Should China respect sanctions on Iran?

I wonder what to make out of those yes - no - yes - maybe - yeno statements lately. Medvedew says the world community is now basicly in agreement on sanctions. I wonder if he speaks for China there as well, probably not. But what made him change his mind now. Iran offering to swap Uranium with Turkey now, and not Russia? Does Medvedew want to offer the EU something for a deal on the Visa issue?
Then again everybody agreeing sanctions should come does not mean they agree on the nature / duration / extent of the sanctions. In the end everybody probably is looking for sacntions that hurt one's own industry the least.
But, since everybody is fearing the military extent of the nuclear programm, I wonder why nobody has come up with the idea of a full blown arms embargo? Then again, that most likely would hurt Russia and China the most in terms of financial gains.
On a final note, I guess the original mistake here was made over two decades ago when India & Pakistan were allowed nukes without any punishment. And then NorthKorea as well without anybody feeling the need to actually intervene.



Medvedev: World powers in agreement on Iran sanctions

By the CNN Wire Staff - June 5, 2010 1:59 p.m. EDT

(CNN) -- Calling Iran's nuclear stance "irresponsible, Russia's president said Iran's leadership needs to heed an international community now in agreement on sanctions against that country, a Russian state news agency reported.

"Nobody wants sanctions," Russian President Dmitry Medvedev told reporters on Saturday during a visit to Germany, where he met with Chancellor Angela Merkel. "But in some cases, it is necessary to agree on them."

"The situation is such that in practical terms, agreements on these sanctions exist," he said.

Medvedev, whose country in the past has balked at tough measures against Iran, said Moscow's position on the Iran nuclear issue had moved closer to that of its Western partners, Ria Novosti reported.

"I think that this is very important for the future of the international community and... for the future of our relations with European and other countries -- with the United States and China," he said.

"We hope that Iran's leadership will listen to the voice of the international community," he said. "It is necessary to talk with partners within the international community, and that is the only way to solve the most difficult issues."

The five members of the U.N. Security Council -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- and Germany have been mulling over a tougher set of sanctions against Iran.

These nations say Iran has been pursuing nuclear weapons development, but Iran says it is only interested in nuclear power for peaceful purposes.

"It is necessary to talk with partners within the international community, and that is the only way to solve the most difficult issues," Medvedev said, stressing that decisions like sanctions should be made through international consensus and not "personal ambitions." ...

bladerunner said:

Yes it is a pity that the mods closed Finns post. However I dont consider myself to blame on this occassion. It was brought about by another member taking exception to what aI consider a acceptable remark about America keeping the peace in the world. (We certainly know that after WW2.the world was a boiling pot of unsettling insurgencys, with no other country having the financial resources to handle the job of sorting it out, the task fell on america whether we liked it or not.) Yes it was open to challenge but the said refuter went over the top and started country bashing etc etc, which is why Popeye closed it.

Click to expand...

Very few of your remarks are acceptable to many people on this site, and this has already been made very clear to you. More than once. I find it unfortunate that you are allowed such free reign to China bash while others are held to much stricter standards. You don't even limit yourself to the government, but love to take the opportunity to take pot shots at "Chinese citizens" themselves that are in fact barely relevant to the topic at hand (these are your own words). Case in point: on a topic called "Should China respect sanctions on Iran?" you've managed to take sideswipes such as comparing China to Nazi Germany, mocked its government for incompetency because it still has "desperate poor" within its borders, and accused "Chinese citizens" of brutish behavior when they defended torch bearers from the onslaught of "protesting" savages, some of whom went so far as to attack disabled people. All in one single thread. About Iran sanctions. Amazing. You would be less inflammatory and thread-derailing if you ever managed to keep your self-professed neocon tendencies in check.

You would be less inflammatory and thread-derailing if you ever managed to keep your self-professed neocon tendencies in check.

Click to expand...

