||[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great
Views expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 7:08 pm Post subject: SMCCDI public letter to UN Ambassador John Bolton (US)
The "Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy
in Iran" (SMCCDI)
September 7, 2005
The Honorable John Bolton,
United States Ambassador to the UN
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Via Federal Express & Fax (202) 647-0244
Dear Mr. Ambassador,
On behalf of the membership of the "Student Movement
Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran" (SMCCDI), and
the people of Iran who have striven so long for freedom of
speech, worship, assembly, a free press, civil liberties,
woman's rights, the application of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, and the rule of law; We
congratulate you on your nomination as America's Ambassador
to the UN.
Comes now this Iranian opposition group, to apprise you of
the facts, the conclusions and suggestions we have been
given to put forward herein this letter, as context to the
2005 UN Summit, and the pending address to the UN of the
Islamic Republic regime's appointed president, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, with the gravest concern for the welfare and
common good of all people, and generations to come...
"In Larger Freedom"
The body of evidence compiled over the long history of
the Islamic Republic's systemic methodology of torture,
political repression and murder of journalists and
dissidents; crimes against humanity including the past and
current crackdown on ethnic and religious minorities, and
"troublemakers" (i.e.: political dissidents of the regime);
applying a Gender Apartheid policy and sexual
discrimination against women; sponsoring and officially
engaging in terrorism (internally and externally), by its
leadership and proxy; suppression of the press, closing of
TV and newspapers as well as confiscation of satellite
dishes, the arrest of "bloggers" and the shutting down of
internet sites, arbitrary arrest and lack of "due process";
the denial of requested information to the UN Commission on
Human Rights (and its sub committees), the denial of access
and information to the IAEA, false declaration to various
UN committee; The failure to uphold the tenants of the UN
Charter signed by Iran in 1948 (in multiple aspects,
consistently and premeditative, and the long history of
denial, subterfuge, bribery, and false public statements on
the record in the UN we believe must be addressed in
totality, before the Security Council, along with other
issues and recommendations brought before the council
regarding this regime, to obtain a holistic solution to a
We understand that the UN Commission on Human Rights
mandate covers only one aspect of the larger picture that
must be addressed, and while the "1503 procedure" states, "
No communication will be admitted if it runs counter to the
principles of the Charter of the United Nations or appears
to be politically motivated." and further states, "As a
rule, communications containing abusive language or
insulting remarks about the State against which the
complaint is directed will not be considered."
We believe it is essential that you and the Commission
understand that SMCCDI's intent is not "politically
motivated" in seeking greater freedom for Iran's people,
nor does any member aspire to become a representative of
any new political structure that may exist in a future free
Iran. It is important for us that you and the UN understand
the nature and precepts of SMCCDI as well as the long road
that has brought the opposition in general to the
conclusions and suggestions expressed herein.
While the 1503 procedure states that no "insulting
language" be used, the truth is different from opinion, and
evil is as evil does. Therefore, while the Islamic regime
will no doubt claim insult and injury to its reputation,
one must in all honesty; call it like one sees it being
manifest in action. Using logic over emotionalism, truth
over viewpoint, and ethics over all.
This is one of the reasons we welcome your tenure as UN
Ambassador, as you have the reputation of manifesting
tangible results, whether it be on UN reform, proliferation
of WMD, or state sponsors of terrorism. We wish to inform
you as a courtesy that a copy of this letter will be hand
delivered to the door of the UN, on September 14th, for
your kind inspection, while thousands of freedom loving
Iranians outside the UN protesting this regime cheer you on
as well as cheering on other free nations' representatives
as measures are taken to address the theocratic regime's
abysmal activities before the UN general assembly.
As you may face the incarnation of boycott and the
regime's answer to the aspirations of the Iranian people's
desire to self determination in the form of an evil man who
has come to power illegitimately; who comes to usurp the
chair of membership in the UN which is by right the chair
belonging to the Iranian people; Usurped by an unpopular
regime that has never held credence to the premise of the
UN charter, or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in
word or deed; we urge you, and all free nation's
representatives to address this issue of , and consider
wisely the matter of the regime's membership, as a matter
of UN reform.
Our opposition movement (SMCCDI) is bound by a charter
formed on principals such as; Human Rights, Democracy,
separation of church and states, and free markets. We
believe these principals represent the most fair and
efficient means for humanity to realize its potential.
Ultimately, no repressive, intolerant regime can withstand
the spread of these ideals.
The Islamic Republic regime currently in power in Iran or
any Islamic variances that may exist there in the future
are no exception. By staying true to these values our
people's triumph is absolutely, positively, and undeniably
It is these precepts voiced by Secretary General Kofi
Annan; "Today, our challenge -- as it was for the founders
of the United Nations -- is to pass on to our children a
brighter legacy than that bequeathed to us. We must build
a future as envisioned in the UN Charter -- a future in
larger freedom"; that the Iranian opposition, and the
democracy movement in Iran is based upon, referencing the
Universal Declaration on Human Rights, so often among the
various opposition groups over these past years.
The horror of this evil regime's hypocrisy, and methodical
atrocities can only be likened to a daily Auschwitz for the
stain it brings on the honor of those who appease and
support and lengthen the life span of this barbaric and
tyrannical regime through silence, economic incentive,
"engagement" and illusion. Blind or not as they may be of
what is taking place in our country, or the intent of the
regime in many aspects that threaten the security of the
Nor can the international community, or any member of any
government that holds in their heart the values of freedom
continue to turn their back on these long standing issues,
and still call themselves human. Or allow this regime,
along with other human rights abusers to block necessary UN
reform of the human rights commission, or the draft
measures in reference on "responsibility to protect".
As a "test case" for UN reform, the Islamic Republic
regime qualifies in every conceivable way.
It is our hope placed in trust that you (as have the US
President and his Secretary of State and many members of US
Congress in the past) will illuminate the plight of our
people that have struggled to shrug off the oppressors and
theocratic chains which have bound the Iranian people for
so long. Chains which have silenced the voice of the people
in utterance, and stilled them with overwhelming force.
Chains denying the Iranian people a better future for our
children, and our children's children for over a generation
in this process
Speaking in regard to "International Woman's Day, March 8,
2005" the US Secretary of State said, "Freedom, the
protection of fundamental human rights, economic
opportunity and prosperity, equality and the rule of
law...these are all elements of the democratic process.
Women are integral to the process of building responsible
governments and democratic institutions. Women's
participation and empowerment at all levels of society will
be key to moving these new democracies forward."
It is the women, who represent a large part of the
opposition and will make a major contribution through their
degree of knowledge and political and civil maturity to the
democratic and peaceful revolution we seek to manifest, as
well as to a future democratic Iran. We cannot carry such
baggage or the individuals who continue to deny women their
place in society in this process of regaining our freedom
and their equality in the process.
When one considers the IRI in totality, the abysmal human
rights record, its long-standing support for terrorism,
it's WMD programs in violation of signed agreements; logic
dictates that with or without referral by the IAEA, this
ideological and unelected regime should not just be
sanctioned, but booted out of the UN altogether for gross
violation of the UN charter, which the Iran Nation is a
signatory to, believing it to be criminally negligent for
any nation to support the continuance and aspirations of
the Islamic Republic system one day longer, and remaining
"seized of the matter." As Churchill put it, "Given the
choice between war and dishonor, Chamberlain chose dishonor
and got war."
To this point, the only leader of free nations who's had
that alternate vision of an Iran existing within the
community of nations..."in larger freedom", and had the
guts to voice the option is President George W. Bush...."..
and to the Iranian people I say tonight, as you stand for
your own liberty, America stands with you." The man
presented possibilities to people in so doing, as a
president will on occasion.
Those words of hope to our people must now be joined in
chorus among all free nations, standing in solidarity with
the tenets and premise of "in larger freedom". The freedom
from fear, from want, the hope to raise our children in
dignity and in religious freedom in a nation that is truly
secular and representative of the people's will.
We shall see if the UN honors the precepts of its founding
Charter, whether the EU, Russia, China and India will
continue to trade and negotiate with a tyrannical and
terrorist regime, and whether the UN membership comes
together in solidarity of it's founding principals to honor
the words of President Bush to the Iranian people.
