US Has No Right to Trigger Snapback Mechanism, Says Iran UN Envoy

Young journalists club

News ID: 47680
Iran » Iran
Publish Date: 11:25 - 01 September 2020
Tuesday, 01 September 2020_ Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations reiterated that the US has no right to activate a JCPOA mechanism for the re-imposition of sanctions on Tehran, saying Washington has formally withdrawn from the multilateral nuclear deal.

US Has No Right to Trigger Snapback Mechanism, Says Iran UN EnvoyIn remarks at a Monday session of the UN General Assembly, Majid Takht Ravanchi said the US government is by no means authorized to trigger the so-called snapback mechanism to reinstate sanctions on Iran.

What follows is the full text of his speech:

“In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful

Mr. President,

I thank you for convening this meeting. I also thank the Indonesian Presidency of the Security Council for presenting the report of the Council.

According to the Charter, the Council “shall submit” an annual report to the General Assembly and the Assembly “shall receive and consider” it. The raison d’être of such a strong obligation is nothing but to ensure that the Council is accountable to the Assembly where all Member States are represented and where the Council obtains its power from.

Therefore, by considering the annual report of the Council, the Assembly is in a position to evaluate the effectiveness of the Council’s actions. This is of particular importance this year, given the conclusion of the current report that “in 2019, the international situation remained quite turbulent”.

In certain cases, the Council’s indecisiveness, indecision and ineffectiveness have undermined regional and international peace and security. In this context, I would like to give certain examples regarding the developments of our region, the Middle East. This is crucial as according to the Council’s report, such situations drew the attention of the Council in 2019 and their impact remained severe.

Last year, parallel to the Israeli regime’s unlawful construction and expansion of settlements, its inhumane blockade of Gaza and its other criminal measures towards the Palestinians, the Council’s historic inaction and utter silence towards this crisis has also continued.

Moreover, last year, meddling and destabilizing activities of the US in the Middle East continued, including through the occupation of parts of Syria, looting its oil and imposing unilateral sanctions against that country amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

In 2019, the US, on a number of occasions, intruded Iran’s territorial waters and airspace. Furthermore, in early January 2020, its military adventurism heightened placing the region on the verge of an all-out war when the US’s military forces, in a terrorist act at the direct order of the US President, violated Iraq’s sovereignty and horrifically martyred two regional anti-terror heroes, including Major General Qassem Soleimani, which was called by many international lawyers and scholars as a clear violation of the UN Charter and international law. Again, the Council was utterly silent.

In 2019, the United States also continued violating Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA. This is a gross violation of the US obligations under the Charter’s Article 25. It also brazenly continued threatening UN members either to defy that Resolution or face punishment.

In pursuance of this destructive policy, the US now has placed the UN under maximum pressure to ultimately kill the JCPOA. Earlier this month, in violation of Resolution 2231, it first proposed a draft resolution to impose arms embargo against Iran, which was rejected by 13 members of the Council.

Later, on August 20, through a letter to the Council, the US attempted to purportedly initiate a process to re-impose the Council sanctions on Iran. The reaction of Council members was decisive. Through their letters, again 13 members, including the remaining JCPOA participants, as well as Iran and the EU High Representative and the Coordinator of the JCPOA Joint Commission, strongly refuted the legal merit of the US letter.

Your Comment