‘Guilty’ or not?

US and three of its Western allies, France, UK and Germany, recently sent a letter of complaint to the UN Security Council, charging that Iran is not complying of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which calls on it not to develop or test missiles capable of carrying nuclear bombs.

The letter said Iran acted “inconsistent with” and “in defiance of” the said resolution and that military leaders claim that the missiles are meant to threaten… Israel.

“By launching nuclear-capable missiles Iran has defied a United Nations Security Council resolution that endorsed last year’s historic nuclear deal,” the joint letter said.

The missiles in question are the medium-range Shahab-3 and the short-range Qiam-1 vintage, which the West says are “inherently capable of delivering nuclear weapons”.

According to Security Council diplomats, the case for new US sanctions is weak as it hinges on some interpretation of ambiguous language in the resolution adopted in July, when Iran reached a deal with the West restricting its nuclear endeavours.

Russia said it would not support new UN sanctions on Iran. Its wielding of veto power will ensure that its promise is delivered.

Moscow said all that the UN Security Council had decided earlier was to “call” on Iran not to test the kind of missiles the four Western countries complain about, which is quite different from “demanding” it not to do so.

It is, admittedly, a dubious line of argumentation never before used at the UN Security Council. But then, equally dubious is the West’s complaint on behalf of Israel.

The difference between “calling “ and “demanding” in the UN jargon is semantic at best. But with the four Western power falling short of calling the Iranian launches a “violation” of the resolution, semantics comes in handy.

Some diplomats believe the most Iran could expect is a public rebuke by the Security Council.

The nuclear deal stipulates that UN sanctions can be reimposed only if Iran violates the restrictions on atomic work.

However, even a rebuke would provide European countries with a legal facilitator to consider new sanctions against Iran.

The issue requires investigation and corroboration before conclusions are drawn.