scholarly journals THE UNITED STATES UNILATERAL WITHDRAWAL FROM THE RESTRICTIONS OF IRAN’S NUCLEAR PROGRAM IN JCPOA 2015 UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-264
Author(s):  
Christopher Valerio Jovan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Council Resolution ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Comprehensive Plan ◽  
Un Security Council

Abstract In 2015, Iran with the P5 + 1 countries (China, France, Germany, Russia, Britain and the United States, as well as the European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) agreed on a JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) which deals with Iran's nuclear program. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action 2015 (JCPOA) is a controversial agreement. First, the JCPOA's status in international law is debated and is not considered as an international treaty. In the midst of the uncertainty over the status of the JCPOA, on May 8 2018, the United States unilaterally declared that it was withdrawing from the JCPOA. Even though the JCPOA has been endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2231 (2015). Thus, other JCPOA participating countries view the withdrawal of the United States as an act that is against international law. This article aims to determine whether the JCPOA is an international treaty and whether the withdrawal of the United States from the JCPOA is justified under international law. Keywords: JCPOA, UN Security Council Resolution, Withdrawal   Abstrak Pada tahun 2015, Iran dengan negara-negara P5+1 (China, Prancis, Jerman, Rusia, Inggris dan Amerika Serikat, serta Perwakilan Tinggi Uni Eropa untuk Urusan Luar Negeri dan Kebijakan Keamanan) menyepakati JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) mengenai pembatasan program nuklir Iran. Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action 2015 (JCPOA) merupakan perjanjian yang mengundang kontroversi. Pertama, status JCPOA mendapat perdebatan karena dianggap bukan perjanjian internasional. Kemudian pada 8 Mei 2018, Amerika Serikat secara sepihak menyatakan menarik diri dari JCPOA. Padahal JCPOA telah dimasukkan ke dalam Resolusi Dewan Keamanan PBB 2231 (2015). Sehingga peserta JCPOA lainnya menganggap tindakan Amerika Serikat sebagai perbuatan yang bertentangan dengan hukum internasional. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah JCPOA merupakan suatu perjanjian internasional dan apakah penarikan diri Amerika Serikat dari JCPOA dapat dibenarkan berdasarkan hukum internasional. Kata kunci: JCPOA, Penarikan Diri, Resolusi Dewan Keamanan PBB

scholarly journals United States Fails to Secure Multilateral Snapback Sanctions Against Iran

2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. 140-146
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Council Resolution ◽  
Comprehensive Plan ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Trump Administration

The United States withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on May 8, 2018, and subsequently reimposed a range of unilateral sanctions on Iran. Throughout mid-2020, the Trump administration sought multilateral support for renewed UN sanctions against Iran, but the Security Council rejected those efforts. In response, the administration moved to initiate snapback sanctions under the terms of the JCPOA and UN Security Council Resolution 2231. However, JCPOA participants and the Security Council largely rebuffed the administration's contention that it could activate the snapback mechanism, instead taking the position that U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA means that it is no longer a “participant state” as required to invoke snapback sanctions.

Forty Years after 242: A ““Canonical”” Text in Disrepute??

2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-48
Author(s):  
Richard Falk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Power Factor ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Council Resolution ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Canonical Text ◽  
Canonical Status

This essay examines the consequences of the near-canonical status acquired over the years by UN Security Council Resolution 242. After tracing the evolution of the vision of peace seen to flow from 242, the essay explores the various ways in which the resolution has been read. In particular, the interpretation of Israel (backed by the United States) is examined, along with the balance of power factor. The essay concludes by suggesting that clinging to 242 as ““canonical”” inhibits clear-sighted thinking on new approaches that take cognizance of the greatly altered circumstances.

