See other World News Articles
Title: US ordered to halt 'humanitarian' Iran sanctions in blow for Trump
Source:
[None]
URL Source: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl ... ump/ar-BBNRHWP?ocid=spartandhp
Published: Oct 3, 2018
Author: Jan HENNOP, Danny KEMP
Post Date: 2018-10-03 07:53:39 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 56
Comments: 6
The UN's top court ordered the United States Wednesday to suspend sanctions on "humanitarian" goods for Iran in a stunning setback for US President Donald Trump. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) handed down the bombshell judgement after Iran asked it to halt economic measures that Trump reimposed after pulling out of a landmark nuclear deal with Tehran. Judges in The Hague unanimously ruled that the sanctions on some goods breached a 1955 "friendship treaty" between Iran and the US that predates Iran's Islamic Revolution. "The court finds unanimously that... the United States of America... shall remove by means of its choosing any impediments arising from the measures announced on 8 May to the free exportation to Iran of medicines and medical devices, food and agricultural commodities" as well as airplane parts, chief judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf said. The court said sanctions on goods "required for humanitarian needs... may have a serious detrimental impact on the health and lives of individuals on the territory of Iran." US sanctions also had the "potential to endanger civil aviation safety in Iran and the lives of its users." - 'Psychological warfare' - Trump slapped a first round of sanctions on Iran in August after pulling out in May of the international deal aimed at curbing Tehran's nuclear ambitions, to the dismay of his European allies. A second round of punitive measures is due in November. The ICJ rules on disputes between United Nations member states. Its decisions are binding and cannot be appealed, but it has no mechanism to enforce them. Ahead of the decision, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said that the sanctions were a form of "psychological warfare" aimed at regime change. "The economic warfare that the United States and some of its regional clients are conducting against Iran is psychological warfare more than real economic warfare," Zarif told BBC radio. During four days of hearings in late August, Iran's lawyers accused Washington of "strangling" its economy. Washington however forcefully told the court that it has no jurisdiction to rule on this case as it concerns a matter of national security. Wednesday's ruling is in fact a decision on so-called provisional measures ahead of a final decision on the matter, which may take several more years, experts said. Trump's America First policy largely rejects overarching international organisations. He recently heavily criticised the separate International Criminal Court in The Hague over a probe into alleged US abuses in Afghanistan. - 'Nazi disposition' - The 2015 nuclear deal saw Iran agree to limit its nuclear programme and let in international inspectors in return for an end to years of sanctions by the West. But Trump argues that funds from the lifting of sanctions under the pact have been used to support terrorism and build nuclear-capable missiles. European allies have pledged to keep the deal alive, with plans for a mechanism to let firms skirt the US sanctions as they do business with Iran. Despite that, France alleged on Tuesday that the Iranian intelligence ministry was behind a foiled plot to bomb an exiled opposition group near Paris. US-Iran relations have plunged to a new low since Trump's election in 2016, even as the US president reaches out to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un over his nuclear programme. Trump and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani faced off at the UN in September, with Rouhani denouncing leaders with "xenophobic tendencies resembling a Nazi disposition". Despite their 1955 Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations, Iran and the United States have not had diplomatic ties since 1980. The case is the second brought by Tehran against Washington since 2016. That year it brought a suit at the ICJ against the freezing of around $2 billion of Iranian assets abroad which US courts say should go to American victims of terror attacks. Hearings in that case are due to start next week.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
I would bet that Treaty dates back to the overthrow of Mossadeqh and the installation of the Shah. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Fly the friendly skies of IranAir. Earlier today the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a provisional judgment (pdf, 29 pages) against some of the U.S. sanction against Iran. The ruling is a preliminary injunction over urgent humanitarian issues that will later be followed by a final judgment. The U.S. responded by canceling the treaty the gave the court jurisdiction over the case. The ICJ is the main judicial organ of the United Nations and settles legal disputes between member states. The rulings of the court, based in The Hague, are binding. But there is no global police force that can make the U.S. government follow the court's ruling. Nevertheless the judgment sets a precedent that other courts will use when more specific cases against the U.S. sanctions against Iran come up. A company that loses business because of the sanctions may sue the U.S. over financial losses. An ICJ ruling on the illegality of the U.S. sanctions will then be used by a