Iran calls recent UN resolution "dangerous precedent"
ISNA - Iranian Students' News Agency
News Code :9008-18546
TEHRAN (ISNA)-The ambassador and permanent representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Mohammad Khazaei said passing a resolution based on unproved allegation is a dangerous precedent.
Khazaei speaking before the General Assembly meeting on the U.S. allegation which claimed Iran was involved in a plot aimed to assassinate Saudi Arabian envoy to Washington, said passing a resolution based on unproved claim is a dangerous precedent.
Full text of his speech comes as follow:
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Allow me to begin by reiterating the appreciation of my delegation and myself for the excellent way you have conducted the business of the current session of the General Assembly. I also thank you for giving me the floor to express my view on the draft resolution placed before us and introduce the amendments that we have already submitted.
I have already sent you a letter, copied to all distinguished permanent representatives, in which I expressed the essence of our views on this draft resolution, which provides as well the rational for its amendment. I also had the opportunity of laying out and develop our legal arguments countering it in the informal meeting held on last Wednesday – a meeting that I found very useful in the sense that a number of colleagues had the opportunity to explain why this draft resolution, as is, could not be acceptable to them either and needed to be amended.
As I already explained, our fundamental difficulty with the draft resolution lies in the very fact that this draft is based on nothing but an unsubstantiated claim of one Member State with a long history of animosity against my country that my government has already and strongly rejected. The essence of the claim was met also with strong doubt around the world, including among the elite in the US and even many former US officials. Under such circumstances, it is mind boggling as to how such a pure and simple allegation could serve as the foundation of a draft resolution brought to the floor of this august Assembly. Such an action is truly unprecedented in the history of the General Assembly and, as such, should be rejected no matter which country is the target.
As I stated on Wednesday, the draft explicitly implicates my country with the alleged plot. In so doing, it prejudges the outcome of a case with unclear dimensions. Therefore, it is very unreasonable as well as unfair to expect Member States to adopt a draft resolution based on an unsubstantiated allegation, thus siding with a judgment unduly passed against another Member State and undermining the UN Charter. That is why we request our colleagues not to support such draft resolution as it stands now and agree with the amendments that we have proposed.
Of course, under Article 10 of the UN Charter any issue could be raised by Member States in this Assembly. However, it is evident that placing allegations as well as hypothetical and unsubstantiated matters on the agenda of the General Assembly would consist of an enormous damage to its credibility and authority. The draft resolution at hand is a brazen example of such an approach. If the members of the General Assembly allow this draft to pass unamended, the General Assembly would run the risk of setting a dangerous precedent and turning into a venue for settling political scores and the advancement of narrow political interests. Consequently, we believe that no matter who is the target of this draft, all Member States that are attached to and hold dear the principles and objectives of the United Nations should resolve in countering it. This is another strong rational for the need to amend this draft.
The political context prevailing between my country and the prime mover of this draft resolution, i.e., the United States, is quite revealing of the intention behind it and, in the first place, the very claim made on October 11 2011 as well as the media hype that followed. While the 1953 coup d’etat lies at the origin of the animosity between the Iranian people and the US Government, the hostilities directed by the US against my country, during the recent decades date back, in fact, to 1979 when the Iranian people chose to be master of their own affairs. Widespread political and economic pressures by the U.S, including unilateral sanctions and the threat of aggression, against my country over the past many years are fully known to every colleague in this hall. This allegation, which is now the basis of this draft resolution, is yet another plot against my country and another step along the same well-known path. Against this backdrop, it should not be acceptable for any of us that this General Assembly, too, be used for advancing a political agenda against a Member State.
Unfortunately, diplomats of many countries and UN international civil servants have been the target of many terrorist acts and, in fact, perished in the current and past many years. A number of Iranian diplomats, too, lost their lives after being targeted by terrorists. Unfortunately, many of our embassies and missions, including our Permanent Mission in New York, were attacked and ransacked. In another case, after more than 30 years, we are yet to find any clue as to what happened to our 4 diplomats who were abducted in Lebanon by the Zionist regime. Many other Member States have also been victim of terrorist attacks against their officials and official premises. Nonetheless, we do not recall that they ever tried to raise such specific issues in the General Assembly. The question now is as to why a pure allegation could be placed on the agenda of this Assembly.
The ways and means of dealing with such cases are well defined and established. Cooperation among countries is chief among them. Targeting countries in multilateral forums is counterproductive and amounts to damaging the environment in which such cooperation should be upheld and promoted.
I urge to those who move this draft not to help the accusatory tendency grow in the United Nations. Such a tendency, if unchecked, would have its adverse impact on all regions, thus eroding confidence and creating tension in international relations.
We have already expressed the position of my government in regard to the allegation in the three letters that I sent to the Secretary-General. We categorically rejected the involvement of any of Iranian officials or agencies in the alleged plot. Moreover, we are fully aware of our obligations under relevant international legal instruments, including 1973 Convention and reaffirm our full commitment to fulfill such obligations.
While requesting our colleagues, once more, to be fully cautious about the ramifications and consequences that this move in the Assembly could entail for the future work of the UN, allow me to turn to our amendments. This is an opportunity to take this draft back to its right path and, instead of targeting a particular country, stress the 1973 Convention on internationally protected persons. Our amendments before you are composed along this line. Thus, we propose to turn it into a resolution that deals with attempts against all internationally protected persons in general.
Therefore, in the light of the above:
1. In our first amendment, contained in document A/66/L.11, we propose that we delete PPs (7), (9), (10) and (11). PP (7) refers to a totally peaceful and restrained demonstration in front of the Saudi Arabian Consulate in Meshed, with no accident occurring. PPs (9) and (10) contain reference to two accusatory letters that try to implicate my country with an alleged plot. In addition to the vagueness and lack of clarity surrounding the so-called plot, as I explained earlier, the distinguished colleagues note that, it is taken here as fact and the Assembly is also invited to do the same. My point here applies to all other references to the so-called plot in this draft. Therefore, we proposed that the said PPs be deleted.
2. In our second amendment, contained in document A/66/L.12, we propose the deletion of preambular paragraph (13). This paragraph also refers to the “plot to assassinate …”, as if it is an established and duly adjudicated case.
3. In our third amendment, contained in document A/66/L.13, we propose the deletion of operative paragraph (3). Here again, we are invited to concur with a claim that is yet to be substantiated and run its logical and judicial course.
4. In our last amendment, contained in document A/66/L.14, we propose to amend operative paragraph (5) to read as follows:
“ Calls upon Member States to comply with all of their obligations under international law, including the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including diplomatic agents.”
Please note that in the written amendment, the latter phrase of the amended OP (5) had been omitted, which I reinsert it orally.
In amending OP (5), as we propose, the General Assembly will avoid considering an issue among Parties to the 1973 Convention relating to the interpretation or application of this Convention, which is, on the basis of its Article 13, out of the competence of this Assembly.
Let me close, Mr. President, by expressing confident that the distinguished colleagues in this Assembly will put, as always, the interest of this Organization above any other transient consideration. I also would like to thank, in advance, all distinguished colleagues who will support the amendments that I introduced.
Thank you Mr. President.
|Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list|