U.N. Council Urges Iran to Halt Atom Activity 
By Warren Hoge
March 30, 2006
The New York Times
Original Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/30/international/middleeast/30nations.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 29 — The Security Council urged Iran on Wednesday to suspend its uranium-enrichment activities and asked the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency to report back on Iran's compliance within 30 days.
The Council took its action in a presidential statement, a nonbinding declaration that needs unanimous support and usually achieves consensus among the 15 members with little resistance. But this one, on the highly charged issue of Iran's nuclear program, which the West maintains is geared toward producing weapons, resulted in three weeks of bruising negotiations that ended up producing a markedly weakened final version.
In a last-minute concession on Tuesday afternoon by the European authors of the final draft, the text eliminated language suggesting that any Iranian drive to produce nuclear weapons would be a threat to international peace and security. China and Russia had argued that the term established a pretext for sanctions, which they both oppose.
When you speak about a threat to international peace and security, you must have strong, clear and legally proved evidence, Andrei Denisov, the Russian ambassador, said before the Council acted.
The statement also dropped references to specific charges and demands for compliance from Tehran and lengthened the period for the report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Vienna-based United Nations nuclear watchdog, to 30 days from 14 days. 
In another step necessary to gain Chinese and Russian support, the statement gave the nuclear agency continuing shared authority over the Iran issue that earlier drafts assigned wholly to the Security Council. Beijing and Moscow fear the Council's power to impose sanctions.
Western ambassadors conceded that the document had been watered down, but argued that it was still meaningful. 
There are some points not in the text that frankly we would have preferred to have seen in the text, said Emyr Jones Parry, the British ambassador. Other colleagues said no, that would send a different message at this particular time.
Despite the text changes, he said, no one doubts that the Security Council is competent for this issue, no one doubts that proliferation is a threat to international peace and security, and we all say the same thing: that we do not wish to see Iran develop nuclear weapons.
The statement avoids suggesting any consequences for noncooperation by Iran, but Jean-Marc de la Sablière, France's ambassador, said: Iran has 30 days. We hope that Iran will comply. If Iran doesn't comply, then the Security Council will have to take its responsibilities.
The most vocal critic of Iran's nuclear activity, John R. Bolton, the American ambassador, said, This is an unambiguous signal to Iran that the Security Council, charged with the maintenance of international peace and security under the Charter, is now dealing with this issue.
He said the Council action would allow an Iran-themed meeting on Thursday in Berlin involving Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the foreign ministers of Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia to be forward looking.
We're finished with the presidential statement: that step is over, he said. Now we look to the future and see if Iran varies the conduct from that it has been following for the past 18 years.
The European ambassadors said they would not prejudge Iran's response and urged Tehran to comply so that negotiations over its nuclear program could resume.
Mr. Bolton held out no such hope. We are prepared to be back on the 31st day, he said, given the Iranian record to date of consistently flouting the International Atomic Energy Agency, attempting to obstruct what they have done and continuing to pursue nuclear weapons.
In a news conference after the Security Council session, Iran's ambassador, Javad Zarif, said Tehran had historically placed little faith in the Security Council and doubted that its action would have any effect on Tehran.
Pressure and threats do not work for Iran, he said. Iran is a country that is allergic to pressure and threats and intimidation.