One Sufic word, I will utter, permission is there?   

O dearer than my eyes! Peace is better than war and arbitration [[1]]

Introduction

In 2005, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) concluded that Iran had failed to properly report its nuclear program under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). [[2]] In 2006, based on the request from the IAEA, the Security Council demanded that Iran suspend its nuclear enrichment activities, and imposed sanctions under Resolution 1737. [[3]] However, Iran refused to sus­pend its peaceful activities. In March 2007, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1747 which widened the scope of existing sanctions against Iran. [[4]] In March 2008, the Council passed Resolution 1803, extending sanctions to cover a wider range of financial institutions, travel, and exports. [[5]] In June 2010, the Council, by adoption of Resolution 1929, imposed a complete arms embargo on Iran, including a ban on ballistic missiles, and travel bans on certain Iranian officials. [[6]]

After diplomatic exchanges between Iran and the United States, a much-watched sum­mit was held in Geneva in November 2013. The outcome was signing of an agreement between five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany and Iran. [[7]] Iran, inter alia, agreed to permit IAEA experts to visit its nuclear sites to ensure compliance with international standards. In exchange, Iran would receive immediate relief from some sanctions, giving it access to frozen financial assets and opening the door to limited direct flights between Iran and the United States, among other benefits. The six-month agreement was designed to permit time for further negotiations on the issues.

On Tuesday 14 July, the P5+1 and Iran finally reached an agreement concerning Iran’s nuclear program under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). This is the fruit of twenty months of negotiations between the participants since the agreement on the initial Joint Plan of Action (JPOA) in November 2013. The JCPOA is consisting of 159 total pages of text, including 18 pages of the JCPOA itself, with a further 141 pages divided among five annexes. [[8]] it has been endorsed by the UN Security Council through Resolution 2231. [[9]] This insight does not evaluate the content of the deal and individual interests of the participants. It only deals with the contribution that the JCPOA will have to peace among nations.

The deal is very technical, detailed and complicated. The drafters, it appears, tried to address all aspects of the issues in question. It deals with a wide range of issues from uranium enrichment to detailed provisions on lifting of sanctions imposed by the U.N. Security Council, the U.S. and the E.U. [[10]] The final result of this deal is that, through rational diplomacy and peaceful means, Iran, as a member of international community, will ultimately be treated as a normal nuclear energy producing state, on par with other Non-Nuclear Weapon States parties to the NPT.

In a statement, [ [11]] the Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, “[…] warmly welcome[d] the historic agreement in Vienna […] and congratulate[d] the P5+1 and Iran for reaching this agreement”.

International Life and Necessity of Peace

International law is not the end. It is a means to be used to achieve the peace. It is an agreed and recognized body of rules for ascertaining legal national interests. In order to serve the humanity, it needs peaceful means and institutions. “The peoples of the UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”. This was because of the “untold sorrow” which has been brought, by war, “to mankind”. They also determined “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to […] promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom”. A peaceful environment and means is very vital to achieve these ends. No peace no positive achievements! We, the peoples, through our elected governments, need “to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security [[12]].”

The law of UN Charter teaches us to live together in Peace. [[13]] For this end, it has prohibited resort to use of force and threat to use force. [[14]] This is the principle and a jus cogens rule. The States need to learn to behave according to this fundamental principle. It also obliges States to resort to peaceful means for establishing peace. To resort to force for establishing peace contradicts the purposes of the UN. It must be the last resort. At the top of the purposes of the UN is “[t]o maintain international peace and security”. [[15]] Again, settlement of disputes shall be made by peaceful means, in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. [[16]] The last point is that even the States which are not members of the UN are required to live in peace with the others. [[17]] Because of this it is true to say that if there is no peace, the realization of the other ends of the UN, e. g., protection and promotion of human rights, may not be possible. 

