U.S. loses Iran arms embargo bid as Putin pushes summit to avoid nuclear deal showdown

By Michelle Nichols and Gabrielle Tétrault-Farber

 

FILE PHOTO: Russia's President Vladimir Putin attends a meeting on the state budget via a video conference call at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence outside Moscow, Russia July 16, 2020. Sputnik/Alexei Druzhinin/Kremlin via REUTERS

 

NEW YORK/MOSCOW (Reuters) - The United States lost a bid on Friday to extend a U.N. arms embargo on Iran as Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed a summit of world leaders to avoid "confrontation" over a U.S. threat to trigger a return of all U.N. sanctions on Tehran.

 

In a U.N. Security Council vote, Russia and China opposed extending the weapons ban, which is due to expire in October under a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers. Eleven members abstained, including France, Germany and Britain, while Washington and the Dominican Republic were the only yes votes.

 

"The Security Council's failure to act decisively in defense of international peace and security is inexcusable," U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement.

 

China's U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun said in a statement after the vote that the result "once again shows that unilateralism receives no support and bullying will fail."

 

The United States could now follow through on a threat to trigger a return of all U.N. sanctions on Iran using a provision in the nuclear deal, known as snapback, even though President Donald Trump abandoned the accord in 2018. Diplomats have said the United States could do this as early as next week, but would face a tough, messy battle.

 

"In the coming days, the United States will follow through on that promise to stop at nothing to extend the arms embargo," U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft said in a statement.

 

Diplomats have said such a move would put the fragile nuclear deal further at risk because Iran would lose a major incentive for limiting its nuclear activities. Iran already has breached parts of the nuclear deal in response to the U.S. withdrawal from the pact and unilateral sanctions.

 

Iran's U.N. Ambassador Majid Takht Ravanchi warned the United States against trying to trigger a return of sanctions.

 

"Imposition of any sanctions or restrictions on Iran by the Security Council will be met severely by Iran and our options are not limited. And the United States and any entity which may assist it or acquiesce in its illegal behavior will bear the full responsibility," he said in a statement.

 

'THE ISSUE IS URGENT'

 

Putin on Friday proposed a video summit with the United States and the remaining parties to the nuclear deal - Britain, France, China, Germany and Iran - to try to avoid further "confrontation and escalation" at the United Nations over Iran.

 

"The issue is urgent," Putin said in a statement, adding that the alternative was "only further escalation of tensions, increasing risk of conflict - such a scenario must be avoided."

 

Asked if he would take part, Trump told reporters, "I hear there's something, but I haven't been told of it yet." French President Emmanuel Macron is open to taking part in a video summit, the Elysee palace said.

 

The United States has argued that it can trigger a sanctions snapback because a U.N. Security Council resolution enshrining the nuclear deal named Washington as a participant. But the remaining parties to the deal are opposed to the move.

 

Putin said Russia, an ally of Iran in the Syrian civil war, remained fully committed to the nuclear deal and that the aim of a summit would be to outline steps aimed at avoiding "confrontation and escalation of the situation in the Security Council."

 

Trump has said he wants to negotiate a new deal with Iran that would prevent it from developing nuclear weapons and also curb its activities in the region and elsewhere. Trump, who has walked away from a series of international agreements, has dubbed the 2015 nuclear deal - reached under his predecessor Barack Obama - "the worst deal ever."

 

Diplomats have said several countries would argue that the United States legally could not activate a return of sanctions and therefore simply would not reimpose the measures on Iran themselves.

 

(Additional reporting by Alexandra Alper and Michel Rose; Writing by Alexander Marrow; Editing by Hugh Lawson, Alistair Bell and Will Dunham)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-08-15

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

So America hates Iran who apparently wants to "wipe Israel off the map" yet Iran are allies with Russia who are enemies of America yet have close ties with their "greatest ally", Israel. hmmmm

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

China's U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun said in a statement after the vote that the result "once again shows that unilateralism receives no support and bullying will fail."

That's rich coming from the Chinese.

You know the US are totally out of court when onto the Dominic Republic takes and notice of what they say....and the UK doesn't used its slave position to vote for the US. Now the ultimate hypocrisy from the US saying they are still involved in JCPOA having torn up the treaty in 2017 and will use their position as a party to JCPOA to snap back sanctions. Irrespective of this, China and the US will sell arms to Iran, including hi-tech S400s and the like.

I would observe that the US is over using sanctions. It will make them much less effective and as it is now seen that they are simply using sanctions to pursue vendettas, people will ignore them. The recent deal sell massive amounts of Iranian oil and gas via a new pipeline to the Chinese, not using dollars in the transaction, shows 

Didn't stop the US from seizing on the high seas millions of barrels of Iranian crude oil that were headed to Venezuela. As for the arms embargo, the US still maintains stringent economic sanctions against the Iranian regime, and no country or company in the world will be selling them a single bullet and risk American sanctions.

UK,  France,  China and all else all waiting for  early November 2020 outcome 

"Do nothing"  is the most appealing option now and in the weeks ahead. 

 

 

Saudi Arabia better start working real hard on getting their own Nuclear weapons. Iran has a longer enemies list than just Isreal in that neighborhood.

