iran etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
iran etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster

11 Nisan 2013 Perşembe

Iran, North Korea, Syria block U.N. arms trade treaty


The United Nations logo is displayed on a door at U.N. headquarters in New York February 26, 2011. REUTERS/ Joshua Lott
UNITED NATIONS | Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:14pm EDT
(Reuters) - IranSyria and North Korea on Friday prevented the adoption of the first international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global conventional arms trade, complaining that it was flawed and failed to ban weapons sales to rebel groups.
To get around the blockade, British U.N. Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant sent the draft treaty to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and asked him on behalf of MexicoAustralia and a number of others to put it to a swift vote in the General Assembly.
U.N. diplomats said the 193-nation General Assembly could put the draft treaty to a vote as early as Tuesday.
"A good, strong treaty has been blocked," said Britain's chief delegate, Joanne Adamson. "Most people in the world want regulation and those are the voices that need to be heard."
"This is success deferred," she added.
The head of the U.S. delegation, Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman, told a group of reporters, "We look forward to this treaty being adopted very soon by the United Nations General Assembly." He declined to predict the result of a vote but said it would be a "substantial majority" in favor.
U.N. member states began meeting last week in a final push to end years of discussions and hammer out a binding international treaty to end the lack of regulation over cross-border conventional arms sales.
Arms control activists and human rights groups say a treaty is needed to halt the uncontrolled flow of arms and ammunition that they say fuels wars, atrocities and rights abuses.
Delegates to the treaty-drafting conference said on Wednesday they were close to a deal to approve the treaty, but cautioned that Iran and other countries might attempt to block it. Iran, Syriaand North Korea did just that, blocking the required consensus for it to pass.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had told Iran's Press TV that Tehran supported the arms trade treaty. But Iranian U.N. Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee told the conference that he could not accept the treaty in its current form.
"The achievement of such a treaty has been rendered out of reach due to many legal flaws and loopholes," he said. "It is a matter of deep regret that genuine efforts of many countries for a robust, balanced and non-discriminatory treaty were ignored."
One of those flaws was its failure to ban sales of weapons to groups that commit "acts of aggression," ostensibly referring to rebel groups, he said. The current draft does not ban transfers to armed groups but says all arms transfers should be subjected to rigorous risk and human rights assessments first.
'HELD HOSTAGE'
Syrian Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari echoed the Iranian concerns, saying he also objected to the fact that it does not prohibit weapons transfers to rebel groups.
"Unfortunately our national concerns were not taken into consideration," he said. "It can't be accepted by my country."
North Korea's delegate voiced similar complaints, suggesting it was a discriminatory treaty: "This (treaty) is not balanced."
Iran, which is under a U.N. arms embargo over its nuclear program, is eager to ensure its arms imports and exports are not curtailed, diplomats said. Syria is in a two-year-old civil war and hopes Russian and Iranian arms keep flowing in, they added.
North Korea is also under a U.N. arms embargo due to its nuclear weapons and missile programs.
Russia and China made clear they would not have blocked it but voiced serious reservations about the text and its failure to get consensus. A Russian delegate told the conference that Moscow would have to think hard about signing it if it were approved. India, Pakistan and others complained that the treaty favors exporters and creates disadvantages for arms importers.
If adopted by the General Assembly, the pact will need to be signed and ratified by at least 50 states to enter into force.
Several diplomats and human rights groups that have lobbied hard in favor of the treaty complained that the requirement of consensus for the pact to pass was something that the United States insisted on years ago. That rule gave every U.N. member state the ability to veto the draft treaty.
"The world has been held hostage by three states," said Anna Macdonald, an arms control expert at humanitarian agency Oxfam. "We have known all along that the consensus process was deeply flawed and today we see it is actually dysfunctional."
"Countries such as Iran, Syria and DPRK (North Korea) should not be allowed to dictate to the rest of the world how the sale of weapons should be regulated," she added.
The point of an arms trade treaty is to set standards for all cross-border transfers of conventional weapons. It would also create binding requirements for states to review all cross-border arms contracts to ensure arms will not be used in human rights abuses, terrorism or violations of humanitarian law.
The main reason the arms trade talks took place at all is that the United States - the world's biggest arms exporter - reversed U.S. policy on the issue after President Barack Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support an arms treaty.
Washington demanded that the conference be run on the basis of consensus because it wanted to be able to block any treaty that undermined the U.S. constitutional right to bear arms, a sensitive political issue in the United States. Countryman said the draft treaty did not undermine U.S. rights.
The National Rifle Association, a powerful U.S. pro-gun lobbying group, opposes the treaty and has vowed to fight to prevent its ratification if it reaches Washington. The NRA says the treaty would undermine domestic gun-ownership rights.
The American Bar Association, an attorneys' lobby group, has said that the treaty would not impact the right to bear arms.
(Reporting by Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Will Dunham, Lisa Shumaker and Paul Simao)

