us-iran-nuclear-russia-veto-idUSKBN0MS4AP20150401

Reply via email to