local court, even an American one, as reference. The core of the ruling says: Indicates the following provisional measures: (1) Unanimously, The United States of America, in accordance with its obligations under the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, shall remove, by means of its choosing, any impediments arising from the measures announced on 8 May 2018 to the free exportation to the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran of (i) medicines and medical devices; (2) Unanimously, The United States of America shall ensure that licences and necessary authorizations are granted and that payments and other transfers of funds are not subject to any restriction in so far as they relate to the goods and services referred to in point(1); (3) Unanimously, Both Parties shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve. The provisional judgment, comparable to an injunction, was issued because of the imminent humanitarian damage the U.S. sanctions cause to Iran. The final judgment may take a year and is likely to be much wider. After today's unanimous ruling the general direction of the outcome is not in question. The U.S. had claimed that the the court has no jurisdiction over the issue of its sanctions against Iran. Iran argued that U.S. sanctions are in violations of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the United States of America (pdf), which was signed at Tehran on 15 August 1955. That treaty gave the ICJ jurisdiction over disputes between the two countries in all issues related to it. The court accepted Iran's view. U.S. Secretary of State Pompeo just held a press conference in which he announced that the U.S. is now canceling the 1955 treaty. His statement was full of bluster and lies: "The court's ruling today was a defeat for Iran. It rightly rejected all of Iran's baseless requests," Pompeo told reporters. The preliminary injunction is obviously a victory for Iran. The court has not yet judged on the wider issue of the U.S. sanctions. Having read the argument I am convinced that the final judgment will only confirm this win. The ruling is a big loss for the Trump administration. It shows the world that the U.S. is the one and only entity which is in breach of the 1955 treaty, the nuclear agreement with Iran (JCPOA) and the unanimous resolution of the UN Security Council endorsing the nuclear deal. Pompeo's announcement of the canceling of the treaty is somewhat schizophrenic. It accepts the ruling and transgresses on it: The U.S. is in fact mocking the court. It is unlikely that any court will accept the clearly upcoming U.S. claim that the treaty no longer exists, that the ICJ has lost jurisdiction over the case and that its orders can thus be ignored. One can not simply change a contract after being found guilty of violating it. The case will be going to a final judgment under the 1955 treaty because that set the legal status when the case was brought to the court. Pompeo and other will undoubtedly argue that the ruling does not matter for the U.S. and that transgressing it will have no costs. That underestimates the effect of such a ruling on lower national courts. It will be them that will judge about the seizure of U.S. assets when claims of economic damage are brought up against the U.S. and its sanction regime. The case will also weigh on the global opinion. It makes it more difficult for other governments to follow the U.S. sanction regime. At least they are flying a Boeing. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
It would seem that this Treaty had nothing to do with the current regime in Tehran. So why are they trying to enforce it today? Treaties exist for the sole purpose of making things easier to deal with in the future. We must ask if a treaty between Russia and the U.S. that preceded the Bolshevik Revolution has any force left today? I would bet Putin would be flabbergasted by any such suggestion. I was just watching Kennedy and her guest was talking about what Iran has just done. He said that Treaty was signed by the Shah of Iran and the Ayatollah's have no greater enemy than Shah Reza Pahlavi. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
It seems this treaty of Amity was the doing of the Eisenhower administration in an attempt to keep the lid on Soviet adventurism during the 50s. They were trying to get a circle around them in the Middle East. The Great Game then is similar to today since it revolves around Geopolitical endeavors. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
a 1955 "friendship treaty" between Iran and the US
#2. To: Ada (#0)
DACA Shithole Dreamers - Make America Great Again?
#3. To: BTP Holdings (#1)
Iran Sanctions - U.S. Responds To Court Order By Canceling Treaty That Gave The Court Jurisdiction
THE COURT,
(ii) foodstuffs and agricultural commodities; and
(iii) spare parts, equipment and associated services (including warranty, maintenance, repair services and inspections) necessary for the safety of civil aviation; The United States on Wednesday called an international court ruling against its Iran sanctions a defeat for Tehran as it terminated a 1955 treaty on which the case was based.
...
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo noted that the UN court did not rule more broadly against US sanctions and he insisted that the United States already exempted humanitarian goods from the sanctions. DACA Shithole Dreamers - Make America Great Again?
#4. To: hondo68 (#2)
Fly the friendly skies of IranAir.
#5. To: hondo68 (#3)
(Edited)
#6. To: hondo68 (#3)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest