It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


WAR: US Asks China, Russia and India to Support Referral of Iran to Security Council

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 02:49 AM
In a statement Friday, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice openly appealed to China, Russia, India and others for support in the referral of Iran to the UN Security Council over its suspected nuclear weapons program. Rice cited UN action against Tehran as a "reasonable option" after Iran continued previously suspended, sensitive fuel-cycle work due to negotiations with Britain, France and Germany. A new report issued last week by IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran had not completely aleviated suspicions about its nuclear intentions.
WASHINGTON (AFP) Sep 09, 2005

"Iran needs to get a message from the international community that is a unified message, and by this I mean not just the EU-3 and the United States, but also Russia and China and India and others," Rice said.

Washington has long been lobbying for a consensus within the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN watchdog, to take steps against Iran which insists its nuclear program is strictly peaceful.

The EU-3, which has been trying to persuade the Iranians to renounce any nuclear ambitions in return for a package of economic and security incentives, appeared Friday to have run out of patience.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

While asking China to support such a move seems far-fetched, asking Russia IMO will almost certainly bring dissapointment. Evidence suggests Russia has been directly involved in Iran's nuclear program by assisting them with the building of at least one reactor, and I just can't see Russia agreeing to such a move.

On the other hand, though, Russia could agree to such a move to help prove their innocence in assisting Iran with anything other than "peaceful" nuclear programs.

Related News Links:

[edit on 13-9-2005 by TrueAmerican]

posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 03:12 AM
I don't think India, Russia or China will agree to "refer" Iran to anything. I'm pretty sure Iran hasn't caused them any problems but instead has been a trading partner and in fact useful to them. The allegations against the nation are to them nothing but allegations, and are likely to remain that way. I expect Rices' pleade to be rejected, if there is any response at all from the three.

posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 04:17 AM
True.. She couldn't have asked anyone worse than these three in order to get a positive answer..
They are all for a nuclear(civilian) iran..

posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:02 AM
US is asking for the support of Russia, China and India, because they know that these are the three major millitary powers which will oppose any millitary action against Iraq, and US know that they're allies, and they'd have to get all of them in, or it's all useless.

China doesn't like US, Russia is helping Iran a lot, and India probably doesn't reeally care, so I doubt the US will get what they want....

posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:20 AM
Actually, I think this is being done only to see who is on board. China has a lot of vested interest in the USA and wants to stay on good terms for trading purposes. Russia needs to show that any help given to Iran was for peaceful energy consumption and not for weapon production. India knows that it's recent economic success is mostly due to out sourcing from USA companies, plus they are depending on the US to keep the Paki's in line. The UK will probably support the sanctions, Germany and France will balk as usual. So to me it looks like Rice is forcing these three to show their hands early in the game.

posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 11:58 AM
I still don't quite understand why such a ruckus is being made over Iran's nuclear programs. Seems to me like this is their business and not the US or Russia's. I don't think creating a stronger contingency is going to amount to more than a mouse fart compared to the current 3 already aboard the anti-nuclear programs ship. Iraq went through without much support, what would make Iran any different?

posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 09:16 AM
Because Iran has been the soapbox terrorist nation since the 70's and remain so today. Washington doesnt like Islamic Fundamentalist governements and though it a bit paranoid, I cant blame them. Of course, its obvious Iran will get weapons if they dont already. Officially, however, it will be civilian, and thus we get a Iraq-ish problem of inspectors getting kicked out and all that bull.

top topics


log in