Spring Break
U.N. must punish Iran for wrongs
Chris Gardner
Issue date: 4/18/06 Section: OpEd Page
As much as I try to stay away from covering topics more than once, Iran simply will not be ignored. Last time I wrote, the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had publicly stated that Israel be "wiped off the map." Now, in the wake of Iran's announcement last week that their scientists have succeeded in enriching uranium, the prerequisite to a nuclear weapon, it seems the country will have the capability to do that someday soon.
That news alone would probably be enough of a reason to write a column about the nation, but Ahmadinejad also said Friday, "The Zionist regime is a dying tree, and soon its branches will be broken down." In response, a one-time Nobel Peace Prize winner Shimon Peres called for direct action against Iran saying Ahmadinejad "represents Satan."
I can't necessarily say I'm capable of determining the veracity of Peres' charge but it seems to me he's a lot more right in this situation than Ahmadinejad and the Iranian government. As Peres also pointed out, the statements by Ahmadinejad come from the president of a United Nations member state and seem to suggest that the destruction of another member state, Israel, would be a desirable end.
And so we're back before the U.N. again. What's unique about this situation is that though other Arab nations may spout off vitriolic rhetoric about how terrible Israel is, none speak as violently as Iran and none are capable of producing nuclear weapons save Iran.
In this light, Iran is presenting a unique threat to a fellow U.N. member that currently exists nowhere else in the world. It seems to me that if the U.N. is an organization that is truly dedicated to peace throughout the globe, it can not allow its members to openly advocate an unprovoked war with another member.
In my last column I recommended political and economic sanctions be levied against Iran because they refused to disable their nuclear program. These most recent actions demand a far more powerful response. In addition to significant economic and political pressure, Iran should be expelled from the U.N. General Assembly and any committees in which it is involved.
Some will argue that by expelling Iran it will be even harder for the U.N. to control the country's actions. To that I respond in two ways. First, if the U.N. is incapable of influencing those states whose actions are so egregious that they are excluded from membership in one of the least exclusive clubs in the world, what good is it doing? Second, Iran isn't cooperating with the U.N. now, so how is it any different if they simply don't have a voice in the organization they are already shunning?
With only an estimated 18 - 24 months before Iran may be capable of producing a nuclear weapon, the time to act is at hand. The world cannot sit, wringing its hands, as the second member of the "axis of evil" realizes its nuclear ambitions.
That news alone would probably be enough of a reason to write a column about the nation, but Ahmadinejad also said Friday, "The Zionist regime is a dying tree, and soon its branches will be broken down." In response, a one-time Nobel Peace Prize winner Shimon Peres called for direct action against Iran saying Ahmadinejad "represents Satan."
I can't necessarily say I'm capable of determining the veracity of Peres' charge but it seems to me he's a lot more right in this situation than Ahmadinejad and the Iranian government. As Peres also pointed out, the statements by Ahmadinejad come from the president of a United Nations member state and seem to suggest that the destruction of another member state, Israel, would be a desirable end.
And so we're back before the U.N. again. What's unique about this situation is that though other Arab nations may spout off vitriolic rhetoric about how terrible Israel is, none speak as violently as Iran and none are capable of producing nuclear weapons save Iran.
In this light, Iran is presenting a unique threat to a fellow U.N. member that currently exists nowhere else in the world. It seems to me that if the U.N. is an organization that is truly dedicated to peace throughout the globe, it can not allow its members to openly advocate an unprovoked war with another member.
In my last column I recommended political and economic sanctions be levied against Iran because they refused to disable their nuclear program. These most recent actions demand a far more powerful response. In addition to significant economic and political pressure, Iran should be expelled from the U.N. General Assembly and any committees in which it is involved.
Some will argue that by expelling Iran it will be even harder for the U.N. to control the country's actions. To that I respond in two ways. First, if the U.N. is incapable of influencing those states whose actions are so egregious that they are excluded from membership in one of the least exclusive clubs in the world, what good is it doing? Second, Iran isn't cooperating with the U.N. now, so how is it any different if they simply don't have a voice in the organization they are already shunning?
With only an estimated 18 - 24 months before Iran may be capable of producing a nuclear weapon, the time to act is at hand. The world cannot sit, wringing its hands, as the second member of the "axis of evil" realizes its nuclear ambitions.