If the UN cannot see fit to honor the tenets of its
founding by enforcing its Charter on members signatory to
it, we in the Iranian opposition will briefly bow our heads
in shame being witness to this, but only briefly as time is
short, and our heads will rise looking only forward, as our
feet continue to trod the path of freedom in process,
whether the international community supports us or not. But
whether this popular movement is successful, or crushed,
depends now upon free nation's support for the aspirations
of Iranian liberty.
It is self-evident that the international community cannot
live with terrorists, nor terrorist regimes in its midst.
There is but one solution to common security in larger
To prevent war and/or civil war, the Islamic regime must
be disavowed by the UN as not legitimately representative
of the People of Iran, and held accountable for its
Nor can its newly unelected leader, self confessed to
having fired coup de grace bullets into political prisoners
after being tortured; under investigation for hostage
taking and other murders outside of the territory of Iran;
claim any "diplomatic immunity", nor be afforded any claim
by the regime under the rules of UN membership, nor be
granted same by the UN, or host nation, if the
investigation warrants prosecution.
We ask very simply that America, and every democratic
member nation of the United Nations, and their
representatives and leaders stand united with the Iranian
people now. Not as diplomats or representatives neither of
nations, nor even as members of the UN per se, but simply
as Humans. For this, and the hope of liberty and justice is
what binds all people, and the UN together in unity, under
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the premise
of the UN Charter.
Indeed, the Islamic Republic regime is engaged in terror,
torture and atrocity on a daily basis, and this
illegitimate regime dares to call itself Democratic, an
advocate of human rights, and protector of the oppressed
throughout the region. A cruel joke added onto the injury
to our nation's pride and heritage, as reportedly the
regime via a dam, will submerge the founder of Persia,
Cyrus the Great's tomb and the archeological sites of
Pasargad and Persepolice under water.
The only way our people can regain our honor, civil
liberties and the trust of the world for a WMD-free Iran
that seeks to provide a safer future for the world and
adheres to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is by
providing us, the people of Iran, the support for our
legitimate aspirations of liberty necessary to restore hope
to the land that Cyrus the Great brought Democracy to over
2500 years ago.
Those ancient precepts regarding freedom of worship,
individual right to own property, freedom from slavery,
representative government in a democratic "federalist"
government that respected the states rights to determine
local laws so long as they were consistent with the
inherent rights of the people, respecting territorial
integrity in the process, have proven themselves over time
and among many cultures. The UN has a replica of this vital
document on display in the entrance lobby. It is as if to
us, the regime intends to submerge the very tenets that
civilization was founded upon, honored and recognized in
the UN, on display. This is not just Persia's heritage
that is at stake, but mankind's, and we hope that a
resolution will be tabled and mandated to protect and
preserve this historical legacy for future generations.
With the firm unanimous voice of the UN, and the pressure
that may be applied "in greater freedom" The UN may honor
the precepts of its founding principals, and reform itself
into an effective, cohesive, transparent instrument for the
common good of all men and women. But if not starting with
the "test case" the regime poses, where will, and when
will, UN reform becomes manifest in action and intent, "
being seized of the matter"? All reform must have some
gage or measure to assess its merit; we propose this as a
means to that end.
1. Implementation of full international economic and
military sanctions on the Islamic Republic regime via UN
Security Council resolution based on human rights, support
for terrorism, and this to be tabled with or without IAEA
board recommendation on the nuclear threat the theocracy
poses. These two issues alone should be viewed as
circumstance the world cannot turn it's back upon, at risk
of civilization itself.
Such measures should include coordination with oil
producing nations to ensure stable world supply while
sanction persists, as well as the halting of any and all
arms transfers to the Islamic Republic regime via the
Proliferation Security Initiative.
2. Full diplomatic sanction and closing of Islamic
republic's embassies worldwide, removal and deportation of
regime representatives, their agents and spies from all
Diplomatic sanction by the UN, revocation of UN membership
and removal of representation from this international forum
till such time as a legitimate interim government can be
established in Iran.
Note: We ask that concerns regarding lack of consular
functions as a result of this action be cooperatively
addressed, so as to continue to allow emergency visas to be
issued. (i.e. family emergencies, etc.) It may be possible
to retain the minimum consular functions, under tight
supervision, but they are well known in their recruiting
of, and issuing visa to potential martyrs and terrorists.
3. Freezing of any and all financial assets of the Islamic
Republic system, current and former leadership, and
corporate interests worldwide, till such time as a new
interim government can be established.
As well as allocation of portions of these assets now to
legitimate non-violent opposition groups inside and outside
Iran, to provide the tangible support needed while civil
disobedience becomes manifest in action. Only in this way
can this action be self-sustaining till it succeeds. Poland
couldn't have become free without support, nor can we, as
this is much to expect of a people under the boot of
repression for over a generation.
4. Repeated statements by world leaders publicly calling
for the leadership of the Islamic Republic regime to step
down peacefully, and to relinquish the government to the
hands and will of the Iranian people, and a UN monitored
"direct" referendum to choose a legitimate, representative,
secular government structure.
5. The coordinated post-regime rebuilding of vital social
institutions and infrastructure of democracy should be
implemented now in preparation, along with he training of
judges, civil servants, police, etc. The Iranian exile
community can provide some of the talent initially, and
there are many more inside Iran supporting the opposition
who will answer the call to service as the situation
permits. This will speed up the post-regime stabilization
process, and greatly enhance institutional development in
the interim government, and constitutional process.
In addition, while SMCCDI does not speak for other groups
in the opposition, we believe it is vital for our efforts
to become coordinated in the formation of a working group
among leaders of opposition groups, in conjunction with
free nation's representatives to help facilitate and
coordinate all of the above measures in a roundtable "Forum
for the Future" of Iran.
The coordination of economic and military sanction,
freezing of assets, closing of embassies, banishment from
the UN General Assembly and other UN related institutions,
such as UNESCO, and other non-violent measures as may be
found worthy under international law will be overwhelming
to the Islamic Republic of Iran, providing solid legitimate
purpose and support among the people of Iran to effect
change from within.
We have striven in our legitimate aspirations for liberty
for over two decades, and often frustrated as the pace of
those aspirations seem to be like that of traveling on the
back of a snail. The vast majority has therefore concluded
that any real democratic reform though legitimate election
or national referendum on the people's choice for a secular
political structure in Iran cannot be possible so long as
this evil ideological regime continues in power. Nor can
the international community relegate terrorism to the
dustbin of history while this regime remains in power.
While our aspirations include taking our future into our
own hands, we are convinced after this long in a most
pragmatic way, that those aspirations cannot be obtained in
isolation or silence, we need the entire international
community firmly by our people's side in word and deed if
the agenda the US president has laid out for global freedom
is to become manifest in Iran.
This noble endeavor in common cause does not require
military intervention, nor do we ask for, or seek this in
any form. The method of civil disobedience has a long
history of painful success throughout history, and with
international support will serve to liberate our people
from tyranny and the world from the blind ambitions of the
theocratic regime in a rather short period of time, if they
are implemented in full now, and in a coordinated and
We in the opposition movement see the strong two-faced
diplomacy the Islamic Republic regime is engaged in, that
has not only caused nations to appease the regime with
offers of economic incentive, but that has caused others to
support their blind ambitions, through various means,
including silence and abstention of action on Human Rights
within the various mechanisms of the UN, sale and smuggling
of arms and WMD technology, and economic trade.
We see the effects of this diplomacy and blatant
propaganda on some members of the US Congress, various
governments and international think tanks, as well as the
IAEA. We see the confusion in policy that has been proposed
by former members of various governments, as well the many
cases in which the UN Commission on Human Rights failed in
the past to be unanimous in their condemnation of the
Islamic Republic regime's human rights record and we
strongly urge you and other free nations' representatives
to address their perceptions in this most grave and
dangerous illusion of providing "political benefit of the
doubt" that some members have apparently been following, as
soon as possible.
We, the membership of the Iranian opposition, among all
the various groups have no doubt of the regime's intent, or
continued activities as described and documented over a
long period of time. There are no "rogue elements" of the
regime involved in the transport of shaped munitions into
Iraq, no "rogue elements" of the regime training martyrs
for terrorism operations, recruiting them through public
advertisement, no "rogue elements" committing crimes
against humanity among our people. No "rogue element"
harboring al-quaida. These are fully supported by,
instructed by, and funded by the Islamic Republic of Iran
in whole, not in part, nor independent of its appointed
president's knowledge, and done so by mandate of the
Failure to address these grave issues now will be a
dereliction of the UN's founding mandate, and those member
states that fail to recognize this must answer to history.
