Iran defiantly ignores a UN deadline. Russia indicates sanctions of any sort are off the table. Following the Lebanon debacle, it seems clear that the UN is fully impotent.

Russia on Friday cast new doubt on the prospects for the Bush administrationÂ’s efforts to punish Iran for refusing to suspend its nuclear program, even as European leaders expressed wariness at moving quickly to impose sanctions.

In Moscow, officials expressed regret that an Aug. 31 deadline had passed without an agreement by Iran to halt its efforts to enrich uranium that could be used for building nuclear weapons, as American and European officials believe Iran intends to do.

At the same time, Russian officials made it clear that they do not support retaliatory sanctions or other steps to isolate IranÂ’s leadership. That was a view that seemed to be widely shared across Europe, despite public consternation over IranÂ’s defiance of a United Nations Security Council resolution.

Despite weeks of diplomacy and compromise among the Security Council’s permanent members — the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia — the resolute deadline set by the Security Council for Iran to halt its nuclear work seemed fairly irresolute once it passed.

Russia’s defense minister, Sergei B. Ivanov, said that the issue of sanctions was “not acute,” and added that diplomats from the five permanent members and Germany would meet to discuss further steps. France’s Foreign Ministry said the meeting was scheduled for next Thursday in Berlin.

RussiaÂ’s foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said that Russia favored continued negotiations and not punitive measures, calling into question their effectiveness.

Even though Russia previously joined the other permanent members of the Security Council in setting the deadline for Iran to comply — with the implicit threat of sanctions — Mr. Lavrov left in doubt whether Russia would ever agree to any penalties. His view echoed one heard increasingly here: that sanctions could be a first step toward a new American-led military conflict in the Middle East.

In light of this, I have to ask why the US and other countries believe that the UN has any role at all in settling world problems. This sort of crap is what we see in the worst parents and worst teachers -- threats made but an unwillingness to carry out. As a result, the wrong-doers are able to continue to act at will, knowing there are no consequences to a failure to comply.

But then again, maybe we should look at history. In 1939, the Russians cut a deal with Hitler. Want to bet that they have a deal with Ahmadinejad?

Posted by: Greg at 03:15 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 444 words, total size 3 kb.