MOSCOW, Oct. 2 (UPI) -- The Iranian Six have confirmed their commitment to talks with Tehran with a view to removing the concern of the world community with its nuclear program.
But they have warned that if there is no progress, the new resolution against Iran will be put to vote in the U.N. Security Council in November. The Six have found a helpful compromise.
On the eve of the foreign minister meeting on further action against Tehran, the Iranian Six were undergoing crisis. Will they be able to overcome it? If not, it could have most adverse consequences.
As expected, the plan of International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohammed ElBaradei to suspend the discussion of tougher sanctions to a later date has caused acute discord among the Six.
Russia and China are refusing to consider new sanctions until the IAEA publishes its report. Moscow and Beijing are convinced that the new sanctions against Tehran will only undermine IAEA efforts to resolve the Iranian predicament. In turn, their opponents in the U.N. Security Council -- the United States, France and Britain -- do not want to delay a draft resolution on tougher sanctions on the grounds that Iran has refused to stop uranium enrichment. The other member of the Six, Germany, sticks to the same position.
It was clear that there will be no consensus either at the upcoming foreign minister meeting of the Six or the Security Council session. What were the potential consequences of this diplomatic confrontation?
The European Trio -- Germany, Britain and France -- may initiate EU unilateral sanctions against Iran, bypassing the United Nations. This would unequivocally mean a split.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner has already spoken about this scenario during his trip to Moscow. At that time his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, said in no uncertain terms that this step was highly dubious.
Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, poured more oil onto the flames by saying that the agreement on technical cooperation with the IAEA cannot be used as a shield to protect Iran from its violation, lack of cooperation and lack of implementation of the demands of the Security Council on the nuclear issue. He recalled that Tehran had ignored Security Council resolutions twice.
But there is still hope that the Iranian issue will not go beyond the Security Council. U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said that the differences between the Security Council permanent members were tactical. This position could be viewed as readiness for some compromise with Moscow and Beijing if they are also prepared to meet the other side halfway.
China and Russia keep repeating that the Security Council should concentrate exclusively on supporting the IAEA efforts to clear up issues in the Iranian nuclear program. The IAEA has achieved certain results in this respect -- Tehran has promised to resolve these questions in a definite timeframe. In other words, the X-Hour for Iran has been fixed and the countdown started.
This approach is likely to suit the United States, France and Britain, because the X-Hour comes in November or December when the IAEA board of governors will meet for a session. As ElBaradei pointed out, if Iran does not use its chance to resolve all the issues, most probably it will not have such chances in the future.
As expected, Washington offered Moscow and Beijing a compromise -- to fix the deadline in November rather than December.
The rules of the game have been observed.
--
(Pyotr Goncharov is a political commentator for RIA Novosti. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)
--
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)
