RESTRICTED
29699 1
-
THE SANCTIONS ORDERS, YOU SHOULD EXPLAIN THAT OUR OBJECTIVE (AND THAT OF THE NINE) IN TAKING THESE MEASURES HAS ALWAYS BEEN:
(I) TO DEMONSTRATE OUR SUPPORT FOR THE US OVER CONTINUED
DETENTION OF THE HOSTAGES, AND
(II) TO SHOW IRAN THAT IT CANNOT CONTINUE TO FLOUT INTER-
NATIONAL LAW WITHOUT SUFFERING PENALTIES AND WITHOUT
DETRIMENT TO ITS ECONOMIC AS WELL AS POLITICAL RELATIONS
WITH US.
WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT OUR LIMITED SANCTIONS WILL (WILL) HAVE
A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON IRAN'S TRADING ECONOMY. WE NEVER
ENVISAGED THAT A WATERTIGHT ECONOMIC BLOCKADE COULD BE SET UP
WITHOUT MANDATORY AND UNIVERSALLY APPLIED MEASURES.
EC ASPECT
12.
THE UK DECISION NOT TO PROCEED ON THE BASIS OF THE 4 NOVEMBER
DATE AGREED AT NAPLES (PARA 6 ABOVE) HAS LED TO SUGGESTIONS
THAT BRITAIN IS DOING LESS THAN OUR EC PARTNERS. IN PRACTICE,
BRITAIN WAS ALWAYS A LEADING PROPONENT, WITHIN THE EC, OF
SIGNIFICANT ACTION ON SANCTIONS BY THE NINE TO DEMONSTRATE
SOLIDARITY WITH US AND WAS ONE OF THE ONLY TWO EC COUNTRIES TO
INITIATE PRIMARY LEGISLATION TO THIS END (THE OTHER BEING
DENMARK) SO THAT SANCTIONS COULD BE EFFECTIVELY IMPLEMENTED.
13. OUR PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTATION DIFFER FROM MOST OF THE
NINE. THEY ARE USING EXPORT LICENSING SYSTEMS: WE ARE RELYING
ON DECLARATIONS WITH SUBSEQUENT CHECKING OF THEIR LEGALITY.
4
RESTRICTED
/ IT IS IMPORTANT
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.