The White House wants to eliminate the "Treaty of Amity" signed in 1955. According to the CIG, the punitive measures of the US violate the terms of the agreement. For t judges, blocs on the entry of basic necessities must be lifted. The relationship between the Trump administration and international justice bodies increasingly tense.
Tehran (AsiaNews) - The United States intends to cancel the ten-year "Amity Treaty" signed in the middle of the last century with Iran, at the time when the country was led by Shah Reza Pahlavi then expelled by the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
The agreement signed in 1955 before the ascent of the ayatollahs, was exploited in recent months by Tehran to bring a lawsuit against Washington at the International Court of Justice (CIG, also known as the International Court in The Hague).
At the center of the controversy was the economic, diplomatic and commercial war launched by the US administration led by President Donald Trump. Last May, Washington imposed new sanctions, the toughest sanctions in history , after pulling out of the nuclear agreement (the JCPOA).
A decision that caused a significant drop in the Iranian economy and a collapse in oil sales, the goal of the second part of the sanctions that will be in force since 4 November. At the expense of it, it was primarily the weakest part of the population.
The trial at the highest UN judicial body opened on 27 August last and yesterday came the sentence of the judges, which is binding but without any coercive means for its implementation. The IGJ ruled in favor of Tehran, ordering the loosening of the American sanctions against the Islamic Republic because they violate the treaty of 1955 between the two nations.
the US reaction was immediate and furious undermining the relevance of the case brought to the International Court of Justice. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the cancellation of the treaty between Washington and Tehran, adding that "it is a decision that has been waiting for 39 years" (the reference is to 1979 and to the seizure of Khomeini and his allies) .
National Security Adviser John Bolton, one of the White House anti-Tehran hawks, added that all pacts exposing the United States to a dispute with the UN court will be "reviewed". Both then define Iranian claims as "groundless" and reject the decision of the IGC, whose task is to settle the disputes that arise between United Nations member states.
The judges of the International Court have ordered the cancellation of "every impediment" that blocks the entry into Iran of basic and humanitarian goods, including food and medicine. Secure air transport and guaranteed delivery of goods must also be guaranteed. However, the court rejected Tehran's request to eliminate all US sanctions, reserving its provisions for the means necessary for the survival of the population.
Analysts and experts point out that the decision taken by Washington to end the treaty is largely symbolic and without practical implications. And the same decision not to recognize a UN court ruling is not a first. While defending international law on paper, the US has often reacted negatively to the decisions of judges and bodies opposed to their interests. Over time he has developed a controversial relationship against the CICJand has never joined the International Criminal Court. The rise to power of Trump and the men of his administration have further widened this fracture.