June 17, 2008
Gordon Brown’s mix-up on Iran sanctions
Diplomacy with Iran is difficult to follow at the best of times. Yesterday Gordon Brown added to the confusion by announcing sanctions on Iran that do not exist. Whatever his motive, it has not helped Britain’s relations with the US, the EU or Iran. Quite a feat.
Here is the background. Standing next to George W. Bush, the prime minister yesterday announced tough new EU sanctions on Iran.”We will take action today,” he said, “that will freeze the overseas assets of the biggest bank in Iran, the bank Melli.”
This delighted the US diplomats, who have been pushing the EU to take action against this bank for months. The sanctions were duly reported in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post (front page).
The big qualification to this is that there are no new sanctions in place. Bank Melli is working in exactly the same way today as it worked yesterday. It can use its assets in whatever way it likes. (Indeed, one imagines they will now be moving a lot of them to Dubai.) Its offices in London are open.
As one diplomat put it to me, Mr Brown “was wrong”. He made an incorrect statement. The problem is that the US delegation and the US press believed him. On the scale of diplomatic blunders, one delegation member put it as a “seven out of 10″.
What emerged yesterday is that the EU agreed (some weeks ago) on what action to take against Bank Melli. This is a significant step. But they have not agreed on when to take it. Downing St argue this is a formality and the sanctions will be imposed in coming weeks. Yet this gap is important, particularly as the EU has made a new offer to Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment programme in return for economic and political support. The Iranians have yet to respond. Mr Brown effectively punished Iran with the stick before Iran decided whether to take the carrot.
It is difficult to determine whether Mr Brown’s intervention has made a difference to the outcome of the talks with Iran. But it is hard to imagine the negotiators welcomed this surprise announcement, or relished explaining it to the Iranians. A decision like this is announced with the agreement of 27 EU foreign ministers, not after a UK/US bilateral. Unexpected moves like this do not help to build trust.
The British had some explaining to do to the American delegation too. Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser, was so certain the sanctions were imminent he told the White House “press gaggle” to expect an announcement after a meeting in Brussels.
“You’re going to hear, as the prime minister indicated, an expectation that out of…the EU foreign ministers meeting this afternoon…there will be an announcement of new sanctions on Iran,” he said. When asked whether the sanctions were in place, or still under negotiation, he said Mr Brown had told him they would “imposed sanctions” on Melli and examination of further oil and gas measures.
“He said it would come out of an EU foreign ministers meeting at 3pm, was what Brown said. That was his expectation, the prime minister’s expectation,” Mr Hadley said.
For the US this was an important breakthrough. For some time US diplomats have been pushing the UK to take unilateral action against Melli because the EU was dragging its feet. Full EU sanctions against this bank was a big boon to Mr Bush as he ended his farewell tour of Europe. Whenever the British officials put the US delegation straight and explained that Bank Melli had not had its assets frozen, it must have been quite a let down.
What went wrong?
What went wrong is that the nuclear issue is merely a pretext anyway, so no amount of Iranian concessions would ever suffice and the negotiations are merely for show. That is why repeated Iranian nuclear compromise offers to place limits on their nuclear program that exceed the requirements of the Additional Protocol and the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and which would have addressed any real concern about nuclear weapons proliferation, have been consistently ignored. The script requires these preliminary steps merely as a build-up to a pre-determined crisis. Whether Iran has nukes or not is largely irrelevant. The media, as usual, are playing along.
Posted by: hass | June 17th, 2008 at 1:23 pm | Report this commentOur governments (US/UK) tend to get along famously with nuclear-armed rogue states such as Pakistan and Israel. In fact we sell arms to these countries. We even supported and encouraged Iran’s nuclear program in the first place, and we’re not raising much of a fuss over Brazil or Argentina’s nuclear programmes either though they have a record of less cooperation with international inspectors than does Iran. I have to agree that the concern about nuclear weapons is probably a feint, intended to divert attention from or give cover to another agenda: to keep Iran down for the sake of Israel’s regional ambitions, and to dominate the world’s nuclear fuel markets in the future. The middle east is ruled by our unpopular repressive puppet regimes — Iran and syria the painful exceptions to our rule.
