2006年08月02日

イラン核開発問題安保理決議

 イラン核開発問題に関する安保理決議が採択された。奇しくも北朝鮮に対する安保理決議1695と連番となる1696となった。1695に関しては雪斎殿が原文へのリンクも含めたエントリで全文を引用しておられるので、そちらを参照されたい。

 対イランの決議案に関するプレスリリースはSC/8792として公表されている。内容はこのようなものだ。以下に決議部を引用しておく。

“The Security Council,
“Recalling the Statement of its President, S/PRST/2006/15, of 29 March 2006,
“Reaffirming its commitment to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and recalling the right of States Party, in conformity with Articles I and II of that Treaty, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination,
“Noting with serious concern the many reports of the IAEA Director General and resolutions of the IAEA Board of Governors related to Iran’s nuclear programme, reported to it by the IAEA Director General, including IAEA Board Resolution GOV/2006/14,
“Noting with serious concern that the IAEA Director General’s report of 27 February 2006 (GOV/2006/15) lists a number of outstanding issues and concerns on Iran’s nuclear programme, including topics which could have a military nuclear dimension, and that the IAEA is unable to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran,
“Noting with serious concern the IAEA Director General’s report of 28 April 2006 (GOV/2006/27) and its findings, including that, after more than three years of Agency efforts to seek clarity about all aspects of Iran’s nuclear programme, the existing gaps in knowledge continue to be a matter of concern, and that the IAEA is unable to make progress in its efforts to provide assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran,
“Noting with serious concern that, as confirmed by the IAEA Director General’s report of 8 June 2006 (GOV/2006/38) Iran has not taken the steps required of it by the IAEA Board of Governors, reiterated by the Council in its statement of 29 March and which are essential to build confidence, and in particular Iran’s decision to resume enrichment-related activities, including research and development, its recent expansion of and announcements about such activities, and its continued suspension of co-operation with the IAEA under the Additional Protocol,
“Emphasizing the importance of political and diplomatic efforts to find a negotiated solution guaranteeing that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively for peaceful purposes, and noting that such a solution would benefit nuclear non-proliferation elsewhere,
“Welcoming the statement by the Foreign Minister of France, Philippe Douste-Blazy, on behalf of the Foreign Ministers of China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States and the High Representative of the European Union, in Paris on 12 July 2006 (S/2006/573),
“Concerned by the proliferation risks presented by the Iranian nuclear programme, mindful of its primary responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security, and being determined to prevent an aggravation of the situation,
“Acting under Article 40 of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations in order to make mandatory the suspension required by the IAEA,

“1. Calls upon Iran without further delay to take the steps required by the IAEA Board of Governors in its resolution GOV/2006/14, which are essential to build confidence in the exclusively peaceful purpose of its nuclear programme and to resolve outstanding questions,

“2. Demands, in this context, that Iran shall suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA,

“3. Expresses the conviction that such suspension as well as full, verified Iranian compliance with the requirements set out by the IAEA Board of Governors, would contribute to a diplomatic, negotiated solution that guarantees Iran’s nuclear programme is for exclusively peaceful purposes, underlines the willingness of the international community to work positively for such a solution, encourages Iran, in conforming to the above provisions, to re-engage with the international community and with the IAEA, and stresses that such engagement will be beneficial to Iran,

“4. Endorses, in this regard, the proposals of China, France, Germany, theRussian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States, with the support of the European Union’s High Representative, for a long-term comprehensive arrangement which would allow for the development of relations and cooperation with Iran based on mutual respect and the establishment of international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear programme (S/2006/521),

“5. Calls upon all States, in accordance with their national legal authorities and legislation and consistent with international law, to exercise vigilance and prevent the transfer of any items, materials, goods and technology that could contribute to Iran’s enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and ballistic missile programmes,

“6. Expresses its determination to reinforce the authority of the IAEA process, strongly supports the role of the IAEA Board of Governors, commends and encourages the Director General of the IAEA and its Secretariat for their ongoing professional and impartial efforts to resolve all remaining outstanding issues in Iran within the framework of the Agency, underlines the necessity of the IAEA continuing its work to clarify all outstanding issues relating to Iran’s nuclear programme, and calls upon Iran to act in accordance with the provisions of the Additional Protocol and to implement without delay all transparency measures as the IAEA may request in support of its ongoing investigations,

“7. Requests by 31 August a report from the Director General of the IAEA primarily on whether Iran has established full and sustained suspension of all activities mentioned in this resolution, as well as on the process of Iranian compliance with all the steps required by the IAEA Board and with the above provisions of this resolution, to the IAEA Board of Governors and in parallel to the Security Council for its consideration,

