Snapback mechanism hinders JCPOA: Commentator
An Iranian political commentator says a mechanism envisaged in a UN Security Council resolution allowing the snapback of sanctions against Iran will hinder a recently reached nuclear conclusion between Iran and the P5+1 world powers, Press TV reports.
The UN Security Council plans to vote on a draft resolution on Monday that will in 90 days remove all of its nuclear-related sanctions against Iran. The new resolution has been prepared based on a conclusion on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) reached between Iran and the P5+1 group — the United States, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany – on July 14 in the Austrian capital of Vienna following days of intensive talks over Tehran’s nuclear program.
“The snapback sanctions refers to the idea of bringing back all the sanctions that were lifted based on the Security Council resolution that…is causing a lot of difficulties not only in Iran but also…in other capitals because of the way the resolution is worded,” Foad Izadi, professor at University of Tehran, told Press TV in an interview on Sunday.
He added that this situation would not allow the five veto-wielding countries of the UN Security Council to exercise “their own veto power.”
“If out of five permanent members, four say we want to continue lifting the sanctions and one objects, then that one country will veto the idea and then Iran will be faced with the sanctions that it had before,” Izadi said.
Political commentator and professor at University of Tehran, Foad Izadi, talks to Press TV during an interview on Sunday, July 19, 2015.
He noted that the five permanent members of the Security Council can present a “complaint” about the process without having to “present evidence, proof or documents.”
“They have a complaint that 30 day period is given to see whether that issue can be resolved. If the issue is not resolved, that particular country that has complaint can basically derail the whole process,” the analyst explained.
“So you have for example United States acting as the country that is complaining about the process and then when it comes to making the decision of what to do next, that same country will act like a judge because they have the veto power,” he noted.
He added that the “unjust structure” of the UN Security Council would become very evident when a country like Iran, that does not hold the veto power in the council, would be penalized and the veto-wielding countries would basically do whatever they want.
The analyst said if disagreements are not resolved within a 30-day period, “then one of those P5+1 permanent members can actually derail the whole set-up.”
Izadi further said the draft Security Council resolution would have a 10-year lifetime.
After 10 years, another resolution would be adopted, if there are no problems, to take Iran out of Chapter 7 of UN Security Council Charter, he added.
“But within that 10 years, all these countries of the UN have the opportunity to cause difficulties for the whole process and 10 years is a long time. So this is a difficulty that I think exists with that resolution,” the commentator pointed out.
According to a snapback mechanism, any of the six countries in the P5+1 can raise what it considers as a violation of the nuclear conclusion.
The issue would then be referred to a dispute resolution panel and if the panel cannot resolve it, the sanctions would automatically resume after 30 days.
The process cannot be interrupted except by a majority vote in the Security Council. But any of the five permanent members can use its veto power to ensure that the sanctions resume.
The snapback requirement was demanded by the US during the recent negotiations in Vienna. However, it was opposed by Russia arguing that it overlooked Moscow’s veto power to prevent the resumption of sanctions on Iran.
Based on the nuclear conclusion, limits will be put on Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for the removal of sanctions, including all economic and financial bans, against the Islamic Republic.