Recently the New York Times reported on the plan of the administration of the President of the United States on extending expiring in October, arms embargo in against Iran. Realizing that resolution at this this reason Russia and China will block, Washington allegedly expects to use a special dispute settlement mechanism under UN security Council resolution 2231, which was accompanied by the adoption of a Joint comprehensive plan of action (SVPD, that is the Iranian nuclear deal) in 2015. The outcome of the mechanism may be the restoration of all previously imposed on Iran international sanctions. To strengthen his party to the transaction from which the US withdrew 2018. However, according to The New York Times, the U.S. government has found a solution: they’ll say they’re out of AGREEMENT, but in accordance with resolution 2231 are members of the UN process that allows them to use all of its mechanisms. Whether Russia something to oppose, the special correspondent of “Kommersant” Elena Chernenko spoke with the permanent representative of Russia to international organizations in Vienna Mikhail Ulyanov.— How likely is it that the United States will be able to implement your plan? What are the chances that they will be able to achieve the restoration of UN sanctions against Iran?— This topic is really in the last days is actively discussed in the Western media. October 18 is the deadline of the current regime of arms deliveries to Iran. It is commonly called “arms embargo”, although de jure it is not: it is a permissive mode of supply, i.e. they are possible, but only with the permission of the UN Security Council. In practice, of course, means a complete ban, because the United States any arms deliveries to carry out not give. The validity of the current regime expires in less than six months, and this makes the Americans very nervous.— They say that they can submit for consideration of the UN Security Council a draft resolution on the renewal of the current regime arms supplies. Yeah, but knowing our opposition to such a move, they supposedly are working on a backup plan. According to leaks to the press, its essence is to insist on the fact that the US maintains the status of the participant AGREEMENT. This status is necessary for the Americans to attempt to start the restoration of the former all sanctions by the UN against Iran, as is permitted in certain situations 2231 a resolution of the UN Security Council.— And they can truly claim the status of party to AGREEMENT if they themselves came out of this deal in 2018?— Do to justify this approach, to put it mildly, is not easy. Americans expect to find a clue in the wording of paragraph 10 of the resolution, which lists all the countries involved in the negotiations AGREEMENT, including the United States, and where they all together are referred to as participants of the nuclear deal. They apparently will try to use this as a formal pretext in order to insist on continuing after him the status of party to the AGREEMENT.The argument, of course, ridiculous. We all know that in may 8, 2018 Washington officially announced its withdrawal from the nuclear deal. And what’s more: two years of US doing everything, so the deal collapsed.Attempt to appeal to resolution 2231 looks cynical, because the resolution of the US undermine, and completely unconvincing from a legal, political and moral points of view.The absurdity of this approach, by the way, in the US many people understand. And in most of the administration people seem to realize the absurdity of this call, and therefore launch the public space of trial balloons.It turns out that the US is trying to regain the status of member of the nuclear deal solely in order to finally dismantle it! I think this idea will not work. But the attempt to implement it can bring a lot of harm and cause a heated debate in the UN Security Council.— That is, if I understand correctly, in 2018 the US, coming out of the Iranian nuclear deal, slammed the door, and now they want it back to blow up the whole house? — Actually, Yes. Russia, in fact, nothing that can not oppose? Because the dispute settlement mechanism, if I’m not mistaken, allows for such a move? Americans say: “We came out of SVPD, but it was a political project, and the resolution will be the resolution of it, we did not go out, and have the right to insist on the involvement of this mechanism”. — According to one old joke: “Eat something he will eat, Yes who will give him”. This attempt theoretically probably possible, but it will put US in a very bad light. Everyone understands the absurdity of such a question. I don’t think the members of the Security Council were prepared to support the claim of the Americans to be part of SVPD. Everyone understands that this savagery. But to create such visits can very much.— And if someone is remaining in the deal countries will play along with US and uses this mechanism? For Example, UK. If the procedure is launched, its features, if I understand correctly, are that the opponents of continuity SVPD easy enough to achieve restoration of international sanctions. And Russia that can not stop it. — To discuss the catastrophic scenarios are not want. I don’t see any reasons why the British pulled the chestnuts out of the fire for the Americans and would take responsibility for the demise of the AGREEMENT.Current members of SVPD officially on the subject is not expressed, but according to available leaks, they perceive such American visits extremely skeptical, knowing that this is an attempt to finish SVPD. And from the point of view of remaining in the deal countries, it is a masterpiece of diplomacy and highly important contribution to strengthening the global nuclear nonproliferation regime. So some of the enthusiasm for the American plan with the remaining members of the SVPD I do not watch. Actually it is not really.— That is, Russia is counting on their intelligence?— Life will show, but they should understand that cynicism should be the limit. Americans are not just came out of the deal, it would be so bad. They have for two years struggled apart this deal contrary to the interests of international security, the interests of U.S. allies in the middle East, contrary to the interests of the United States. Such an approach is not rational. It is no support when the IAEA Board of governors discussion of this topic, Americans are in almost complete isolation.— Why Russia at the time, agreed to the introduction into the transaction of the dispute settlement mechanism if it allows in fact to nullify it? The whole nuclear deal is a very delicate compromise, hard-won balance of interests. Not only we, but the Iranians themselves this (mechanism.— “B”) agreed. Such compromises and concessions during the negotiations had to do each country in the interests of the output on a mutually acceptable result.Especially because then nobody could assume that the United States pull out of the deal. It’s just nobody came because the US administration under Barack Obama has played a very important role in the development of this agreement. It was a diplomatic success for all participants in the negotiations, including the United States.— Summing up our conversation: Russia hopes that the US will not be able to permanently break up the deal, and remaining in it can not be moved?— With respect to SVPD, you can use the famous phrase of Mark TWAIN: “the Rumors of my death are greatly exaggerated”. The end of the transaction predicted two years ago, when the United States came out of it. And then repeatedly been speculation on this, but the deal stood. She was very tenacious, although it is in poor condition. For its part Russia is doing and will do whatever is necessary to make this transaction save. In relation to the need to maintain the transaction there is an absolute consensus among all of the remaining participants: we may differ on some private issues, but all recognize the value and importance of AGREEMENT, and all confirm their readiness to work to maintain it.