“8. Expresses its intention, in the event that Iran has not by that date complied with this resolution, then to adopt appropriate measures under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations to persuade Iran to comply with this resolution and the requirements of the IAEA, and underlines that further decisions will be required should such additional measures be necessary,

“9. Confirms that such additional measures will not be necessary in the event that Iran complies with this resolution,

“10. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”


 一見して分かると思うが、ここで押し出されているのは、まずIAEAという国際的に正当性を認められた組織に対する非協力である。もちろん、実質の外交努力を担っているのは欧米露の多国間の働きかけであることは言うまでもない。しかしそれは第4項での記述の"Endorses, in this regard,"以下にまさによく現れているのだが、その取り組みを認めるという形で間接的に扱われている。これは適切なアプローチだろう。

 先の北朝鮮に関する決議でも、決議が通る通らないに関わらず状況は全ての関係諸国に明らかであった。しかし、韓国内の世論の反応はこれまでと異なってきている。無論ミサイル発射という事実自体に直面したことが重要だが、明確な形で国際的に正当性を認められた外交文書が作成されるというのは、大きな意味があるものなのだ。そして今回のイランに関してはIAEAと二段構えである。民主主義国はもちろん、そうでない国も政策を巡っての国内議論は様々な力学が働く。その中で何が優勢になるかというのは、この種の文書一つであっさり決定することがしばしばある。これは、何だかんだといいながらもそこそこの大国意識がある日本人は、米国など一部の国を除き、多くの国と比較してそれほど実感していないと言えるかもしれない。

 しかし、その日本にしても、イランのアザデガン油田などを巡って色気を示す向きもあったところ、まずは核開発問題が重要だというメッセージを発することが出来た。実のところ実質的には政策転換なのかもしれない。しかし、こういう場で賛成して首尾一貫したメッセージを発していれば必ずしもそうとは取られない。恐らくこの決議案が出るタイミングで行動することを計画していたのであろう。今回の日本に関する部分も引用する。

Japan, which traditionally had friendly relations with Iran and was a country committed to nuclear non-proliferation, had undertaken its own diplomatic initiative towards the peaceful resolution of the issue. Japan would contribute its own efforts through continuous dialogue and engagement with Iran.


 この短い文書でownを2回にcontributeと、これは国連の報道官が大島氏の言を受け取って表現し直した部分であろうか。経緯はともかくもちろん意を受けているのであろうし、このように国際的に報道されるようにしてあること自体、様変わりという印象もある。この調子ならイラン問題での失敗は無さそうかなと言う気もする。

 それにしても、対北朝鮮決議との関係は興味深い。あれで7章関連を削った結果、この対イラン決議でも削るというのは、中国やロシアも難しい。またこの件ではIAEAを前面に押し出すことで受益者としての立場を再確認させてもいる。プレスリリースではロシアが軍事的な対応を除外されているという立場を示しているが、現段階ではそれで構わない。そして北朝鮮がまた何かリアクションを起こしたら、先の安保理決議1695のみならず、この対イラン決議1696の内容も重要となる。イランより甘くしたのがまずかったと主張することは容易である。

 多国間外交はこのようにややこしい経緯をたどる。今回、非常任理事国といえど、安保理メンバーとして活動していたのは真に幸いであった。常任理事国入りに関する国内的な議論も今まで以上にまとまるであろう。今になってみれば、自分から常任理事国の地位を投げ捨てた戦前の愚が良く分かるかもしれない。また、戦後少ない外交リソースをアメリカに一点張りしていた理由も合理性はあったと実感できるだろう。日本外交の質に問題があるとすればそれは質というより量の少なさだが、それを補う事に関してもコンセンサスが出来つつある、と信じたいところだが・・・・
posted by カワセミ at 23:06| Comment(0) | TrackBack(1) | 西南アジア・北アフリカ
この記事へのコメント
この記事へのトラックバックURL
http://blog.sakura.ne.jp/tb/1267854

この記事へのトラックバック

長崎原爆犠牲者慰霊平和祈念式典〜核はなくならない?〜
Excerpt: おはようございますッ 今日も雨〜〜ハァ━(-д-;)━ァ...まろんは傘もささずに会社へ来ました……シタタタッ ヘ(*¨)ノ だって山手線に忘れてしまった大切な傘が見つからないんだものー(*´Д`)..
Weblog: SMASH HIT !!
Tracked: 2006-08-09 15:11