In conclusion Sir,
It would therefore be in our opinion (reflective of the
1503 procedures), criminally negligent for members of the
UN Commission on Human Rights, and the UN Security Council
to fail to act on the body of evidence regarding security
issues and threats the IRI poses at this time to the
international community and of systematic human rights
abuse (in all aspects) by the Islamic Republic regime; due
to "political considerations" within their respective
nations who's Human Rights records are not the best, or
economic factors in trade with the regime playing a part in
debate, threat of veto, or abstention of moral
It would be quite logical therefore were the UN to
disavow any vote that was deemed "politically motivated" in
the Security Council, calling for a two-thirds majority
vote in the General Assembly to implement any resolution
not achieved in SC decision, along with GA voting on ending
any and all participation, membership and communication
from the Islamic Republic regime (other than answering to
charges brought), for the regime itself is in consistent
and conscious violation of multiple aspects of the UN
Charter, and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights that
the UN is founded upon.
It is for these reasons described herein (as well as the
fact that while Iran is an original signatory to the UN
charter, the current regime flaunts the tenets and is not
legitimately in an of itself, a signatory to it.), that we
have suggested revocation of UN membership through the UN
General Assembly by a two-thirds majority vote as may be
done under the governing rules of the UN, until such time
as a new interim government is established in its place
which will re-ratify Iran's adherence to the UN Charter and
rejoin the family of nations in good standing.
Whereas: "a consistent pattern of gross and reliably
attested violations of human rights and fundamental
freedoms exists." in multiple source documentation
independent of this letter.
Whereas: "communications may be submitted by individuals
or groups who claim to be victims of human rights
violations or who have direct, reliable knowledge of
Whereas: "each communication must describe the facts, the
purpose of the petition and the rights that have been
violated." And we have striven to do so.
Whereas: "domestic remedies have been exhausted", and it
is convincingly apparent that "solutions at the national
level have been ineffective" - "over an unreasonable length
We therefore respectfully ask that this letter also be
taken in this context as such a petition to provide proper
perspective to you, the Whitehouse, the UN member states,
President of the General Assembly Ping as well as to
Secretary General Annan on the issues we have addressed
herein with the gravest concern for the welfare of
Regarding the security risk the regime poses to its
citizens through its WMD programs and intent in acquiring
this capability. We believe this too, constitutes a
violation of our basic civil liberties (having no voice in
the matter) and poses an unacceptable risk to the
population of Iran and the region through potential and
perhaps unavoidable catastrophic conflict, if the UN does
not act accordingly to prevent further tragedy now.
On behalf of SMCCDI,
Aryo B. Pirouznia (Movement's Coordinator)
5015 Addison Circle #244 Addison, TX 75001 (USA)
Tel: +1 (972) 504-6864; Fax: +1 (972) 491-9866;
www.daneshjoo.org ; www.iranstudents.org
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:10 am Post subject:
|In Larger Freedom:
Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All, March 2005
For those who have not read this, please do so.
One will then better understand the basis for the challenge issued in the SMCCDI letter draws upon, accurately reflecting this defining document the 2005 UN Summit centers around.
|Liberty Now !
Joined: 04 Apr 2004
|Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 3:03 pm Post subject: no comment.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:50 pm Post subject:
|United Nations to call for clampdown on acts inciting terrorism+
The Associated Press, Sept. 10, 2005
NEW YORK, Sept. 10
(Kyodo) _ In a resolution expected to be adopted next week, the U.N. Security Council will call on all member states to take further antiterrorism measures, such as banning acts that incite terrorism, according to a draft obtained by Kyodo News on Saturday.
The Security Council will also urge member states to crack down on institutions encouraging what it calls "extremist ideologies" and not to harbor terrorists, says the draft resolution for adoption at the council's summit.
The resolution, worked out by Britain, comes against the backdrop of failure to prevent subway and bus attacks in London in July which killed at least 56 and injured more than 700 as the fourth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States approaches.
The planned document will demonstrate to leaders from about 170 member states, who are taking part in a U.N. General Assembly summit, the Security Council's firm determination to fight terrorism.
The antiterrorism resolution is likely to be the key achievement in a series of meetings and events to be held at the United Nations next week, in contrast to the General Assembly's stalled effort to hammer out a document for reform of the global body to commemorate the U.N.'s 60th anniversary.
According to the draft resolution, the Security Council condemns "in the strongest terms all acts of terrorism irrespective of their motivation, whenever and by whomsoever committed, as one of the most serious threats to peace and security."
The council calls on all U.N. member states "to prohibit by law the incitement of a terrorist act or acts through the adoption of such measures as may be necessary and appropriate and in accordance with their obligations under international law."
The council also urges the countries to "deny...safe haven to any persons with respect to whom there are serious reasons for considering that they have been guilty of such conduct contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations, with a view to ensuring that such persons are being brought to justice."
It also calls on the U.N. member states "to counter violent extremist ideologies, including steps to prevent the subversion of educational, cultural, and religious institutions by terrorists and their supporters."
In the wake of the deadly attacks in London, British Prime Minister Tony Blair has already said the British government may consider deporting foreign Islamic extremists and shutting down religious institutions encouraging what he branded as extremist ideologies.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:54 pm Post subject:
|Canada threatens Iran with UN action on rights record Fri. 5 Aug 2005
OTTAWA - Canada threatened Friday to introduce a UN resolution on Iran's human rights record as it called on the Islamic republic's new government to improve its human rights record and change its position on nuclear ploriferation.
Canadian Foreign Minister Pierre Pettigrew urged new Iranian President Mahmood Ahmadinejad to "usher in an era of change" to repair relations hurt by the killing of a Canadian journalist in Tehran.
"As no real improvement in Iran's human rights conditions has been noted to date, consultations have begun between Canada and its like-minded partners regarding a possible new resolution on Iran's human rights situation before the UN General Assembly in the fall of 2005," Pettigrew said in a statement.
Earlier, Iran rejected a European Union demand for it to abandon making nuclear fuel with possible weapons use, in return for trade, technology and security incentives.
"Only meaningful change by President Ahmadinejad's new government on Iran's position on human rights and nuclear proliferation can lead to an improvement in our relationship," Pettigrew said, uring Iran to continue negotiations with Europeans.
In May, Pettigrew said Canada had decided to "constrain" its relations with Iran until Iranian authorities handle the case of the Iranian-Canadian photojournalist Zahra Kazemi "in a serious and credible manner."
Kazemi, who was 54, died in custody in Tehran in July 2003 after being arrested for photographing a demonstration outside a Tehran prison. Family lawyers have accused the judiciary of a cover-up, a charge backed by Ottawa.
Iran's government has acknowledged that Kazemi was violently beaten in prison, although the judiciary has also said she may have died after a fall.
Pettigrew on Friday also demanded the "immediate release" of Abdolfattah Soltani, a Kazemi family lawyer arrested after a court hearing on July 25.
Canada also condemned the jailing of dissident journalist Akbar Ganji, the recent hanging of two teenagers and the persecution of minorities, including members of the Baha'i faith.
"We are extremely concerned over the deterioration of the human rights situation in Iran," Pettigrew said.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:57 pm Post subject:
|Iran uses “an army of merchants” to infiltrate Iraq Mon. 5 Sep 2005
London, Sep. 05 – Iran is using an ‘army of merchants’ to infiltrate Iraqi towns and cities to carry out political agitation and intelligence gathering work for the Iranian regime’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS), the Dubai-based daily al-Ettehad reported.
Referring to the recent discovery of Iranian-made bombs and weapon caches in Iraq, the daily wrote that despite official Iranian denial the arms could not have entered the country without the knowledge of Iranian military commanders since all weapons belonging to the Islamic Republic were systemically and accurately accounted for by Iran’s Ministry of Defence.
In August, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told a London-based Arabic newspaper that Iran continued to be the transit point for arms smuggled to insurgents in Iraq.