In case you haven't noticed, he has well over 1,000 posts. Probably, most of them are "acceptable" to the majority. In any case, his opinions are not really the issue. To me, it is a matter of style, and the effort required to discuss with people having different points of view. This is not a matter of second guessing popeye, but of "crafting" your answers to CONVINCE your opponents, rather than aiming to piss them off!

Then again everybody agreeing sanctions should come does not mean they agree on the nature / duration / extent of the sanctions. In the end everybody probably is looking for sacntions that hurt one's own industry the least.

Click to expand...

China is also calling for continued negotiations, even though they have apparently negotiated terms acceptable to themselves -- and apparently to Iran too!

My general feeling is that an ever greater proportion of international politics is coming under the general heading of lip service. France joins the NATO command structure... but sells warships to Russia. Turkey wants to join the EU, and is a member of NATO, but its positions seem to push it further and further from NATO, or at least from the US. Brazil has traditionally been one of the closest American "allies" in Latin America, but it has been bucking the US quite openly lately. And then Obama "welcomes" Brazil's efforts!

Red Moon said:

In case you haven't noticed, he has well over 1,000 posts. Probably, most of them are "acceptable" to the majority. In any case, his opinions are not really the issue. To me, it is a matter of style, and the effort required to discuss with people having different points of view. This is not a matter of second guessing popeye, but of "crafting" your answers to CONVINCE your opponents, rather than aiming to piss them off!

Click to expand...

--------

ravenshield936 said:

There are also no point for any of the members to provoke a trap or start any flamebaiting, because that's also equally unaccepted in SDF and such behavior will be equally punished.

Click to expand...

Flamebaiting is plenty tolerated here. I got flamebaited over in the Flanker thread by multiple people over several pages and silly me I decided to bite the bait. For some reason I got censured for biting but the baiters got off scott free.

ravenshield936 said:

And lastly, so this my question. Is bladerunner's words, points, and arguments, as those mentioned above, necessary to the construction of a rational, logical, and convincing argument?

Click to expand...

NO. In all honesty, he doesn't fit in here. His views belong to the likes of Newsmax or similar right wing sites where his posts comparing China to Nazi Germany and trashing Olympic torch bearers' body guards are the norm and not as surreal as they are in the context of a site like SDF.

Red Moon said:

My general feeling is that an ever greater proportion of international politics is coming under the general heading of lip service. France joins the NATO command structure... but sells warships to Russia. Turkey wants to join the EU, and is a member of NATO, but its positions seem to push it further and further from NATO, or at least from the US. Brazil has traditionally been one of the closest American "allies" in Latin America, but it has been bucking the US quite openly lately. And then Obama "welcomes" Brazil's efforts!

Click to expand...

I don't think this is anything new. As long as there has been international politics there has been lip service, if by that you mean countries that don't say what they mean and don't think what they say. China is no different from the US or any other country in that it will say and do whatever is in its own interests, whether or not what it says and what it does correspond to the same thing. Its own perceived interests lie in the maintenance of the status quo in the Middle East, and it will pursue whatever agenda and say whatever it needs to say in order to pursue that status quo. Charles De Gaulle once said "No nation has friends only interests." This is as true of the relationship between the US and UK as it is between China and Iran, or China and Pakistan, or any other bilateral relationship you can think of.

Well, my point is not so much about lying and cheating, but about alliances. Through the 20th century alliances certainly meant something, and very big wars were fought on the basis of these alliances. Obviously, there will always be lying and cheating, but I believe there is a general loosening of existing alliances today, and there are basically three causes: First, the very rapid shifting in the balance of strength among different powers. Thus, Brazil and Turkey feel they take a stronger stand. Secondly, the very intense competition among states that was first unleashed by the war in Iraq, but which has become even stronger with the 2008 financial crisis. Thus, Turkmenistan can play China, Russia and the US against each other. In the third place, the fact that the most important of the rising powers, China, has zero alliances and directly refuses any such thing. This directly encourages a more fluid international situation.