EU's Ashton urges Iran to respond to nuclear offer


European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu (R) address a joint news conference in Ankara April 3, 2013. REUTERS/Umit Bektas
ANKARA | Wed Apr 3, 2013 11:42am EDT
(Reuters) - European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said on Wednesday Iran must respond to an offer proposed by world powers if this week's nuclear talks were to succeed.
Ashton was speaking in the Turkish capital Ankara before talks on the nuclear dispute with Iran in Kazakhstan on Friday and Saturday, at which she will lead negotiations on behalf of the United States, ChinaRussia, Britain, France and Germany.
"I remain always cautiously optimistic. But I am also very clear that it is very important that we do get a response (from Iran)," she told reporters when asked about the talks in Almaty.
Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful but Western powers suspect Tehran of seeking nuclear weapons capability.
The six powers held talks with Iran in Almaty in February when Western officials say they made a proposal intended to break a deadlock in the dispute over Tehran's nuclear program.
They offered to ease a ban on trade with Iran in gold and other precious metals, and a relaxation of an import embargo on Iranian petrochemical products, the officials say.
In return, Iran would have to suspend uranium enrichment to a fissile concentration of 20 percent at its Fordow facility and "constrain the ability to quickly resume operations there", a U.S. official has said.
The proposals appeared to soften the six powers' previous demands.
Iran has hinted it is not satisfied with the offer, although chief negotiator Saeed Jalili said after the talks in February that the six powers had tried to "get closer to our viewpoint".
Iran says it has a sovereign right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, which include fuellingnuclear power plants so it can export more oil. It denies seeking nuclear weapons.
(Reporting by Parisa Hafezi; Writing by Jonathon Burch; Editing by Alistair Lyon)

U.S. official puts onus on Iran in upcoming nuclear talks


Top officials from the U.S., France, Germany, Britain, China, Russia and Iran take part in talks on Iran's nuclear programme in Almaty February 27, 2013. REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov
WASHINGTON | Wed Apr 3, 2013 5:39pm EDT
(Reuters) - Progress in this week's nuclear talks between Iran and six major powers depends on how Tehran responds to a proposal offered by the six in February, a senior U.S. official said on Wednesday.
"How far we get ... depends on what the Iranians come back with in terms of a response on the substance to our proposal," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"There has been a very positive line out of Tehran on the talks so far. We hope that that positive talk will now be matched with some concrete responses and actions on the Iranian side," the official added.
The United States and its allies suspect Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop atomic weapons. Iran denies this, saying its program is entirely peaceful.
At February 26-27 talks with Iran in Almaty, Kazakhstan, the six major powers - Britain, ChinaFranceGermanyRussia and the United States - offered modest sanctions relief in return for Iran curbing its most sensitive nuclear work.
The senior U.S. official put the onus on Iran to put forward a substantive response at Friday's talks in Kazakhstan, known informally as "Almaty II," but also played down the idea that this week's discussions constituted a last chance for Iran.
"I would hope that we're not at any last chance," said the official. "If we are not sure about how much we've gotten and whether we have gotten enough, we'll go back and consult with capitals before we reach any ultimate conclusion here.
"So I think we have time and space to consider what we hear," the official added. "We hope that they make concrete, substantive and specific responses so that we can go to work."
In February, Western officials said the offer presented then by the six powers included an easing of a ban on trade in gold and other precious metals, and a relaxation of an import embargo on Iranian petrochemical products. They offered no details.
In exchange, a senior U.S. official said, Iran would among other things have to suspend uranium enrichment to a fissile concentration of 20 percent at its Fordow underground facility and "constrain the ability to quickly resume operations there."
This appeared to be a softening of a previous demand that Iran ship out its entire stockpile of higher-grade enriched uranium, which it says it needs to produce medical isotopes.
Iran says it has a sovereign right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, and wants to fuelnuclear power plants so it can export more oil.
But 20-percent purity is far higher than that needed for nuclear power, and rings alarm bells abroad because it is only a short technical step away from weapons-grade uranium.
Asked whether the United States wanted an absolute shut-down of Fordow, the U.S. official declined to provide details but suggested some flexibility.
"I won't be able to give you specifics on Fordow, except to say that our objective to deal with Fordow remains the same objective," said the official. "There are many ways to get there and our proposal is one vehicle for doing that, but our desire to make sure that Fordow does not remain the concern that it is very much part of the proposal ... we have put on the table."
(Reporting By Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Sandra Maler and Todd Eastham)