Posted by: Timmy | June 17th, 2008 at 2:59 pm | Report this commentIran has a natural right to harness nuclear technology, even for military purposes. Indeed, if Israel had the right to possess and stockpile hundreds of nuclear warheads, that are being trained at Muslim cities such as Cairo, Istanbul, Tehran and Damascus and probably Mecca and Medina as well, why on earth would Muslim states such as Iran, Egypt and Saudi Arabia not have such a right? After all, are Jewish nuclear bombs kosher?
Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister said “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” This is exactly the maxim being adopted by Israeli leaders who are spreading lies, disinformation and half-truths about Iran in order to get the madman in Washington D.C. and his gang of neocons and war criminals to attack another Muslim country on Israel’s behalf.
Posted by: Harold | June 17th, 2008 at 3:21 pm | Report this commentJudging by the first two comments above, everything is just one big conspiracy cooked up by the enemy of the world - the Anglo-Saxons. Quite depressing.
Posted by: Jon T | June 17th, 2008 at 3:39 pm | Report this commentMake that the first three posts above.
I pity the future of freedom in the world these guys are going to create.
Posted by: Jon T | June 17th, 2008 at 3:41 pm | Report this commentThe Western industrial nations have divided the world between the Privileged and the Unfortunates. The Privileged are allowed to commit any violent action, including murder, pre-emptive invasions, rendition, etc.. The Unfortunates are not allowed to defend themselves and must either succumb to dictates or, in one simple word: perish.
Posted by: Paul B | June 17th, 2008 at 5:19 pm | Report this commentAt last some truthfull comments ie to find the truth one must, like a policeman, look for motive. and i agree with the above comments..the west is beholden to oil and Israel..quite simple really. Everything is dressed upto fit in with this scheme. the rightwing media as usual (owned by a few) willingly go along by creating a fog so that no one can see.
Posted by: harvi | June 17th, 2008 at 5:34 pm | Report this commentIs there a Sanctions-Crime-Court, where sanctions-mongers can go justify the misery they cause to people of the world and the businesses of their own nations?
For a reality check on Iran, see
http://www.bibijon.org/iranimage/#Israel
Posted by: BiBiJon | June 17th, 2008 at 6:13 pm | Report this commentNot sure what’s “conspiratorial” about the fact that the West has tried to control the world’s energy resources (first oil, now apparently nuclear) This is historical fact. 85% of the fuel for Britain’s military fleets came from Iran prior to Mossadegh’s nationalization of Iran’s oil — which led to his overthrow and the re-installation of the Shah. Today, we have a “Nuclear Suppliers Group” that is undermining the Non-Proliferation Treaty’s explicit requirement for the sharing of nuclear technology “to the fullest extent possible” and “without discrimination”. Meanwhile, we have refused to abide by our own NPT obligations of nuclear disarmament. The hypocricy is blatant and palpable.
Posted by: JJSmith | June 17th, 2008 at 7:08 pm | Report this commentLets all bow down and take it as Israel and the Jewish billionaires of the world dictate how US and european foreign policy should be conducted.
Posted by: Fred J. | June 17th, 2008 at 7:39 pm | Report this commentTo those who do not like to hear people defend Irans rights, who cares.
These people are simply pro Israel or have bought the BS that Iran and the muslim world is out to dominate the world.( which are lies Israel has spread to further its own cause)
Nicely put: G. Brown is punishing with the stick before giving the carrot. Such statements indicate the hostility of US administration and its allies (UK, France, etc) with the Iranian people in particular and all other oppressed nations in general.
