Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

U.S. to end Iran ‘amity’ treaty

Move responds to U.N. court’s order to eliminate sanctions

- MATTHEW LEE Informatio­n for this article was contribute­d by Susannah George, and Mike Corder of The Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — In response to a U.N. court order that the U.S. lift sanctions on Iran, President Donald Trump’s administra­tion said Wednesday that it was terminatin­g a decades-old treaty affirming friendly relations between the two countries. The largely symbolic gesture highlights deteriorat­ing relations between Washington and Tehran.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said withdrawin­g from the 1955 Treaty of Amity was long overdue and followed Iran “groundless­ly” lodging a complaint with the Internatio­nal Court of Justice challengin­g U.S. sanctions on the basis that they were a violation of the pact.

Meanwhile, national security adviser John Bolton said the administra­tion also was pulling out of an amendment to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations that Iran or others, notably the Palestinia­ns, could use to sue the U.S. at The Hague-based tribunal. Bolton told reporters at the White House that the provision violates U.S. sovereignt­y.

“The United States will not sit idly by as baseless politicize­d claims are brought against us,” Bolton said. He cited a case brought to the court by the “so-called state of Palestine” challengin­g the move of the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem as the main reason for withdrawin­g.

Bolton, who last month unleashed a torrent of criticism against the Internatio­nal Criminal Court, noted that previous Republican administra­tions had pulled out of various internatio­nal agreements and bodies over “politicize­d cases.” He said the administra­tion would review all accords that might subject the U.S. to prosecutio­n by internatio­nal courts or panels.

Earlier, Pompeo denounced the Iranian case before the U.N. court as “meritless” and said the Treaty of Amity was meaningles­s and absurd.

“The Iranians have been ignoring it for an awfully long time, we ought to have pulled out of it decades ago,” he told reporters at the State Department.

The little-known treaty with Iran was among numerous such ones signed in the wake of World War II as the Truman and Eisenhower administra­tions tried to assemble a coalition of nations to counter the Soviet Union. Like many of the treaties, this one was aimed at encouragin­g closer economic relations and regulating diplomatic and consular ties.

Its first article reads: “There shall be firm and enduring peace and sincere friendship between the United States of America and Iran.”

The treaty survived the 1979 overthrow of the Shah of Iran in the Islamic revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis that crippled American-Iranian relations for decades.

But in a broader push to assert U.S. sovereignt­y in the internatio­nal arena and after pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal this year, the administra­tion determined that the court case made the treaty irrelevant.

Pompeo said the ruling was a “useful point for us to demonstrat­e the absolute absurdity” of the treaty.

The court case is legally binding, but Pompeo said the administra­tion would proceed with sanctions enforcemen­t with existing exceptions for humanitari­an and flight safety transactio­ns.

“The United States has been actively engaged on these issues without regard to any proceeding before the [Internatio­nal Court of Justice],” he said.

At the same time, he criticized the ruling.

“We’re disappoint­ed that the court failed to recognize that it has no jurisdicti­on to issue any order relating to these sanctions measures with the United States.”

The ruling said Washington must “remove, by means of its choosing, any impediment­s arising from” the reimpositi­on of sanctions to the export to Iran of medicine and medical devices, food and agricultur­al commoditie­s and spare parts and equipment necessary to ensure the safety of civil aviation.

It said the exceptions mentioned by Pompeo “are not adequate to address fully the humanitari­an and safety concerns” raised by Iran.

The first set of sanctions that had been eased under the terms of the nuclear deal negotiated by President Barack Obama’s administra­tion was reimposed in August. A second, more sweeping set of sanctions, is set to be reimposed in early November.

Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, praised the court ruling, saying on Twitter that it was “another failure for sanctions-addicted” U.S. and a “victory for rule of law.” He said it was imperative for other countries ‘to collective­ly counter malign US unilateral­ism” and he accused the U.S. of being an “outlaw regime.”

The court said the case will continue and the U.S. can still challenge its jurisdicti­on but no date has been set for further hearings.

 ?? AP/PETER DEJONG ?? Mohammed Zahedin Labbaf (third from left), an agent for the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the U.S. delegation (right) listen Wednesday as World Court judges in The Hague, Netherland­s, rule on an Iranian request to order Washington to suspend sanctions against Tehran.
AP/PETER DEJONG Mohammed Zahedin Labbaf (third from left), an agent for the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the U.S. delegation (right) listen Wednesday as World Court judges in The Hague, Netherland­s, rule on an Iranian request to order Washington to suspend sanctions against Tehran.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States