“Credible intelligence shows that arms smuggling continues through the Iran-Iraq border and the shipment of arms to terrorist groups in Iraq is a clear reality”, Zebari said in an interview with the daily Al-Hayat.
“One of our requests was that Iran change its policy towards Iraq, including for it not to sign bilateral deals with individual Iraqi provinces without the knowledge or approval of the central government [in Iraq]”, he added.
The Iraqi Foreign Minister asked Tehran not to “sign agreements or dialogue or joint-contracts with parties separate to the central government in power, since such violations are not acceptable under the principle of bilateral cooperation”.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:00 pm Post subject:
|Iran’s intelligence service “occupies” key Iraq city - daily Sun. 4 Sep 2005
London, Sep. 04 – Iran’s notorious Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) has infiltrated key levers of power in the holy Iraqi city of Karbala, southern Iraq, according to an independent Iraqi daily.
“The city of Karbala is presently under complete occupation of the Iranian regime and has been taken over”, the daily Iraq al-Ghad (Tomorrow’s Iraq) wrote.
“Thousands of intelligence agents of the Iranian regime have been given Iraqi citizenship”, the daily wrote.
“The sale of books on literature, arts, and philosophy is banned in Karbala’s bookstores. Only religious books that the culture centre distributes at a cheap price or at times free of charge are permitted”.
The paper added that 421 Iranian agents that had been arrested in Karbala at the time when Ayad Allawi was Iraq’s interim Prime Minister. It said the city’s police chief had been fired after complaining about the massive Iranian influence over the city.
One of the tactics used by MOIS agents to gain the support of the Iraqi people for neighbouring Iran, the paper said, was to deliberately cut off the electricity supply in the city on a routine basis and distribute portable electricity generators and food as gifts from Tehran’s rulers.
“All senior administrative and security posts in this city are under the control of Iranian regime’s Intelligence Ministry”, the Iraqi paper added.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:45 pm Post subject:
|THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
September 21, 2004
The President's Address
to the United Nations General Assembly
PRESIDENT BUSH: Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen: Thank you for the honor of addressing this General Assembly. The American people respect the idealism that gave life to this organization. And we respect the men and women of the U.N., who stand for peace and human rights in every part of the world. Welcome to New York City, and welcome to the United States of America.
During the past three years, I've addressed this General Assembly in a time of tragedy for my country, and in times of decision for all of us. Now we gather at a time of tremendous opportunity for the U.N. and for all peaceful nations. For decades, the circle of liberty and security and development has been expanding in our world. This progress has brought unity to Europe, self-government to Latin America and Asia, and new hope to Africa. Now we have the historic chance to widen the circle even further, to fight radicalism and terror with justice and dignity, to achieve a true peace, founded on human freedom.
The United Nations and my country share the deepest commitments. Both the American Declaration of Independence and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaim the equal value and dignity of every human life. That dignity is honored by the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women, protection of private property, free speech, equal justice, and religious tolerance. That dignity is dishonored by oppression, corruption, tyranny, bigotry, terrorism and all violence against the innocent. And both of our founding documents affirm that this bright line between justice and injustice -- between right and wrong -- is the same in every age, and every culture, and every nation.
Wise governments also stand for these principles for very practical and realistic reasons. We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace. We know that oppressive governments support terror, while free governments fight the terrorists in their midst. We know that free peoples embrace progress and life, instead of becoming the recruits for murderous ideologies.
Every nation that wants peace will share the benefits of a freer world. And every nation that seeks peace has an obligation to help build that world. Eventually, there is no safe isolation from terror networks, or failed states that shelter them, or outlaw regimes, or weapons of mass destruction. Eventually, there is no safety in looking away, seeking the quiet life by ignoring the struggles and oppression of others.
In this young century, our world needs a new definition of security. Our security is not merely found in spheres of influence, or some balance of power. The security of our world is found in the advancing rights of mankind.
These rights are advancing across the world -- and across the world, the enemies of human rights are responding with violence. Terrorists and their allies believe the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the American Bill of Rights, and every charter of liberty ever written, are lies, to be burned and destroyed and forgotten. They believe that dictators should control every mind and tongue in the Middle East and beyond. They believe that suicide and torture and murder are fully justified to serve any goal they declare. And they act on their beliefs.
In the last year alone, terrorists have attacked police stations, and banks, and commuter trains, and synagogues -- and a school filled with children. This month in Beslan we saw, once again, how the terrorists measure their success -- in the death of the innocent, and in the pain of grieving families. Svetlana Dzebisov was held hostage, along with her son and her nephew -- her nephew did not survive. She recently visited the cemetery, and saw what she called the "little graves." She said, "I understand that there is evil in the world. But what have these little creatures done?"
Members of the United Nations, the Russian children did nothing to deserve such awful suffering, and fright, and death. The people of Madrid and Jerusalem and Istanbul and Baghdad have done nothing to deserve sudden and random murder. These acts violate the standards of justice in all cultures, and the principles of all religions. All civilized nations are in this struggle together, and all must fight the murderers.
We're determined to destroy terror networks wherever they operate, and the United States is grateful to every nation that is helping to seize terrorist assets, track down their operatives, and disrupt their plans. We're determined to end the state sponsorship of terror -- and my nation is grateful to all that participated in the liberation of Afghanistan. We're determined to prevent proliferation, and to enforce the demands of the world -- and my nation is grateful to the soldiers of many nations who have helped to deliver the Iraqi people from an outlaw dictator.
The dictator agreed in 1991, as a condition of a cease-fire, to fully comply with all Security Council resolutions -- then ignored more than a decade of those resolutions. Finally, the Security Council promised serious consequences for his defiance. And the commitments we make must have meaning. When we say "serious consequences," for the sake of peace, there must be serious consequences. And so a coalition of nations enforced the just demands of the world.
Defending our ideals is vital, but it is not enough. Our broader mission as U.N. members is to apply these ideals to the great issues of our time. Our wider goal is to promote hope and progress as the alternatives to hatred and violence. Our great purpose is to build a better world beyond the war on terror.
Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have established a global fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. In three years the contributing countries have funded projects in more than 90 countries, and pledged a total of $5.6 billion to these efforts. America has undertaken a $15 billion effort to provide prevention and treatment and humane care in nations afflicted by AIDS, placing a special focus on 15 countries where the need is most urgent. AIDS is the greatest health crisis of our time, and our unprecedented commitment will bring new hope to those who have walked too long in the shadow of death.
Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have joined together to confront the evil of trafficking in human beings. We're supporting organizations that rescue the victims, passing stronger anti-trafficking laws, and warning travelers that they will be held to account for supporting this modern form of slavery. Women and children should never be exploited for pleasure or greed, anywhere on Earth.
Because we believe in human dignity, we should take seriously the protection of life from exploitation under any pretext. In this session, the U.N. will consider a resolution sponsored by Costa Rica calling for a comprehensive ban on human cloning. I support that resolution and urge all governments to affirm a basic ethical principle: No human life should ever be produced or destroyed for the benefit of another.
Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have changed the way we fight poverty, curb corruption, and provide aid. In 2002 we created the Monterrey Consensus, a bold approach that links new aid from developed nations to real reform in developing ones. And through the Millennium Challenge Account, my nation is increasing our aid to developing nations that expand economic freedom and invest in the education and health of their own people.
Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have acted to lift the crushing burden of debt that limits the growth of developing economies, and holds millions of people in poverty. Since these efforts began in 1996, poor countries with the heaviest debt burdens have received more than $30 billion of relief. And to prevent the build-up of future debt, my country and other nations have agreed that international financial institutions should increasingly provide new aid in the form of grants, rather than loans.
Because we believe in human dignity, the world must have more effective means to stabilize regions in turmoil, and to halt religious violence and ethnic cleansing. We must create permanent capabilities to respond to future crises. The United States and Italy have proposed a Global Peace Operations Initiative. G-8 countries will train 75,000 peacekeepers, initially from Africa, so they can conduct operations on that continent and elsewhere. The countries of the G-8 will help this peacekeeping force with deployment and logistical needs.
