Resolution on Iran adopted, Tehran wins

PanARMENIAN.Net - As the world media reports, the IAEA urges Iran to "engage with the Agency on the resolution of all outstanding issues concerning Iran's nuclear programme and, to this end, to cooperate fully with the IAEA by providing such access and information that the Agency requests to resolve these issues".

Iran is also urged to comply "fully and without qualification" with its safeguards obligations, and implement and ratify promptly the Additional Protocol.

U.S. and other Western countries accuse Iran of developing nuclear weapons under the guise of peaceful nuclear energy program. The UN Security Council adopted five resolutions and imposed sanctions on Iran, demanding it renounce the uranium enrichment. Tehran denies all the charges, claiming its nuclear program is aimed solely at meeting the country's electricity needs.

In fact, by hand of IAEA, U.S. resigned Tehran's right to hold a nuclear program at a time when all her neighbors, with the exception of Afghanistan, have an atomic bomb and nuclear power plants. Since 2006, the IAEA has unsuccessfully sought to call Tehran "to order", without resolutions, but it all in vain. Strictly speaking, it could never succeed, as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not one of those presidents who can be made to do what, in his opinion, does not meet the national interests of his country. Nuclear capability increases the safety of a country, especially such as Iran. With rather a large number of enemies, Tehran is simply forced to have a deterrent at least not to share the fate of Iraq. And it is beyond doubt that such a scenario is not yet laid on the shelf. It is one thing to attack a country which has no atomic bomb, and quite another to do the same, knowing that Tehran would not think long before making a preemptive move. Threats to Israel so far remain threats. What would happen if it occurred to someone in the Pentagon or in Tel Aviv to attack Iran? The region would turn into an abyss of uncontrollable chaos. That is why it still comes down to resolutions and admonitions. Western hopes of the government change in Iran did not come true, although hardly is it possible that a different president, expected to replace Ahmadinejad, might go against the will of Ali Khamenei and renounce the nuclear program. Even reformer Moussaoui firmly held to the issue of nuclear program.

Attacks on Iran are, alas, the sad legacy of George W. Bush, and what is happening now can be defined as "inertia". United States, and all other countries, would be glad to put a brake on the whole Iranian story; they have enough concerns.

But in all this story there is one incomprehensible point: the behavior of Russia, which is allegedly considered to be an ally of the Islamic Republic, but which, for some reason, votes for the resolution. The same is true about Turkey. However, the position of Turkey is more or less clear: she has to keep herself on two chairs simultaneously, a position very few countries can maintain long. As for Russia, she needs to finally bury the Nabucco project, and, to achieve her goal, she is practically ready to do anything, even voting against her partner. As usual, every country is trying to derive maximum benefit from the current situation. However, one thing is clear: no matter how hard the West opposes, Iran has so far stood her ground. It is not the country to implement resolutions of purely advisory character...