Posted by: Mike | June 17th, 2008 at 7:41 pm | Report this commentHas Iran followed a policy of ignoring the UN for 30 years while they occupy an area that (according to the vast majority of sovereign countries) belongs to the indigenous people?
No.
Does Iran have a record of preemptive war on 6 continents, massive, regionally-destabilizing covert activities, coup d’etats, and an archipelago of concentration camps spread across the globe?
No.
Has Iran done anything that would indicate that it would use a nuclear weapon against a civilian population like the United States did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
No.
The real issue with Iran is that its leaders have shown the temerity to control their own resources, which the corporate globalists and Washington plutocrats claim as their own.
Posted by: Robert | June 17th, 2008 at 7:54 pm | Report this commentHow is it possible that those who make war, drop bombs, make thousands of nuclear arms, torture in their jails and wiretap — that is to say, the biggest violators of human rights in the world — can try and impose their model on everyone else?
Posted by: Philip | June 17th, 2008 at 7:57 pm | Report this commentWell, why are we fooling ourselves?! Maybe this was just a nice, friendly gesture from Mr. Brown and the British Government (as there were sevral in the past) to the Islamic Republic in Iran that beware, they are soon coming after you to freeze your assets, so take them away and run with them as soon as possible, before that happens!!
I a not a conspiracy theorist, but there has been occasions in the past 29 years that the British Government have shown similar gestures towards the Islamic Republic.
Posted by: Pavaneh Pajoohesh | June 18th, 2008 at 3:14 am | Report this commentSomething not quite kosher about the comments above…..nice anglo saxon names, but I have my doubts….just too one sided. A bit of editorial input needed here I would think.
Posted by: T Wilkinson | June 18th, 2008 at 5:01 am | Report this comment[…] and Brussels alike last week (notwithstanding an unlucky hat-trick of comms mess-ups: see here, here and here). And on top of that, there’s been a definite pick-up of momentum within Whitehall […]
Posted by: Gordon’s growing international credibility : Global Dashboard | June 22nd, 2008 at 2:09 pm | Report this commentWhat makes everyone think that Iran does not have nuclear weapons already?
Posted by: Farid | June 27th, 2008 at 11:04 pm | Report this commentAfter all the first Iranian nuclear research facility was built in 1953 (by the USA).
In the 1970’s, under the dictatorship of the Shah. When Iran was part of another axis of evil (with Israel and apartheid South Africa) these three nations combined to secretly produce nuclear weapons. Since Israel and South Africa clearly succeeded why assume Iran didn’t too?
What makes everyone think that Iran does not have nuclear weapons already?
After all the first Iranian nuclear research facility was built in 1953 (by the USA).
In the 1970’s, under the dictatorship of the Shah. When Iran was part of another axis of evil (with Israel and apartheid South Africa) these three nations combined to secretly produce nuclear weapons. Since Israel and South Africa clearly succeeded why assume Iran didn’t too?
PS: with regard to Anglo-Saxon names, a 19th century British historians claimed that the name Saxon origated from the old Iranian word Saxa, and that the anglo-saxons themselves were originally and indo-iranian people of that name.
Posted by: Farid | June 27th, 2008 at 11:24 pm | Report this commenthttp://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Culture/impact/persian_origin_english.htm
What makes everyone think that Iran does not have nuclear weapons already?
After all the first Iranian nuclear research facility was built in 1953 (by the USA).
In the 1970’s, under the dictatorship of the Shah. When Iran was part of another axis of evil (with Israel and apartheid South Africa) these three nations combined to secretly produce nuclear weapons. Since Israel and South Africa clearly succeeded, why assume Iran didn’t too?
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/943729.html
PS: with regard to Anglo-Saxon names, 19th century British historians claimed that the name Saxon origated from the old Iranian word Saxa, and that the anglo-saxons themselves were originally and indo-iranian people of that name.
Posted by: Farid | June 27th, 2008 at 11:27 pm | Report this commenthttp://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Culture/impact/persian_origin_english.htm