At this hour, the world is witnessing terrible suffering and horrible crimes in the Darfur region of Sudan, crimes my government has concluded are genocide. The United States played a key role in efforts to broker a cease-fire, and we're providing humanitarian assistance to the Sudanese people. Rwanda and Nigeria have deployed forces in Sudan to help improve security so aid can be delivered. The Security Council adopted a new resolution that supports an expanded African Union force to help prevent further bloodshed, and urges the government of Sudan to stop flights by military aircraft in Darfur. We congratulate the members of the Council on this timely and necessary action. I call on the government of Sudan to honor the cease-fire it signed, and to stop the killing in Darfur.
Because we believe in human dignity, peaceful nations must stand for the advance of democracy. No other system of government has done more to protect minorities, to secure the rights of labor, to raise the status of women, or to channel human energy to the pursuits of peace. We've witnessed the rise of democratic governments in predominantly Hindu and Muslim, Buddhist, Jewish and Christian cultures. Democratic institutions have taken root in modern societies, and in traditional societies. When it comes to the desire for liberty and justice, there is no clash of civilizations. People everywhere are capable of freedom, and worthy of freedom.
Finding the full promise of representative government takes time, as America has found in two centuries of debate and struggle. Nor is there any -- only one form of representative government -- because democracies, by definition, take on the unique character of the peoples that create them. Yet this much we know with certainty: The desire for freedom resides in every human heart. And that desire cannot be contained forever by prison walls, or martial laws, or secret police. Over time, and across the Earth, freedom will find a way.
Freedom is finding a way in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and we must continue to show our commitment to democracies in those nations. The liberty that many have won at a cost must be secured. As members of the United Nations, we all have a stake in the success of the world's newest democracies.
Not long ago, outlaw regimes in Baghdad and Kabul threatened the peace and sponsored terrorists. These regimes destabilized one of the world's most vital -- and most volatile -- regions. They brutalized their peoples, in defiance of all civilized norms. Today, the Iraqi and Afghan people are on the path to democracy and freedom. The governments that are rising will pose no threat to others. Instead of harboring terrorists, they're fighting terrorist groups. And this progress is good for the long-term security of us all.
The Afghan people are showing extraordinary courage under difficult conditions. They're fighting to defend their nation from Taliban holdouts, and helping to strike against the terrorists killers. They're reviving their economy. They've adopted a constitution that protects the rights of all, while honoring their nation's most cherished traditions. More than 10 million Afghan citizens -- over 4 million of them women -- are now registered to vote in next month's presidential election. To any who still would question whether Muslim societies can be democratic societies, the Afghan people are giving their answer.
Since the last meeting of this General Assembly, the people of Iraq have regained sovereignty. Today, in this hall, the Prime Minister of Iraq and his delegation represent a country that has rejoined the community of nations. The government of Prime Minister Allawi has earned the support of every nation that believes in self-determination and desires peace. And under Security Council resolutions 1511 and 1546, the world is providing that support. The U.N., and its member nations, must respond to Prime Minister Allawi's request, and do more to help build an Iraq that is secure, democratic, federal, and free.
A democratic Iraq has ruthless enemies, because terrorists know the stakes in that country. They know that a free Iraq in the heart of the Middle East will be a decisive blow against their ambitions for that region. So a terrorists group associated with al Qaeda is now one of the main groups killing the innocent in Iraq today -- conducting a campaign of bombings against civilians, and the beheadings of bound men. Coalition forces now serving in Iraq are confronting the terrorists and foreign fighters, so peaceful nations around the world will never have to face them within our own borders.
Our coalition is standing beside a growing Iraqi security force. The NATO Alliance is providing vital training to that force. More than 35 nations have contributed money and expertise to help rebuild Iraq's infrastructure. And as the Iraqi interim government moves toward national elections, officials from the United Nations are helping Iraqis build the infrastructure of democracy. These selfless people are doing heroic work, and are carrying on the great legacy of Sergio de Mello.
As we have seen in other countries, one of the main terrorist goals is to undermine, disrupt, and influence election outcomes. We can expect terrorist attacks to escalate as Afghanistan and Iraq approach national elections. The work ahead is demanding. But these difficulties will not shake our conviction that the future of Afghanistan and Iraq is a future of liberty. The proper response to difficulty is not to retreat, it is to prevail.
The advance of freedom always carries a cost, paid by the bravest among us. America mourns the losses to our nation, and to many others. And today, I assure every friend of Afghanistan and Iraq, and every enemy of liberty: We will stand with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq until their hopes of freedom and security are fulfilled.
These two nations will be a model for the broader Middle East, a region where millions have been denied basic human rights and simple justice. For too long, many nations, including my own, tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression became common, but stability never arrived. We must take a different approach. We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations.
This commitment to democratic reform is essential to resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. Peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, tolerate corruption, and maintain ties to terrorist groups. The longsuffering Palestinian people deserve better. They deserve true leaders capable of creating and governing a free and peaceful Palestinian state.
Even after the setbacks and frustrations of recent months, goodwill and hard effort can achieve the promise of the road map to peace. Those who would lead a new Palestinian state should adopt peaceful means to achieve the rights of their people, and create the reformed institutions of a stable democracy. Arab states should end incitement in their own media, cut off public and private funding for terrorism, and establish normal relations with Israel. Israel should impose a settlement freeze, dismantle unauthorized outposts, end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people, and avoid any actions that prejudice final negotiations. And world leaders should withdraw all favor and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays their cause.
The democratic hopes we see growing in the Middle East are growing everywhere. In the words of the Burmese democracy advocate, Aung San Suu Kyi: "We do not accept the notion that democracy is a Western value. To the contrary; democracy simply means good government rooted in responsibility, transparency, and accountability." Here at the United Nations, you know this to be true. In recent years, this organization has helped create a new democracy in East Timor, and the U.N. has aided other nations in making the transition to self-rule.
Because I believe the advance of liberty is the path to both a safer and better world, today I propose establishing a Democracy Fund within the United Nations. This is a great calling for this great organization. The fund would help countries lay the foundations of democracy by instituting the rule of law and independent courts, a free press, political parties and trade unions. Money from the fund would also help set up voter precincts and polling places, and support the work of election monitors. To show our commitment to the new Democracy Fund, the United States will make an initial contribution. I urge other nations to contribute, as well.
Today, I've outlined a broad agenda to advance human dignity, and enhance the security of all of us. The defeat of terror, the protection of human rights, the spread of prosperity, the advance of democracy -- these causes, these ideals, call us to great work in the world. Each of us alone can only do so much. Together, we can accomplish so much more.
History will honor the high ideals of this organization. The charter states them with clarity: "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war," "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights," "to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom."
Let history also record that our generation of leaders followed through on these ideals, even in adversity. Let history show that in a decisive decade, members of the United Nations did not grow weary in our duties, or waver in meeting them. I'm confident that this young century will be liberty's century. I believe we will rise to this moment, because I know the character of so many nations and leaders represented here today. And I have faith in the transforming power of freedom.
May God bless you. (Applause.)
USUN PRESS RELEASE # 149 (05)
August 4, 2005
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
United Nations Webcast
Remarks by Ambassador John Bolton at the Security Council Stakeout following the adoption of Resolution 1618 Condemning Terrorist Attacks in Iraq, August 4, 2005
Ambassador Bolton: I would just like to underline what I said in the Council: the importance the United States attaches to this resolution (1618) on terrorism in Iraq, the threat it poses to the constitutional processes that the Iraqis are engaged in, and the importance we attach to the obligations of all member states to cooperate in preventing the flows of terrorists, weapons of terrorists, and financing to Iraq, and particularly call on Iran and Syria to meet their obligations to prevent the flows of terrorists and financing. I’ll just take one or two questions on the resolution.
Ambassador Bolton: As I said, I would just take questions on the Iraq resolution. I think our position on the G-4 situation is pretty clear. Anything on Iraq?
Question: You emphasized in your explanation of the vote the link this resolution has to the transnational war on terrorism. Could you elaborate on the significance of that tie-in?
Ambassador Bolton: I think frankly the statement by the Iraqi Ambassador was very eloquent in describing the linkages and the threats that all of us face from international terrorism, obviously in one of its most exacerbated forms in Iraq, but around the world in a number of the places he mentioned: London, Madrid, Casablanca, Jerusalem, New York, obviously. So this is a global threat and is one reason we are happy to have this resolution. Good to see you all.