Trump Administration Maintains Nuclear Deal with Iran, Despite Persistent Skepticism

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 776-781
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immediate Release ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
Comprehensive Plan ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The World ◽  
Trump Administration

Iran, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Germany, and the European Union agreed to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in July 2015. Under the JCPOA, Iran agreed to limit the scope and content of its nuclear program in exchange for relief from various nuclear-related sanctions imposed by the other signatories. Throughout his campaign, President Donald Trump denounced the JCPOA. He said that, if elected, he would “renegotiate with Iran—right after … enabl[ing] the immediate release of our American prisoners and ask[ing] Congress to impose new sanctions that stop Iran from having the ability to sponsor terrorism around the world.” So far, however, the Trump administration has kept the agreement in place. The United States has continued to acknowledge Iran's compliance with the terms of the JCPOA and has waived various sanctions against Iran in compliance with its own obligations thereunder. Iran, by contrast, has charged the United States with failing to live up to its own JCPOA commitments.

scholarly journals Conflict in Darfur in the perspective of genocide prevention

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-99
Author(s):  
Jakub Kościółek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Community ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Effective Prevention ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The World

The article presents the records collected by the Darfur Atrocities Documentation Team (ADT), which have proved the occurrence of genocide in Darfur. It describes the discussion of the academic community and often conflicting political positions on the issue. The author attempted to analyse the results of the work of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur (ICID), appointed at the request of the United States by the UN Security Council, which examined the numerous violations of the international law in the province, but did not express an opinion whether or not genocide had taken place in Darfur. He has confronted the collected evidence of crimes committed in Darfur with the “Convention on the prevention and punishment of genocide”, which obliges the international community to intervene when genocide is proved to be happening. The conflict in Darfur has been presented as an example of the ineffectiveness of the response of the international community to genocide. Therefore, an analysis was carried out on the means of effective prevention of genocide, which can be used in future prevention of crimes in other regions of the world.

scholarly journals Nuclear efforts of Iran under the shadow of US sanctions

2020 ◽  
Vol V (III) ◽  
pp. 60-67
Author(s):  
Sajida Begum ◽  
Robina Saeed ◽  
Muhammad Munib Khalid
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Foreign Capital ◽  
The United States ◽  
Atomic Energy ◽  
The West ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
The Us ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Domestic Support

Iran has started the Atom program for Peace which has already planned by the US for countries concerned in consuming atomic energy for non-violent devotions. Iran also decided to develop a nuclear program to generate electricity. In 1979 US and the west has temporary banned the project. The United States has applied these sanctions on Iran for various purposes. This includes weakening domestic support for the Islamic regime and, recently, imposing charges on Iran to continue its nuclear program. These sanctions have left Iran with local and foreign capital, and have isolated it economically and politically. However, the regime has survived and continues to challenge the international community. Iran has also made great strides in nuclear planning. This article aims to explain how the Iranian's survived despite international sanctions specially the US. It rebuilds the interaction between the contraction of sanctions by the UN Security Council, the United States and targeted regime strategies to promote the nuclear program and maintain cohesion within the choice.

THE SPILLOVER EFFECTS OF THE RE-IMPOSED UNITED STATES SANCTIONS ON IRAN ON MENA, THE PRC, RUSSIA, AND TURKEY

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (01) ◽  
pp. 2050003
Author(s):  
JOSEPH PELZMAN
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Spillover Effects ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Firms ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
Mena Countries ◽  
The Us ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Eu