The JCPOA itself as a means to serve Peace

International law seeks to secure compliance with international legal norms. When the States agree to comply with international law through peaceful procedures, the effectiveness of international law “under the principle of economy with minimal insult or embarrassment to states” shall be enhanced.[18] The JCPOA is a good example of the non-coercive and peaceful procedures for compliance of international law. It is also a practical translation of the UN charter (See Articles 2 (3) and 33). There is no doubt that diplomatic negotiations play significant role preparing agreed and peaceful solution for solving disputes. According to the Permanent Court of International Justice “before a dis­pute can be made the subject of an action at law, its subject matter should have been clearly defined by means of diplomatic negotiations.”[[19]] The JCPOA, therefore, is “culmination” of diplomatic efforts. [[20]] It does not only present peace to international and national atmosphere, but also rebuffs the risk of a military option.

According to Mr. Ban Ki-moon “an immense amount of work went into this” deal, which “is testament to the value of dialogue”. He believed and hoped that “this agreement will lead to greater mutual understanding and cooperation on the many serious security challenges in the Middle East.  As such it could serve as a vital contribution to peace and stability both in the region and beyond.” [ [21]]

The JCPOA is a good "model for resolving other crises" and “an important investment for restoration of peace and tranquility in the region”. [[22]] It represents “a triumph of diplomacy and cooperation over confrontation and mistrust”. [[23]] This deal will be beneficial to the regional and neighboring countries and will consolidate the economic relations. [[24]] The fruits of this deal are not limited to the participants. All actors in international life shall enjoy its fruits.

The JCPOA`s Contribution to Peace through Dispute resolution mechanism

The participants “reaffirm their commitment to the purposes and principles of the United Nations as set out in the UN Charter”. [[25]] They agreed on a peaceful procedure, based on Article 33 of the UN charter, for settlement of any dispute in relation of non-performance of the commitments under the JCPOA. According to Para. 36 of the agreement, if one of the participants believed that any or all of the other participants were not meeting their commitments under this JCPOA, the concerned participant could refer the issue to the Joint Commission for resolution. The Commission would have 15 days -extendable by consensus- to resolve the issue.

If, after the Joint Commission consideration, any participant considers that the compliance issue had not been resolved, it may refer the issue to Ministers of Foreign Affairs. Ministers would have 15 days -extendable by consensus- to resolve the issue. After Joint Commission consideration, the issue may be considered by an Advisory Board [[26]] -in parallel with (or in lieu of) review at the Ministerial level- in the request of either the complaining participant or the participant whose performance is in question. The opinion of the board is not binding. Again, if the complaining participant is not happy with the opinion, and if, in its view the issue constitutes significant nonperformance, then that participant could treat the unresolved issue as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part and/or notify the UN Security Council that it believes the issue constitutes significant non-performance. Upon receipt of the notification from the complaining participant, the UN Security Council, in accordance with its procedures, shall vote on a resolution to continue the sanctions lifting. If the resolution described above has not been adopted within 30 days of the notification, then the provisions of the old UN Security Council resolutions would be re-imposed, unless the UN Security

Council decides otherwise […].

Conclusion

Sovereign States are the major actors in international life. This life, as a social phenomenon, is an interdependent life. The experience has shown that in a peaceful environment and through peaceful means, these actors are in a better position to do their functions. The UN charter is a sacred covenant which must be respected by all organs of international community. The JCPOA, as a peaceful means, is a realization of respect for the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

This agreement is outcome of a dynamic process of patient negotiations. It is a peaceful procedure for creation of peaceful means for realization of peace. It has saved us from the scourge of war. The results of this agreement are not limited to national borders. It will have positive impacts on the quality of human life and also in the relationship of States. At the end, this JCPOA is the power of soft, peaceful and non-coercive procedures which presents peace for all and contributes to the rule of law. It is not the end, it is the beginning.

About the Author: Heybatollah Najandiamnesh, PhD, is an assistant professor of international law at Allameh Tabatba`i
University, Faculty of law and political sciences, Tehran, Iran.

This piece was originally published by Iranian Society of International Law.