Ambassador Bolton: What I said in the prepared statement is that we call on all members to meet their obligations to stop the flow of terrorists, terrorist financing, and weapons, and particularly on Iran and Syria. We think this is very important, obviously, to help bring stability and security to the people of Iraq and to permit the constitutional process to go forward. It is the highest priority for the people and government of Iraq and for the United States as well.
Question: What else would you like to see in this resolution if you could add a couple other things in there to talk about a little bit more?
Ambassador Bolton: We are very happy with it as written. I think it expresses an important view of the Security Council on behalf of all the member governments of the UN. I think it addresses a very serious problem that is taking place in Iraq right now that we and the other coalition members and the government of Iraq are trying to address. Thank you. Good to see you all.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:52 pm Post subject:
|Iraqi Foreign Minister calls on Iran, Syria to control borders Tue. 2 Aug 2005
London, Aug. 02 – Iraq’s Foreign Minister once again called on Iran and Syria to control their borders to prevent insurgents entering Iraq, in an interview on Tuesday with a London-based Arab daily.
Hoshyar Zebari held the two governments responsible for the flow of foreign fighters and told the daily Asharq al-Awsat that the two neighbours had the power to stop infiltrations but had been unwilling to do so.
"Terrorist elements are infiltrating from neighbouring countries, particularly from Iran and Syria. We have asked the authorities of these countries to control their borders and stop the infiltrations, which are obvious to them. Though Iran and Syria have security organs capable of preventing the infiltrations, they are not stopping them”, Zebari said.
The Iraqi Foreign Minister stressed that his government’s message to the neighbouring countries had been clear at a recent meeting of their interior ministers in Istanbul. “Iraq asked them to stop the infiltrations into its territories and implement the relevant UN Security Council resolutions that have become ink on paper”.
“There is variation in the infiltrations from Iraq's neighbouring countries and the danger comes from Syria and Iran”, he added.
On Thursday, Zebari told Al-Iraqiya television that he had complained to Iranian leaders in a recent visit to Tehran that Iran continued to meddle in the affairs of its neighbour.
“We told [the Iranian authorities] forthright that Iran was meddling in the internal affairs of Iraq, since this is our country and we expect our neighbours to cooperate with us”, Zebari said.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:07 pm Post subject:
|"Membership in the United Nations is open to all peace-loving states which accept the obligations of the Charter and, in the judgement of the Organization, are willing and able to carry out these obligations.
The admission of any such State to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council."
Article 4, Chapter 2, United Nations Charter
And be removed from the UN body, by revocation of membership for violation of UN charter obligations, in decision by two-thirds majority vote of the UN General Assembly upon recomendation of the Security Council.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:12 pm Post subject:
|'OUR CHANGED AND CHANGING WORLD' - FOREIGN SECRETARY SPEECH (17/09/05)
Event: UN Millennium Summit
Location: New York, USA
Speech Date: 17/09/05
Speaker: Jack Straw
May I begin by paying tribute to the extraordinary efforts of your predecessor, Jean Ping, principally on the Millennium Review Summit but also throughout the last year.
On behalf of the European Union, I would also like to express our sympathy and solidarity with the people of the United States and in particular the Southern Gulf States in their time of need.
Two months ago, my first duty as Presidency of the European Union was to go to Srebrenica to mark the tenth anniversary of the massacre there – the worst in Europe since the end of the Second World War. More than 8000 people – mainly Muslim – were taken away and killed as the international community just stood to one side. For sure, we had shown the right conviction in words; but, shamefully, we had simply failed to act.
The lesson of that massacre – and of the even greater horror of Rwanda a year before – was that we all needed better means to turn our collective will into decisive action. And we in the European Union have learnt in the intervening period. Today the European Union is on the ground – as military, police or civilian presence – in Bosnia, Aceh, Iraq, the Democratic Republic of Congo and, with the African Union, in Darfur.
I think too that the United Nations has learnt the lessons of the last decade. At the summit this week, we agreed the further steps that we need to take for the organisation to be more effective. But, of all of this, I believe that it will be the agreement on our Responsibility to Protect that will be seen in the future as the decision of greatest significance. If we follow through with that Responsibility to Protect, then never again will genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity be allowed to take place under our noses with nothing done.
The Responsibility to Protect is, of course, a reflection of our common morality. But it is also a recognition that the worl in which we now live is too small for us to be unaffected by or indifferent to the innocent victims of murder and of oppression.
This shrinking of the world has been as sudden as it has been profound. When the Berlin wall fell, a generation of ideological certainties was swept away. People could suddenly see partners where before they had glimpsed only adversaries. And, as that very visible barrier was noisily being breached, a revolution in information technology was quietly erasing the barriers of distance and of time. Continents and cultures are now cabled together and bound by trade and services in a way unimaginable only a decade ago.
In this new world, we can no longer safely tolerate the general threat which can come from a particular human tragedy – wherever it takes place. To a greater extent than ever before we share the same world – the same threats and responsibilities, the same opportunities and threats.
And precisely because the boundaries of our world have contracted, the horizons, the ambitions of many people across the globe have infinitely expanded. For the first time in our history, mankind has the ability to realise the potential of individuals in societies of all kinds and in every region through an open exchange of goods, investment, technology and, above all, of ideas.
Not least, in all this, it is the rise of India and China which is re-ordering the world economy. Hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty there and elsewhere. A new global market has been created which ignores the divide – which seemed fundamental for so many decades – between East and West.
Currently, not everyone has the chance to share in this. Much of sub-Saharan Africa remains blighted by poverty, disease and conflict. The European Union has now set a clear timetable to achieve the 0.7 per cent target for aid. Debt relief, trade reform and development aid are all vital. But none of these can work alone. Fundamental to making poverty history are the governments of the developing world themselves. And where governments fail, their own peoples are the victims – as UN Special envoy Anna Tibaijuka’s damning assessment of the situation in Zimbabwe only too graphically shows.
Sub-saharan Africa is not alone in being yet to achieve its potential. The American author Tom Friedman in his recent book “The World is Flat” highlights an extraordinary anomaly; it was the Arab peoples whose forebears devised algebra and the algorithms upon which our digital age is based, but these peoples are now right at the rear of the today’s technological revolution with one of the lowest rates of Internet access in the world.
Three UNDP Arab Development Reports have now set out clearly how limted economic prospects and stunted political freedoms have led young and talented people towards alienation and disillusionment.
The answer to all this does not lie however in easy stereotypes about some clash of civilisations. It is the terrorists and preachers of hate who want us to believe that Islam and the West are fundamentally different. Theirs is a philosophy of mistrust and despair and we reject it utterly. Indonesia and Turkey, to name but two, are both striking examples of how countries with predominantly Muslim populations can embrace democracy and modernity. We in the European Union have seen in our own vibrant Muslim communities that Islamic and Western cultures can be partners in a global society.
Everyone knows that the Arab peoples want prosperity, freedom and democracy every bit as much as anyone in Europe or America. So the fact that the Arab world has such low scores in regional measurements of democratic practices, civil freedoms and good governance, is not, therefore, some cultural or religious inevitablity but a temporary failure of human will.
To do this, the international community has a responsibility to encourage regionally-led political, social and economic reform; and the European Union is and will be strongly supporting those reforms.
Equally it has been our active foreign policy which has placed us in the lead with regard to Iran, especially on the nuclear dossier. With Javier Solana, and my French and German colleagues, we have made detailed proposals for the relationship to be based on co-operation and on respect for international norms and treaties. Our proposals envisage a high-level, long-term political and security framework between the European Union and Iran, in which we would work together in political, economic, scientific and technological areas – including the civil nuclear field, in return for Iran providing guarantees about its intentions and capabilities concerning nuclear weapons. So we will listen very carefully and reflect on this afternoon’s speech by the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Dr Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.
On Iraq, the European Union now has a comprehensive programme of engagement and has put behind it divisions over the military action two and a half years ago. We are supporting the goal of a peaceful, prosperous, democratic and stable nation.
We are also giving active support to the Quartet’s efforts to secure a just and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians; two states living side by side. We salute Prime Minister Sharon’s brave decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and we salute President Mahmoud Abbas’s work to build the first stage of an effective, viable Palestinian state.
