Nations sending Iran to Security Council (for Israel via the US, of course!):

Nations sending Iran to Security Council (for Israel via the US, of
course!):

By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer 23 minutes ago

World powers agreed Wednesday to send Iran back to the United Nations
Security Council for possible punishment, saying the clerical regime
has given no sign it means to negotiate seriously over its disputed
nuclear program.
The United States and other permanent members of the powerful U.N. body
said Iran has had long enough to say whether it will meet the world's
terms to open bargaining that would give Tehran economic and energy
incentives in exchange for giving up suspicious activities.
"The Iranians have given no indication at all that they are ready to
engage seriously on the substance of our proposals," French Foreign
Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said on behalf the United States,
France, Britain, Russia and China, the five permanent Security Council
members, plus Germany and the European Union.
Expressing "profound disappointment," the ministers said, "we have no
choice but to return to the United Nations Security Council" and resume
a course of possible punishment or coercion that the powers had set
aside in hopes of reaching a deal.
Any real punishment or coercion at the Security Council is a long way
off, but the group said it will seek an initial resolution requiring
Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment. Debate could begin as soon as
next week.
If Iran does not comply, the group said it would then seek harsher
action. The group's short statement did not give any specifics, but it
cited a section of the world body's charter that could open the door to
economic or other sanctions.
Though Russia and China signed on to Wednesday's statement, the two
traditional commercial partners of Iran have previously stated their
opposition to imposing the toughest of sanctions on Tehran.
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, the Bush administration's chief
negotiator on the Iran issue, said the United States is pleased by what
it called strong action by the Security Council group.
"This is a significant decision that frankly reflects the
disappointment and frustration of our countries over the lack of a
serious response."
The group said it could stop the Security Council actions at any time
should Iran cooperate. The U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency has already
told Iran it must put uranium enrichment and related disputed
activities on hold, and doing so is the condition for opening
negotiations on the incentives package presented to Iran last month.
If Iran agrees to the group's terms for negotiations, it would mean the
first high-level face-to-face talks between the United States and Iran
after more than a quarter century of estrangement.
Iran ruled out responding this week to international incentives to
suspend disputed portions of its nuclear program. The United States and
other nations wanted an answer by Wednesday on whether Iran would meet
terms to begin negotiations on a package of economic and energy
incentives for Iran in exchange for at least the short-term end to
Tehran's rapidly advancing program to enrich uranium.
"The indications are that Iran's response has been disappointing and
incomplete," Rice had reporters aboard her flight here.
Iran repeatedly has said it will not respond to the offer before
August.
The six countries had been pushing for an agreement before world
leaders meet this weekend in Russia for the Group of Eight summit of
leading industrial democracies.
Enrichment can produce fuel for a civilian reactor or fissile material
for a bomb. The U.S. and its allies suspect Iran's nuclear program is
cover for a weapons program, despite Tehran's repeated denials.
"If we go to the Security Council we'll take our time in terms of
putting together the best response," to make sure Iran understands that
it cannot continue to pursue enrichment while talks are ongoing, and
that it also understands it can still choose to bargain, Rice said.
The Security Council would also make clear the consequences of
rejecting the deal, Rice said

"Hawkish Israeli Lobby Wants War with Iran!"

http://baltimore.indymedia.org/newsw...2448/index.php



Scroll down to the 'Pro-Israel lobby under attack' UPI article at the
following URL:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=49800

Israel threatening to go beyond southern Lebanon - next step of 'A
Clean Break' coming soon?:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=55711

"NOMOREWARFORISRAEL" wrote in
ups.com:

Nations sending Iran to Security Council (for Israel via the US, of
course!):

Nah, some things just need to be done for the sake of
doing them. Splodin' an Ayatollah or two is one of those
opportunities that are just too good to pass up.

IBM