Wednesday, June 09, 2010

Iran Laughs At Ineffectual UN 'Sanctions'

As expected, the UN came up with a yes vote on a fourth round of ineffectual sanctions that fell far short of the 'crippling sanctions' promised by a certain president and his Secretary of State:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and the foreign ministers of allied nations asked the European Union's chief diplomat to pursue talks with Iran at the "earliest possible opportunity," and President Obama asserted that "these sanctions do not close the door on diplomacy."

"We think that the sanctions send a kind of message to the entire Iranian leadership, which is quite diverse in their assessments and reactions, that there is still an opportunity for you to participate and to work with us," Clinton said after the 15-nation council adopted Resolution 1929 in 12-to-2 vote, with Brazil and Turkey casting no votes and Lebanon abstaining.

Clinton, traveling in Latin America, told reporters that the United States would move forcefully to ensure enforcement of the sanctions, which she said would make it easier to "slow down and interfere" with Iran's nuclear program.

Still, the resolution fell short of the "crippling sanctions" that she had pledged to impose on Iran a year ago, and the Obama administration was unable to secure a unanimous vote at the Security Council, as the Bush administration did on other sanctions resolutions on Iran.

The administration did succeed in preserving support from China and Russia, although only after assuring them that the measures would not impair their ability to continue trading with Tehran. {...}

The resolution will reinforce a range of existing economic, high-technology and military sanctions against Iran, encourage states to pursue Iranian vessels suspected of transporting banned materials and strengthen the U.N.'s capacity to monitor enforcement. It steps up pressure on banks and insurers to sever ties with Iranian entities linked to Iran's nuclear program. And it freezes the assets of various officials, including the head of the Iranian atomic energy agency, as well as of 40 entities linked to the nation's military elite.

What's really going on is that these are pretend sanctions with a lot of 'optional' enforcement that's still going to allow the Russians, China and Ahmadinejad's new best friends Brazil and Turkey and anyone else who wants to do business as usual with Tehran.

Nor are the Iranians taking this seriously in the least:

Iran dismissed new U.N. sanctions on Wednesday as "valueless," vowed to continue its nuclear work and warned it may reduce cooperation with the United Nations nuclear agency.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said during a visit to Tajikistan: "these (U.N.) resolutions have no is like a used handkerchief that should be thrown in the waste bin."

"Sanctions are falling on us from the left and the right. For us they are the same as pesky flies...We have patience and we will endure throughout all of this," he said in comments in Farsi translated into Russian.

Ahmadinejad is entirely correct. These sanctions are about as effective as a used Kleenex. So much for all those months of diplomacy and that 'unclenched fist'. But watch Obama and Hillary running around chest thumping about what a huge blow they have struck against the mullahs and their nukes program!

I almost think that Israel is the real target of today's business. Obama willuse this as an excuse to demand that Israel back off from attacking Iran's nuclear facilities 'to give the sanctions time to work.'

And if the Israelis comply, when the Mullahs pull off a successful nuclear test Obama can simply shrug, grin and say 'who knew?' And say that it's time for yet another round of effective diplomacy.

And if the deal goes down that way, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Obama use it as leverage to get Israel to give up it's own presumed nuclear exchange fro some spiffy and worthless UN 'guarantees'.

Fortunately, I doubt the Israelis are going to wait to be pushed into a corner like that. Obama may be clueless about the matter, but the Israelis see the issue as existential where they're concerned.

please helps me write more gooder!

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

It's not a good way just to have USA leading the world, the problem is that you have as in commercial terms only on offer, not good at all, let's Iran to propose a counter offer