In July, the European Union again suffered the horror of a major terrorist atrocity. This time the target was my country – the United Kingdom, its capital, London. But none of us is safe from the threat of terror. International terrorism requires an international response; otherwise we all pay the price for each other’s vulnerabilities. The ratification of the Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism is therefore of the highest priority.
But the threat from terrorists and the political instability they bring is made worse by the easy availability of weapons in what has become an anarchic, unregulated, international trade. These same weapons fuelled the killings in Rwanda and Bosnia a decade ago and are fuelling the conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo and in Darfur today.
We already have international instruments to regulate chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. We in the European Union have a comprehensive arms control regime. But I suggest to this General Assembly that the time has now come for this organisation to embrace the idea of an international Arms Trade Treaty which would build on and strengthen existing initiatives.
It was in the killing fields of Europe, in two successive wars, that the twin ideas of the United Nations and of the European Union became imperative. The European Union’s commitment to the United Nations is profound – it has never been stronger – and is reflected in what we give in voluntary donations and to the regular budget and peacekeeping operations.
The United Nation’s fundamental purpose remains today what it was at its foundation – to remove the scourge of war, to reaffirm the worth of the human person, and to promote social progress and better standards of life. In this changed and changing world, it is the responsibility of us all to secure for the organisation the powers and resources to make sure that it achieves this aim.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:14 pm Post subject:
|Remarks at the 60th United Nations General Assembly
Secretary Condoleezza Rice
United Nations Headquarters
New York, New York
September 17, 2005
(10:45 a.m. EDT)
SECRETARY RICE: Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished delegates,
ladies and gentlemen:
On behalf of President Bush, and all of the American people, welcome to New
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, my fellow citizens have experienced the
compassion of the United Nations.
I want to thank Secretary General Annan for mobilizing the support of this
And I want to thank the representatives of 126 countries that have offered
assistance in our relief efforts.
The United States will never forget your generosity in our time of need.
Fellow delegates: In moments of tumultuous historical change, leaders must
become architects of a better world.
We must survey the new international landscape, lay firm foundations of moral
principle and build institutions that reflect our unique moment in history. It
is these institutions that enable citizens of conviction to lead us ever closer
to the ideals of justice that stir every soul -- the universal desire for
security, and prosperity, and liberty, and dignity.
Sixty years ago was just such a time of transformation. After one of the
greatest cataclysms in world history, the United States joined with visionary
builders from over 50 countries to create the United Nations.
We placed the enduring principles of human rights and fundamental freedoms at
the foundation of the UN Charter. And we built an institution that has helped
to support a peaceful world order for six decades.
Today, however, with the end of the Cold War, and the rise of globalization,
and the emergence of new threats, the very terrain of international politics
has shifted beneath our feet.
In this new world, we must again embrace the challenge of building for the
Fellow members of the General Assembly: The time to reform the United Nations
is now. And we must seize this opportunity together.
Chapter 1, Article 1, of the UN Charter proclaims the four "purposes of the
United Nations" -- great aspirations that have stood the test of time.
But consider what different forms they take today -- in 2005 -- as opposed to
1945, when they were first declared.
The first purpose of the United Nations is to help "maintain international
peace and security."
In 1945, the most serious threats to peace and security emerged between states
and were largely defined by their borders.
Today, however, the greatest threats we face emerge within states and melt
through their borders -- transnational threats like terrorism, and weapons
proliferation, pandemic disease and trafficking in human beings.
The second purpose of this institution -- as written in the UN Charter -- is
"to develop friendly relations among nations, based on equal rights and
self-determination of all peoples."
In 1945, a life of liberty and dignity was more an aspiration than a reality
for a majority of the world's people.
Today, however, more nations than ever have enshrined the principles of
democracy and human rights -- a true moral triumph that will only be complete
when all individuals are secure in their basic freedoms.
The third purpose of the United Nations is "to achieve international
cooperation in solving international problems."
In 1945, the fear was that strong, aggressive states -- eager and able to
expand their frontiers with force -- would be the primary cause of
Today, however, it is clear that weak and poorly governed states -- unwilling
or incapable of ruling their countries with justice -- are the principal source
of global crises -- from civil war and genocide, to extreme poverty and
The final purpose of the United Nations -- as the Charter states -- is "to be a
center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of common
In 1945, the world's leaders joined together to build an institutional
partnership that could address the shared challenges of their time.
Today, faced with the realities of a new world, we must transform the United
Nations to meet the shared challenges of our time.
The members of this body must work together to strengthen security in a world
threatened by stateless extremists.
Today, I call on the nations of the world to ratify the Comprehensive
Convention on Terrorism.
No cause, no movement, and no grievance can justify the intentional killing of
innocent civilians and non-combatants.
This is unacceptable by any moral standard.
It is time for every member of the United Nations to outlaw acts of
We must also work together to promote prosperity and development in a world of
The United States is committed to the Millennium Development Goals.
And at Monterrey, three years ago, all nations agreed that development must be
a two-way street.
Donor countries have a responsibility to increase their assistance to
developing nations. And developing nations have a responsibility to govern
justly, to advance economic liberty, and to invest in their people.
The Monterrey Consensus is working.
Now is not the time to revert to old, failed thinking about development.
Countries representing three-quarters of the developing world's population are
on a pace to meet the targets of the Millennium Declaration by 2015.
And as President Bush said on Wednesday, the United States is prepared to take
new action to accelerate this progress: We will eliminate all tariffs and
subsidies that distort free trade -- as other nations do the same.
Members of the United Nations must work together as well to support democracy
in a world of expanding liberty. To advance this common purpose, in 2004,
President Bush proposed the creation of a Democracy Fund. With the broad
support of this body, we have made that a reality.
The Fund is now receiving donations -- in cash and in kind -- from countries
both large and small, who wish to help other nations lay the foundations of
Showing its leadership as the world's largest democracy, India made the
generous opening pledge of $10 million.
Now to be sure, when speaking about democracy, the United States has reason for
After all, it was only in my lifetime that America guaranteed the right to vote
for all its citizens.
Obviously, the path to democracy is long, and imperfect, and different for
But the principles of democracy are universal -- as is the desire for them. And
the United Nations must support every country that embraces the challenge of
self-government. In Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, in the Palestinian territories
and throughout the world, peoples who want to build democracy deserve our help.
The many goals we share are great indeed. And the United Nations has a major
role to play in their achievement.
But for this institution to become an engine of change in the 21st century, it
must now change itself.
The United Nations must launch a lasting revolution of reform.
The UN Summit Declaration, which every head of state endorsed this week,
expresses a global consensus that reform is imperative. And I want to thank
former General Assembly President Ping for his tireless hard work.
Our challenge now -- under President Eliasson's leadership -- is to enact the
vital reforms that will make the United Nations more accountable to its
members, more suited to new challenges and more faithful to its founding
The United States welcomes the commitment of all leaders to establish a new
Peace-Building Commission. Now, we must embrace the difficult task of
implementing that vision.
A Peace-Building Commission should plan for post-conflict missions before
And it must help to coordinate reconstruction efforts after the fighting stops.
In a world threatened by civil strife, the United Nations needs to be better
prepared to help countries rebuild in the aftermath of conflict.
We are also pleased that the world's leaders recognized the importance of
establishing a new Human Rights Council.
But it will take a lot of hard work in the coming months to realize this goal.
The Human Rights Council must have fewer members, less politics, and more
credibility. And it should never -- never -- empower brutal dictatorships to
sit in judgment of responsible democracies.
The Human Rights Council must have the moral authority to condemn all violators
of human rights -- even those that sit among us in this hall.
Finally, we welcome the promise of the world's leaders to make the United
Nations a more effective -- and more principled -- institution.
As President Bush said on Wednesday, "The United Nations must stand for
integrity, and live by the high standards it sets for others."
For the United Nations to champion democracy more legitimately, we must
increase the transparency and accountability of this institution.
For the United Nations to promote prosperity more credibly, tougher ethics
rules and greater internal oversight are needed to ensure the highest
And to make the United Nations relevant to the challenges of today, the purpose
and performance of all UN programs must be reviewed thoroughly, consistently,
Our fellow citizens deserve a United Nations that commands their respect -- and
is worthy of their hard-earned tax dollars.
In a democracy, leaders must be able to justify that their people's money is
indeed being well spent.