So, now there's a new round of sanctions against Iran. They mainly focus on additional types of weapons that are now forbidden to be sold to Iran, plus travel restrictions to Rvolutianary Gurd Figures and financial penalties to Companies owned by the Revolutionary Guards. But are in general not too hard really.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

UN approves new Iran sanctions
Ian Black, Wednesday 9 June 2010 17.05 BST

In attempt to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions, security council tightens sanctions on arms, state enterprises, individuals and Revolutionary Guards.

The United Nations imposed a new slate of sanctions on Iran today in an attempt to force it to comply with international demands over its nuclear programme – even though Tehran has insisted punitive measures will not change anything.

The UN security council approved resolution 1929 authorising the sanctions. Twelve countries voted in favour - including crucially all five permanent members, Britain, China, France, Russia and the US. Brazil and Turkey voted against, saying sanctions would not have the desired effect. Lebanon abstained.

The new measures include financial curbs, an expanded arms embargo and warnings to UN member states to be vigilant about a range of Iranian activities. Companies and individuals are named in detailed annexes to the resolution. Iran's national shipping company is specifically targeted, as are entities controlled by the powerful Revolutionary Guards, the backbone of the Islamic regime. ...

Click to expand...

Russia is apparently not going to sell any more S-300 systems to Iran, or maybe they change their mind again.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Russia now says Iran sanctions ban S-300 missiles

By LYNN BERRY (AP) – 1 day ago

MOSCOW — The new U.N. sanctions prevent Russia from delivering S-300 air-defense missiles to Iran, a Kremlin official said Friday, in a reversal of the position announced by Russia's Foreign Ministry the day before.

The Kremlin statement was sure to please Israel and the United States, which have long urged Russia not to supply the powerful missile system. Russia signed a deal to sell the missiles in 2007, but has delayed their delivery.

The U.N. Security Council resolution passed Wednesday bans Iran from developing ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, investing in nuclear-related activities and buying certain types of heavy weapons.

The Kremlin official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the S-300 falls under these sanctions. ...

Click to expand...

Tehran in the meantime seems to decide on how that decission by some countries will affect relations, and what those messures actually mean.
I already feel somehow that China & Iran, maybe also Russia, find ways to circumnavigate some restrictions in those sanctions.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Iranian MPs draw up plan to reassess ties with Russia, China
Tehran Times Political Desk

“The Islamic Republic has extensive economic relations with China and Russia, and we did not expect they vote for the sanctions,” said Esmaili, a senior member of the Majlis majority faction.

Unfortunately, these two countries were swayed by the Zionist lobbies and the Unites States and supported the adoption of the resolution against Iran, he said on Saturday.

In response to this move, lawmakers decided to draft a proposal to reduce ties with Russia and China which will be submitted to the Majlis presiding board in the near future, he explained.

China, Russia will not observe new resolution: politico

A conservative politician, Hamid-Reza Taraqi, is of the opinion that China and Russia would not go ahead to implement the terms of the new sanctions on Iran.

“The recently-approved resolution will not have any affect on Iran in practice, and Russia and China have announced that they are not committed to implement this resolution,” Tarraqi, a member of the Islamic Coalition Party, told the Mehr News Agency. ...

Click to expand...

in general iran should not feel too disappointed about the sanction. it didnt hit them where it hurts afterall, and it is not just China that has trade relations at stake with iran. countries like Japan and Korea also have investments in iran. so China is really doing some of the dirty work for them since it has the biggest stake. the fact that the iranian conservatives would say that China and Russia will circumvent the UN terms of sanction is internal propaganda + sending a message to China and Russia stating that iran does not yet view them as enemies.

I'd like to get back to the first question asked on this thread.

I assume that one day China will demand UN sanctions for its own purposes. If they were passed, how would you guys feel if other countries ignored them?