Iran has faced US sanctions in one form or another since its invasion of the US Embassy in Iran in 1979. The 2007-08 period marked the initiation of heightened international sanctions on Iran imposed by the UN Security Council in reaction to Iran’s nuclear program. These sanctions were tightened in 2010, when the UN Security Council, the US Congress, and the European Union all implemented separate sets of sanctions targeting either the Iranian nuclear program or the energy and banking sectors. Under the Obama Administration the Joint Plan of Action (JPOA) was signed in late 2013 and within months the United States and the EU took steps to waive specific sanctions. In 2015 the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was signed, which lifted nuclear-related sanctions by the UN, EU and US. The Trump Administration on May 8, 2018 announced the US withdrawal from the JCPOA and directed federal agencies to begin to take steps to re-impose the sanctions established under U.S. law that were lifted or waived in order for the United States to meet its commitments in the JCPOA. On November 5, 2018, all pre-JCPOA - U.S. sanctions on foreign firms that conduct transactions in all of Iran’s core economic sectors, including energy, banking, shipping, and manufacturing, went back into effect. These include sanctions on “petroleum-related transactions” and transactions by foreign banks with Iran’s Central Bank. In addition,700 Iranian and third country entities have again been designated by the United States as sanctioned entities, meaning that foreign firms that transact business with these entities could face virtual exclusion from the U.S. economy. With the re-imposition of sanctions on Iran, in 2018, the US finds itself as a lone player in a world where the EU, the PRC, Russia and a group of MENA countries have no intentions to comply with these re-imposed sanctions. The purpose of this paper, consequently, is to assess the spillover effects which can be expected to result from the US re-imposition of Iran sanctions on relevant MENA countries, the PRC, Russia and Turkey.

Security Council

1963 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 226-230
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Government ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The World ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
States Government

The Security Council discussed this question at its 1022nd–1025th meetings, on October 23–25, 1962. It had before it a letter dated October 22, 1962, from the permanent representative of the United States, in which it was stated that the establishment of missile bases in Cuba constituted a grave threat to the peace and security of the world; a letter of the same date from the permanent representative of Cuba, claiming that the United States naval blockade of Cuba constituted an act of war; and a letter also dated October 22 from the deputy permanent representative of the Soviet Union, emphasizing that Soviet assistance to Cuba was exclusively designed to improve Cuba's defensive capacity and that the United States government had committed a provocative act and an unprecedented violation of international law in its blockade.

Russia may entrench its influence in CAR

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Mining Sites ◽  
Un Security Council

Significance Russia on June 28 rejected as “lies” similar allegations by the United States, United Kingdom and France at the UN Security Council. The exchanges come against the backdrop of rising diplomatic tensions between Russia and France in CAR. Impacts Touadera’s ongoing offensive against rebel forces threatens to deliver a fatal blow to the peace deal he struck with them in 2019. Expanding Russian control over key mining sites could be a persistent source of frictions absent sophisticated local arrangements. Human rights concerns will deter some African leaders from engaging with Russia, but not all.

Historical Landmarks in the Hundred Years’ War on Palestine

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rashid I. Khalidi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Historical Documents ◽  
Hundred Years War ◽  
The Past ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
History Of ◽  
Modern Era

This essay argues that what has been going on in Palestine for a century has been mischaracterized. Advancing a different perspective, it illuminates the history of the last hundred years as the Palestinians have experienced it. In doing so, it explores key historical documents, including the Balfour Declaration, Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, and UN Security Council Resolution 242, none of which included the Palestinians in key decisions impacting their lives and very survival. What amounts to a hundred years of war against the Palestinians, the essay contends, should be seen in comparative perspective as one of the last major colonial conflicts of the modern era, with the United States and Europe serving as the metropole, and their extension, Israel, operating as a semi-independent settler colony. An important feature of this long war has been the Palestinians' continuing resistance, against heavy odds, to colonial subjugation. Stigmatizing such resistance as “terrorism” has successfully occluded the real history of the past hundred years in Palestine.

Trump Administration Recertifies Iranian Compliance with JCPOA Notwithstanding Increasing Concern with Iranian Behavior

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
pp. 1056-1062
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
Comprehensive Plan ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Ongoing Concern ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Trump Administration

In July 2015, Iran, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Germany, and the European Union adopted the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Pursuant to that agreement, Iran committed to limiting the scope and content of its nuclear program in exchange for relief from various nuclear-related sanctions imposed by the other signatories. By law, the U.S. State Department is required to certify Iran's compliance with the agreement every ninety days. The Trump administration first certified Iran's compliance with the agreement in April 2017, albeit reluctantly. In its first certification, the Trump administration expressed ongoing concern about Iran's sponsorship of terrorism, and repeated previous criticism of the JCPOA as “fail[ing] to achieve the objective of a non-nuclear Iran.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document