Real progress on these fundamental reforms will prove that the United Nations
can address greater issues of change -- in particular, the reform of the
We want this important body to reflect the world as it is in 2005 -- not as it
was in 1945.
The United States is open to expanding the Security Council.
We have long supported a permanent seat for Japan. And we believe that
developing countries deserve greater representation on this body.
All of this would make for a more effective Security Council -- and the
Security Council must be effective.
It must be able to deal with great challenges like terrorism and nuclear
proliferation, especially when it faces real threats and when countries like
Iran threaten the effectiveness of the global non-proliferation regime.
When diplomacy has been exhausted, the Security Council must become involved.
Questions about Iran's nuclear activities remain unanswered, despite repeated
efforts by the IAEA.
And after agreeing to negotiate with Europe, Iran has unilaterally walked away
from the talks and restarted its nuclear programs.
Iran should return to the negotiations with the EU-3 and abandon forever its
plans for a nuclear weapons capability.
My friend, the experience of recent years has reinforced the universal truth
that international institutions are only as strong, and effective, and relevant
as their members choose to make them.
The United Nations is no different.
The United States believes in a United Nations that is strong and effective.
And we have ambitious hopes for its future.
So in this year, as the United Nations marks its 60th anniversary, let us
recommit ourselves to principled action.
Let us embrace the same spirit of creation that moved the builders and leaders
And let us reform this great institution to meet the challenges of a new era.
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico
|Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:09 pm Post subject:
|If the reader has read the open letter to John Bolton, you know that SMCCDI has put the validity of the IRI's UN membership in question, and asked that it be brought before the General assembly for debate, and action.
I post the following, because if what has been reported here is accurate, the IRI may save folks the trouble of booting them out of the UN.
Iran Walking Into a Trap?
September 24, 2005
As the drumbeat of war gets louder in Tehran it is, perhaps, time to wonder whether President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s new administration is not walking into a trap partly of its own making.
Over the past week or so Iranian officials at various levels have made a number of statements that could harm Iran’s interests at a difficult time.
Many had hoped that Ahmadinejad would use the opportunity provided by his presence at the UN General Assembly in New York to offer a way out of the diplomatic impasse over Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions.
But that didn’t happen.
Ahmadinejad’s speeches and interviews represented an improvement over his predecessor Muhammad Khatami, a mulla, who amused UN audiences by trying to show off his knowledge of Hobbes and Hegel. Unlike Khatami, Ahmadinejad did not pretend to be what he is not, that is to say a liberal democrat. Instead, he spoke as a radical Islamist revolutionary representing a radical Islamist revolutionary regime.
Nevertheless, Ahmadinejad committed a mistake by making no distinction between rhetoric and real politics.
Before Ahmadinejad arrived in New York many in the UN saw Iran as a poor developing nation being bullied by big powers on spurious grounds. Ahmadinejad replaced that image with one of a cocky midsized power trying to punch above its weight regardless of the consequences.
That impression was subsequently strengthened by sermons in Tehran by the “Supreme Guide” Ali Khamenehi.
Meanwhile, various officials have been acting as loose cannons.
Ali Larijani, the new secretary-general of the High Council of National Defense, has threatened that Iran might withdraw from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) rather than continue the diplomatic wrangle with it. (That threat, however, was withdrawn by Ghulamreza Aqazadeh, Ahmadinejad’s assistant for nuclear affairs, hours later.)
Next it was the turn of Islamic Majlis Speaker Ghulam-Ali Haddad-Adel, to issue a threat that Iran might withdraw from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). (Since Ahmadinejad has not succeeded in appointing an oil minister it is not clear who speaks on the subject.)
That the administration was out of sync was further illustrated by Manuchehr Mottaki, the new foreign minister, who told European Union colleagues that Ahmadinejad’s tough speech at the UN should be taken with a pinch of salt. A similar message was relayed by the Islamic Republic’s ambassadors at the UN, and in London, Paris and Berlin.
Ahmadinejad’s braggadocio has also inspired editorial writers in Tehran who, now that the radical faction is in control, are trying to renew their revolutionary credentials. One way of doing so is to call for the withdrawal of the Islamic Republic not only from the NPT and OPEC but also from the United Nations.
At the same time, mullas working for the government have seized Ahmadinejad’s warlike language to heat up the situation further. In a speech in Qom last week, one such mulla, Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi, claimed that it was Iran’s mission to lead a global revolution and “liberate” the world in the name of the “Hidden Imam” whose birthday was celebrated on Sept. 21.
To add to the confusion, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani has been touring the region at the head of a 30-man delegation that included two former foreign ministers, a former minister of intelligence and security, and several political mullas. Rafsanjani, who heads something called The Expediency Council, behaved as if he, and not Ahmadinejad, were the president of the Islamic Republic, and tried to engage his embarrassed hosts on issues outside the remit of his current job.
Rafsanjani is not alone in this game of make-believe.
Khatami, who also appears to have difficulty in getting used to the idea of Ahmadinejad as president, has spent the past few weeks touring the provinces to address small anti-Ahmadinejad crowds as if engaged in a presidential election campaign.
Part of this bizarre situation may be due to Ahmadinejad’s inexperience in politics at national and international levels.
It is obvious that he has not yet mastered the details of such complicated dossiers as the nuclear program. Also, Ahmadinejad has little direct knowledge of the outside world and the workings of the global system. His only previous visit to the West was in 1989 when he spent a week in Vienna as part of an official team from Tehran negotiating with Kurdish dissidents in exile. (The episode ended in a shoot-out in which three Kurdish leaders were killed by a hit squad from Tehran. Ahmadinejad, apparently not informed about the plot, was injured.)
Ahmadinejad’s lack of experience in international affairs is compounded by the fact that the Islamic Republic’s media and foreign policy establishments are filled with members or at least sympathizers of the Rafsanjani-Khatami faction.
The Islamic Republic’s diplomatic service has never been politically neutral, partly because few of its members are career diplomats. Politicians and mullas could become ambassadors, or even foreign minister, while ambassadors could resign their diplomatic positions to stand for election in local or national contests. A mulla who has served as ambassador could leave diplomacy to become Friday prayer leader in a province.
Ahmadinejad knows that the diplomatic service, together with the rest of the administration, is filled with foes who regard him as an intruder if not a usurper. But he would need time to place his own men in key positions.
By pushing Ahmadinejad, and with him the Islamic Republic, into a major international crisis, the defeated faction pursues a number of objectives.
First, a government preoccupied with a diplomatic crisis would have little time to act on Ahmadinejad’s campaign promise of auditing the last 16 years to “ bring to book those who have robbed the nation and wrecked its economy.”
Secondly, the new administration could be weakened by a crisis that it manifestly cannot handle at this stage. That would give Ahmadinejad’s opponents an opportunity for chipping away at his authority by raising the profile of the organs they still control. (As noted above Rafsanjani is already doing that through his so-called Expediency Council.)
Thirdly, a weakened administration would be unable to implement the reforms that Ahmadinejad has promised. These include a pledge to restore state control over the oil industry that has been transformed into a banquet table for some 40 private companies that, according to Ahmadinejad, have acted as “rapacious vultures.”
Finally, Ahmadinejad’s failure could ensure his faction’s defeat in the parliamentary elections in two years’ time, enabling the “rapacious vultures” to stage a comeback.
The negative impact of the war noises made in Tehran is already felt in the economic domain with a fall in the value of the rial, Iran’s currency. This is all the more surprising because, thanks to record high oil prices, Iran is earning over $200 million a day in foreign exchange. Many business contracts have been frozen while even small companies and private citizens are transferring as much of their capital as they can to foreign banks and offshore funds.
A nation’s foreign policy is a continuation of its domestic politics; and the Islamic Republic is no exception. While the Islamic Republic’s foreign enemies wish to force it into isolation, Ahmadinejad’s domestic foes are cheering him on his way into a diplomatic trap. Ahmadinejad seems to believe that he can take on the Western powers, led by the United States, in a limited conflict, and defeat them thus becoming a national hero and a pan-Islamic knight riding the steed of history in triumph. That is a juvenile illusion that could wreck Ahmadinejad’s presidency before it finds its cruising speed.
||All times are GMT - 4 Hours
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group