4 hours ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Didn't stop the US from seizing on the high seas millions of barrels of Iranian crude oil that were headed to Venezuela. As for the arms embargo, the US still maintains stringent economic sanctions against the Iranian regime, and no country or company in the world will be selling them a single bullet and risk American sanctions.

How sad that the USA is committing piracy on the high seas.

53 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

Saudi Arabia better start working real hard on getting their own Nuclear weapons. Iran has a longer enemies list than just Isreal in that neighborhood.

If Trump wins, then he will order the government to sell nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia.

 

OTOH if Biden/Kamala wins (and I hope that they do), there could be some big changes down the line.

10 hours ago, sscc said:

UK,  France,  China and all else all waiting for  early November 2020 outcome 

"Do nothing"  is the most appealing option now and in the weeks ahead. 

 

 

Is the US really a superpower any longer? It seems to me that the twisted crook Netanyahu, has Trump wrapped round his little finger. If you want to make the Middle East a nuclear free zone you should get rid of the Israeli ones that actually exist, rather than going into a total state of mindless idiocy fretting about the Iranians, who certainly don't have any, or the delivery systems. My god that Pompeo is a total slime ball.

Hows all that winning going.

 

US insults its allies and now cries when only that powerhouse dominican republic backs it.

 

America first, america alone.

I thought that Trumpee had this sown up as a done deal.

 

19 hours ago, billd766 said:

If Trump wins, then he will order the government to sell nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia.

 

OTOH if Biden/Kamala wins (and I hope that they do), there could be some big changes down the line.

 

There's already a stalled(?) effort selling USA nuclear tech and and hardware to KSA. Guess if that fails they could get it elsewhere, though. USA selling nuclear weapons to KSA? Nah, not gonna happen.

 

I wouldn't know what "big changes" (re Biden/Harris) are imagined, but in all probability, nothing too dramatic. More like going back to the same old, perhaps less fanning of flames.

13 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Is the US really a superpower any longer? It seems to me that the twisted crook Netanyahu, has Trump wrapped round his little finger. If you want to make the Middle East a nuclear free zone you should get rid of the Israeli ones that actually exist, rather than going into a total state of mindless idiocy fretting about the Iranians, who certainly don't have any, or the delivery systems. My god that Pompeo is a total slime ball.

You are correct, i would like to add on your opinion.  I believe the people that hold power are global, in that they care not for borders, nations and peoples.  Rather it is corporations and currencies they care about.  There is no doubt the US has the dominant military but this means little if the people that control it hate Americans.  As Netanyahu has stated "cyber is the real domain of power" there are only 2 companies that can produce high level cpu's, AMD and Intel, Intel as we speak is being shipped to israel and AMD is manufactured  at Taiwan Semi Conductors in Taiwan (a little to close to China for my liking).   America is getting back doored there is no doubt about this.  100 years from now people will be debating: was Trump a patriot or was he in on the America's demise.  I believe you have intuition and know the answer to this.

13 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Is the US really a superpower any longer? It seems to me that the twisted crook Netanyahu, has Trump wrapped round his little finger. If you want to make the Middle East a nuclear free zone you should get rid of the Israeli ones that actually exist, rather than going into a total state of mindless idiocy fretting about the Iranians, who certainly don't have any, or the delivery systems. My god that Pompeo is a total slime ball.

 

The "wrapped round his little finger" bit is not real. Might have been a short time, way back in the beginning of Trump's term, that it was so. Over time, there are more instances and issues Netanyahu had to walk back from, cover for being out of sync with the Trump administration etc. 

 

As far as I understand the arms embargo is more to do with conventional arms, as the nuclear part would be covered by both the NPT and the JCPOA. With regard to Iranian delivery systems, I think they have platforms that could potentially carry a nuclear warhead range-wise.

 

I wouldn't know that "getting rid" of Israel's nuclear arms would imply that neighboring countries (Iran and KSA being top candidates) wouldn't work toward acquiring some anyway.

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The "wrapped round his little finger" bit is not real. Might have been a short time, way back in the beginning of Trump's term, that it was so. Over time, there are more instances and issues Netanyahu had to walk back from, cover for being out of sync with the Trump administration etc. 

 

As far as I understand the arms embargo is more to do with conventional arms, as the nuclear part would be covered by both the NPT and the JCPOA. With regard to Iranian delivery systems, I think they have platforms that could potentially carry a nuclear warhead range-wise.

 

I wouldn't know that "getting rid" of Israel's nuclear arms would imply that neighboring countries (Iran and KSA being top candidates) wouldn't work toward acquiring some anyway.

Remind me again the name that new estate on the recently annexed Golan Heights is. 

3 minutes ago, Heppinger said:

Remind me again the name that new estate on the recently annexed Golan Heights is. 

 

Wouldn't know that 1981 is "recently", or that your faux question is relevant to the topic and my post.

 

Just now, Morch said:

 

Wouldn't know that 1981 is "recently", or that your faux question is relevant to the topic and my post.

 

Yes your correct, should have asked what is the estate called in the recently recognized annexation of the Golan Heights.  At least you looked it up though

Just now, Heppinger said:

Yes your correct, should have asked what is the estate called in the recently recognized annexation of the Golan Heights.  At least you looked it up though

 

Yawn. Still irrelevant to the topic or my post.

troll post/meme removed

It does not matter, the earth is so damaged already.