United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
UN Security Council
Resolution 1929
Iran (orthographic projection).svg
Date 9 June 2010
Meeting no. 6,335
Code S/RES/1929 (Document)
Subject Non-proliferation
Voting summary
12 voted for
2 voted against
1 abstained
Result Adopted
Security Council composition
Permanent members
Non-permanent members

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929, adopted on 9 June 2010, after recalling resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008) and 1887 (2009) concerning the topics of Iran and non-proliferation, the Council noted that Iran had failed to comply with previous Security Council resolutions concerning its nuclear program and imposed further sanctions on the country.[1]

The resolution, which adopted a fourth round of sanctions against the country,[2] was adopted by twelve votes for the resolution, two against from Brazil and Turkey, with one abstention from Lebanon.



In the preamble of the resolution, the Council reaffirmed its commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, its provisions therein and obligations on parties to the Treaty. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors had adopted a resolution stating that a solution to the Iranian nuclear issue would contribute to global non-proliferation efforts and the Middle East region free of weapons of mass destruction. There was concern that Iran had not yet fully suspended uranium enrichment activities, resumed co-operation with the IAEA or clarified issues relating to a possible military dimension to its nuclear program.[3]

The Council recognised that access to diverse, reliable energy was critical for sustainable growth and development, and emphasised the rights of states in international trade. It called upon Iran to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and was determined to take appropriate measures to make Iran comply with provisions in previous Security Council resolutions and requirements of the IAEA.[3]


Acting under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Council determined that the Iranian government had yet to meet the requirements of previous Security Council resolutions and IAEA requirements. It affirmed that Iran should immediately co-operate with the IAEA on all outstanding issues, particularly with regards to activity at Qom, clarifications on a possible military use of the nuclear program and granting unrestricted access to all sites, persons, equipment and documents requested by the IAEA. The Council also decided that Iran should comply with the Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA, not undertake any further reprocessing, heavy water-related or enrichment-related activities or acquire commercial interests in other states involving uranium mining or use of nuclear materials and technology.

Further provisions of the resolution included:[4]

All states were furthermore recommended to undertake the following:[4]

  • Inspect all cargo to and from Iran in accordance with the Convention on the Law of the Sea and civil aviation agreements for prohibited items if the state has reasonable grounds to suspect such items exist and report within five days explanations for the search and the findings from such inspections;
  • The seizure and disposal of prohibited items;
  • Prevent the provision of fuel, supplies and servicing of Iranian vessels if they are involved in prohibited activities;
  • Provide information to the Committee concerning attempts to evade the sanctions by Iran Air or Iran Shipping Lines to other companies;
  • Prevent the provision of financial services that may be used for sensitive nuclear activities;
  • Exercise vigilance when dealing with Iranian individuals or entities if such business could contribute to Iran's sensitive nuclear activities;
  • Prohibit the opening of Iranian banks in their territory and prevent Iranian banks from entering into relationships with banks in their jurisdiction if there is reason to suspect the activities could contribute to sensitive proliferation activities in Iran;
  • Prevent financial institutions operating in their territories from opening offices and accounts in Iran if they would contribute to Iran's proliferation sensitive activities.

Throughout the imposition of the aforementioned measures, exceptions were made for humanitarian purposes and legal economic activities.[3]

The Security Council deplored the transfer of arms by Iran to other countries in violation of Resolution 1747 and directed the Committee to respond to violations and promote the implementation of previous resolutions. The Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was requested to establish a panel consisting of up to eight experts for an initial period of one year to assist the Committee in its mandate; examine information presented by countries, particularly with regards to instances of non-compliance; make recommendations to the Council and report on its findings and recommendations.[3]

All states were to report to the Committee within 60 days on the measures they had taken to implement the provisions of the current resolution. It emphasised diplomatic efforts by the five plus one (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and United States) to resolve the nuclear issue and encouraged further efforts. It commended the Director-General of the IAEA Yukiya Amano for a draft agreement between France, Iran and Russia and requested a report within 90 days on whether Iran had begun co-operating with the IAEA and suspended activities mentioned in Resolution 1737. On the basis of the report, the Council would review the sanctions regime and would lift provisions if compliance was reported or consider further measures in the light of non-compliance with Security Council resolutions.[3]


The resolution was adopted after receiving 12 votes for the resolution, two against (Brazil and Turkey) and one abstention (Lebanon).[5]



Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad described the new resolution as a "used handkerchief which should be thrown in the dustbin".[6] He also warned that the country would end negotiations on its nuclear program if the resolution was adopted.[7]

In an e-mail interview to the British newspaper The Guardian, the Iranian reformist politician Mehdi Karroubi argued these sanctions would actually strengthen the Ahmadinejad regime by offering "an excuse to the Iranian government to suppress the opposition".[8]

Turkey and Brazil[edit]

Brazil and Turkey criticised the sanctions, saying they could undermine further diplomatic efforts.[9] Brazil and Turkey had just previously attempted to mediate the dispute, concluding negotiations with Iran which led to the so-called Teheran Declaration, but which was not accepted by the P5+1.

See also[edit]


External links[edit]