WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Earlier on Monday, the UN Security Council approved the agreement reached between Iran and the P5+1 group of nations comprised of the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom plus Germany.
“It seems quaint to say so, but we cannot ‘reserve the right to use force against Iran’ when, under international law, we have no such right,” Freeman said on Monday.
Freeman stated that, “Attacking Iran when the UN Security Council has approved a framework for constraining its nuclear program would be about as egregious a violation of international law and comity as one can imagine.”
US critics of the agreement ignore the mechanisms within it to deal with any identified breaches by the Iranians, the veteran diplomat pointed out.
“The post-agreement rhetoric clearly needs adjustment to reflect the fact that there is now an agreed means of managing the problem,” he said. “‘All options are on the table’ and such is no longer a persuasive sound bite.”
Freeman noted the threat of military action against Iran to destroy its nuclear program had never been a credible option.
“The use of force against Iran was never an effective means of dealing with its alleged nuclear weapons program. Pretending otherwise is empty political posturing.”
Freeman added that Washington policymakers and their critics both have to remember that the United States had not entered the agreement with Iran alone. Other great powers were equal participants with the United States in reaching it and upholding it, he added.