UNSC rejection of US bid proved ‘complete failure’ of maximum pressure policy: Scholar

The United Nations Security Council’s rejection of the US bid to extend an arms embargo on Iran proved a “complete and dismal failure” of Washington’s so-called maximum pressure on the Islamic Republic, an American writer and former professor has said. 

E Michael Jones, the current editor of Culture Wars magazine, made the remarks in a phone interview with Press TV while commenting on the failure of US President Donald Trump’s administration to extend a UN arms ban on Tehran.

The Security Council overwhelmingly rejected on Friday an American-drafted resolution to extend the Iranian arms embargo which is slated to expire in October as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which has been endorsed by Security Council Resolution 2231.

During the 15-member Security Council vote, the US only received support only from the Dominican Republic for its anti-Iran resolution, leaving it far short of the minimum nine "yes" votes required for adoption.

UN Security Council rejects US resolution to extend Iran arms embargo

The United Nations Security Council has rejected a US resolution to extend an arms embargo on Iran that is due to expire in October.

Russia and China voted against the draft resolution and the remaining 11 Security Council members, including France, Germany and Britain, abstained.

“The United Nations just vetoed the United States' attempt to extend the arms embargo against Iran. The vote was overwhelmingly against the United States; eleven nations abstained, only one nation — the Dominican Republic — supported the United States,” Jones told Press TV.

“So, what we're seeing here is the fruit of this maximum pressure policy that has been inaugurated by the Trump administration. It is proven to be a complete and dismal failure because it is based on force, without any reference to rationality,” the American writer added.

Jones went on to say that, “You cannot unilaterally revoke an agreement, an international agreement, and then expect the rest of the world to support your irrationality, that doesn't work.”

Stressing that the UN’s rejection of the US bid showed the “bankruptcy” of Washington’s diplomatic approaches, Jones said, “It doesn't bode well for the administration that seems to be doubling down on its own irrationality and by this, I mean the appointment of Elliott Abrams as ambassador to Iran, which is something akin to appointing Adolf Hitler as ambassador to Israel, this is not going to work.”

Elliott Abrams — the worst choice for US special envoy for Iran

“Elliott Abrams is a worse choice for US Special Representative for Iran than Brian Hook ever was,” says J. Michael Springmann, a former US diplomat.

The American write added that, “Unfortunately, Trump is in the midst of a revolution that is trying to depose him. He is not devoting the attention that he should to foreign policy. He's been a captive of the Israel lobby for so long. He's trying to desperately hold on to the people that got him elected, and it's not working, certainly not working as a foreign policy.”

Washington has been seeking to keep the arms ban in place through the UNSC resolution, threatening that it would use a provision in the agreement to trigger a return of all UN sanctions on Iran if the UN body fails to extend the embargo.

This is while Washington unilaterally abandoned the deal in 2018.

The Trump administration has repeatedly threatened to trigger the so-called snapback provisions of the 2015 nuclear deal if it cannot secure an arms embargo extension.

Since leaving the JCPOA, the US has been resorting to its maximum pressure campaign against Iran by reinstating its sanctions and persuading others to follow its suit.

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.co.uk