Brussels, 30/01/2008 (Agence Europe) - MEPs were unanimous in their condemnation of the massive violations of human rights and fundamental liberties in Iran and in their opposition to any attempt by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to build nuclear weapons. However, they were divided on the approach that the international community should follow to prevent Iran from pursuing its nuclear enrichment programme and require it to comply with International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) rules. That is what came out of the debate in the European Parliament, meeting in mini plenary session in Brussels, held on Wednesday 30 January with EU High Representative for the CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy) Javier Solana, and European External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner. In Berlin last week, the permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Great Britain, Russia and the United States) and Germany agreed on a draft resolution strengthening international sanctions to force Iran to stop enriching uranium. Discussion on this draft began on 28 January in the Security Council in New York. The text includes a ban on travel for those involved in the Iranian nuclear programme and possible checks on maritime and air freight for Tehran, should there be any suspicion that they contain banned materials.
While Michael Gahler (EPP-ED, Germany) and Hannes Swoboda (PES, Austria) expressed their support of their respective political groups for strengthening sanctions against Tehran, others warned about such measures, which, they said, would be directed more against the Iranian people than the regime. Angelika Beer (Greens/EFA, Germany), who recently led an EP delegation to Iran, said that sanctions would only “bolster Ahmadinejad and punish citizens”. Rather than isolate Iran, contact should be increased with civil society and democratic forces “which do exist in the country and which must be supported”. The fact that more than 7,000 people had registered as candidates in the 14 March elections in Iran (many of the candidatures have been declared illegal by the regime) “shows that Ahmadinejad has his back to the wall” on the internal political level, Beer said, and she argued for negotiations to continue. Tobias Pflüger (GUE/NGL, Germany) said that his group would oppose any increase in UN sanctions, which , in his opinion, would be counter-productive. On this same point, Javier Solana had highlighted earlier that the aim in increasing sanctions was “not to punish Iran, but to persuade it to come to the negotiating table, the sooner the better”.
Addressing MEPs, Solana described the two faces of Iran. On the one hand, it was a “great country which we hold in great respect”, a country with a long history and a dynamic society, and a very high percentage of well-qualified women. Iran was also a “key country” in the Middle East and presented many opportunities for cooperation, not only in energy. On the other hand, the human rights situation was deteriorating and fundamental freedoms were becoming more and more restricted. Tehran's active support for Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran made Iran a “troublemaker” in the region, all the more so since it rejects the “two-state solution” in the peace process between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. To this can be added the Iranian nuclear programme, on which the international community was “united”. Iran had the right to use nuclear energy for civilian purposes, but “Iran can use nuclear civil power without doing enrichment,” he said. The EU and the international community were ready even to help Iran develop a strictly civilian nuclear programme, he added, before concluding, “Iran must return to the negotiating table. We will do all we can to pursue the way of dialogue”.
Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner also welcomed the international community's “unity and firmness” on the nuclear issue. Unfortunately, at the moment, she said, Iran lacked the “political will” to return to the negotiating table, and this could delay the conclusion of a trade and cooperation agreement between the EU and Iran, she lamented. However, the deadlock on the nuclear programme must not prevent the EU from trying to pursue dialogue on human rights (a dialogue which Tehran had unilaterally suspended) and trying to increase contacts with civil society and democratic forces, she said. The human rights situation had worsened dramatically, the commissioner went on.
According to Ms Ferrero-Waldner, who quoted press articles and figures from Amnesty International, the number of executions had increased from 177 in 2006 to 297 in 2007. She concluded that, “the Commission agrees with the EP: without systematic improvement of human rights our relations cannot develop properly”.
Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck (Belgium, ALDE) said that it was paradoxical that a country like Iran, which possesses a history and civilisation that is so rich and a population so dynamic, had fallen so low in terms of human rights. Speaking about the nuclear programme, Hannes Swoboda (Austria, PES) was categorical, “we don't want nuclear weapons either in Iran or in the whole region” of the Middle East (in this context, he criticised the US, which a the time allowed Pakistan to obtain nuclear weapons). The same concern was expressed by Philip Claeys (Belgian, non-attached) who said that Iran's nuclear plans were a “danger to the region and world peace”.
The European Parliament is expected to adopt a resolution on Iran on Thursday 31 January. (H.B.)