IRAN: PEACEFUL SOLUTION – THE ONLY RATIONAL OPTION

Declaration of Turkish intellectuals

Ankara, April 2006

We, whose names, signatures and professions appear at the end of this collective statement, express, though in summary form, our deep concerns over the controversy regarding the legal and political implications on the research, production and use of nuclear energy in the Islamic Republic of Iran.  This Memorandum, intended to reach the President and all the other members of the United Nations Security Council, calls for the peaceful settlement of the dispute as the only rational option, and warns against dogmatic imposition of sanctions and certainly all attempts to resort to force by any super or regional power.  The undersigned share the objectives of similar statements, made previously and/or simultaneously, of like-minded groups, pledged to peace and stability, foremost among them being the timely reminder of the prestigious International Progress Organization, which is attached to the U.N. as an NGO with consultative status.

            We accentuate with profound anxiety that the conflict, centering in one of the most vulnerable spots on earth, courts above all undeniable dangers that threaten international peace and security, not only now but also for decades to come.  We are fully convinced as well that the right of all countries, including Iran, and especially the latter under the present circumstances, to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, need to be defended and assured.  We believe, moreover, that the world public ought to be appropriately informed of the legal limits of contractual requirements.

            In pursuit of the judgments stated above, we are likewise convinced that any use of arms, on the basis of mere suspicion, from the air, adjacent waters or on land ostensibly to frustrate Iran’s nuclear research or to pass a U.N. Security Council resolution that may eventually activate a unilateral resort to force against the same regional state will only exacerbate the danger to international peace and security.  We share the opinion that Iran, which never used, or threatened to use force, against any U.N. member, repeatedly and often voluntarily allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect its military sites, adopted measures to address past shortcomings, and took extensive confidence-building initiatives.

            A sizable portion of the world public thinks that other cases of military interventions proved to be counter-productive and put regional peace and stability in jeopardy.  Even a limited aerial attack on the nuclear infrastructure will initiate a protracted military confrontation that will involve other states as well.  An attack on Iran will adversely affect its current cooperation with the international community.  Such an outcome will lead to the very option that all rational people are presently trying to avoid.  Hence, impartial and far-sighted opinion demands that approaches other than war and sanctions must be sought, no matter how difficult they may seem to be.

            We are also united in opposing high-handed sanctions with no ifs and buts, which have also proved in a number of previous cases to be humanly brutal, ethically unacceptable, and materially disastrous.

            Legal treatment of the subject determines that Iran, which is a State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), possesses the inalienable right to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.  Iran cannot be obliged to implement the Additional Protocol that it has signed but not ratified.  Therefore, the IAEA cannot expect Iran to go beyond that country’s legal responsibilities.  We support, on the other hand, Iran’s willingness to keep and continue its dialogue with the IAEA.  Similarly, the U.N. Security Council’s notice to Iran to suspend all enrichment activities cannot invalidate that country’s right to engage in nuclear research.

            It is of utmost importance that the employment of double standards in the evaluation of various states in relation to the nuclear issue ought to be avoided. The Security Council should not be allowed, above all, to be misused in the interests of its most powerful permanent member.  We judge that the option of peace will be imperative within this United Nations organ as well as among the world public.

Co-ordinator: Prof. Dr. Türkkaya Ataöv, Ankara