Continued Reactions to the Adoption of Two Human Rights Resolutions Regarding Iran

Following the reactions to two resolutions adopted by the UN General Assembly's Human Rights Committee regarding Iran, the Iranian Foreign Minister described the issuance of these resolutions as a "bitter irony of our times." At the same time, government opponents labeled their adoption as a result of the "smiling policy" and the "neutral" nature of the Foreign Ministry's diplomacy. Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran's Foreign Minister, on Saturday, November 30, at the "International Conference on the 70th Anniversary of the Establishment of the United Nations" at the Political and International Studies Office of the Foreign Ministry, emphasized the necessity of the UN as a comprehensive body for solving some problems through dialogue, while also pointing out its shortcomings, stating that "political considerations dominate real global concerns" as one of these shortcomings. Zarif referred to the two resolutions recently issued against Iran and stated that their issuance "may be one of the bitter ironies of our time, where countries that have no knowledge of constitutions or elections speak of such matters, and those who have fostered ISIS criticize countries' responses to it, and unfortunately, they also gain votes." The Third Committee of the UN General Assembly adopted two resolutions proposed by Canada and Saudi Arabia regarding Iran on November 28 and 29. The Canadian resolution condemned the "suppression of civil activists, journalists, and opponents, and the exponential increase in executions in Iran," as well as violations of the rights of women and ethnic and religious minorities. This non-binding resolution was adopted with 76 votes in favor, 35 against, and 68 abstentions, and it also called for holding "valid, transparent elections in accordance with the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" and allowing international oversight of these elections. The adoption of this resolution was met with a strong reaction from Iran's permanent mission to the UN on the same day. Gholamhossein Dehghani, the deputy of this mission, described its presentation by Canada as being "politically motivated and continuing support for Zionists." The other resolution, adopted a day later by the same committee, was proposed by Saudi Arabia, condemning foreign "intervention" in Syria and naming "all foreign terrorist groups... and foreign forces participating in battles in support of Bashar al-Assad, especially the Quds Force (the IRGC's overseas branch), the IRGC, and militia groups like Hezbollah [Lebanon]." This resolution did not directly name Russia but condemned "all attacks against moderate opposition groups in Syria." This non-binding resolution was adopted with 115 votes in favor, 15 against, and 51 abstentions. In addition to Iran's permanent mission to the UN and the Foreign Minister, some conservative representatives opposing the government and members of the "Stability Front" also reacted to the adoption of these resolutions. Ismail Kowsari, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission of the Parliament, accused Saudi Arabia of "paying some UN members" and "buying their votes," stating that the UN only serves the "pain of tyrants, oppressors, arrogant, Zionist, and greedy people" and that its structure needs to be changed. He then referred to the remarks made on Friday by Hassan Qashqavi, the consular deputy of Iran's Foreign Minister, who deemed the formation of an international or bilateral fact-finding committee with Saudi Arabia regarding the "Mina" incident as "unlikely" due to legal issues and stated that the Foreign Ministry intends to pursue this matter in Saudi courts. Kowsari told the Fars News Agency that Qashqavi said he could not bring Saudi Arabia to international legal institutions for the Mina tragedy, but Saudi Arabia condemns Iran at the UN. He added that this is the result of the "smiling policy" and shows that the Foreign Ministry's diplomacy is "neutral" and needs to become "offensive" diplomacy. Kowsari also threatened that the Parliament could summon the Foreign Minister for his performance and question him or even impeach him, but since the term of the ninth Parliament is nearing its end, this would not be practical.