From US News and World Report. To my mind it is full of spin, though how much from Vimont and how much from USN&WR is harder to say.

The ever frustrating U.S.-led quest for stepping up economic sanctions on Iran in response to its defiant nuclear stand is poised for yet more delays.

Ever frustrating to who? Is it “defiant” for Iran to stand up for things that are within it’s rights by international law? Defiance has a negative connotation.

That was the clear implication of remarks today by France’s ambassador to the United States, Pierre Vimont, in Washington. France, along with Britain, is a key partner in the diplomatic effort to ratchet up pressure on Iran for refusing to suspend its nuclear work, a move that has been set as a precondition for launching full-on talks on the nuclear issue, security problems in the Persian Gulf, and other political questions with Iran.

To summarize: anything that goes wrong will be Iran’s fault because the PTB won’t even talk to them until they stop doing everything the PTB doesn’t like. That’s what we call “diplomacy”.

Vimont, in remarks to the Middle East Institute, pegged two new sources of delay. First, some of the new, nonpermanent members of the United Nations Security Council are not yet on board with even the relatively mild increase in sanctions that apparently have been agreed to by the United States, France, Britain, Germany, Russia, and China.

The nerve.

“This may take some time,” Vimont said. “There is more work to be done.”

Second, some members of the Security Council—not identified by Vimont—want to wait at least until the end of February to see whether Iran will satisfy the demands of Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency, for greater cooperation and adequate explanations on questions about Iran’s once secret atomic work in the past. As such, Vimont’s remarks represented an unusually candid assessment of the slow diplomatic work on Iran. Vimont called for standing firm on the demand for suspending Iran’s nuclear work—but also for more flexibility on reaching out to Tehran with offers for civilian nuclear assistance and talks about strategic disputes. He backed increasing sanctions in response to Iran’s stand. “Sanctions are biting, but they’re biting slowly,” he said.

Can you believe that? Some countries, who shall remain nameless, want to wait a whole other month to see what happens! Outrageous. Who are these people??

Vimont predicted the Security Council would ultimately come together on the next sanctions resolution, but his overall assessment is not likely to hearten those officials, including in the Bush administration, who are trying to turn the screws on Iran.

“So far,” Vimont said of the diplomatic campaign, “there has been no result.”

According to this page, the current non-elected members of the security council are: Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Croatia, Libya, Vietnam, Belgium, Indonesia, Italy, South Africa and Panama. The first five are the “new” nonpermanent members. So if I’m understanding this article correctly, some of these countries have thrown a monkey wrench into the big war machine, for the time being at least.

Very interesting.

UPDATE: Here’s another article.

Without naming the countries, French envoy to Washington Pierre Vimont said a “few” members wanted to wait for Iran to clear up questions over its nuclear program with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog.

In addition, he said, it would take “some time” to get an agreement from some of the council’s non-permanent members on the proposed third set of sanctions over Tehran’s refusal to halt uranium enrichment.

The Security Council on Monday held informal talks on a third sanctions resolution, a draft of which was agreed by the five veto-wielding permanent members — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — plus Germany.

A “few” members want to wait for the IAEA to report (in March), and some of the non-permanent members are balking at the sanctions, but all the big members agree to the sanctions, including Russia, who perhaps needs a proxy?

Vimont also said, “Not only that we have to get an agreement from the Russians and the Chinese but now we also have to get an agreement among some of the non-permanent members in the Security Council and this may take some time.”

The French envoy singled out “new” non-permanent members, saying, “we want to reach consensus among those and there is more work to be done.”

The non-permanent members elected to the council in January were Libya, Vietnam, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica and Croatia.

Come to find out, Russia and Libya have recently embarked on a new relationship. It looks like Libya is the new international hottie to pursue. Libya has assets.

In a letter extended to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, Putin expressed his willingness to visit the country, saying that Moscow is ready to enhance bilateral cooperation in various fields. Tripoli welcomed the letter and expects Putin’s visit.

…The West also intends to resume ties with Libya, eyeing its abundant oil reserves and potential as a market.

Furthermore, Libya’s role in Africa and the Middle East has improved since the United Nations lifted sanctions against it, and its role will be further enhanced after Jan. 1, 2008, when it becomes a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council.

Lavrov pinned great hopes on his visit, saying both countries have the sincere wish to promote bilateral ties.

…According to sources from the Russian delegation, Russia has agreed to provide help to Libya in its pursuit of civilian nuclear development and both sides hope to sign such an agreement.

Analysts said Russia will comprehensively resume its ties with Libya if Putin succeeds in setting foot in the country.

What follows, they said, will be fierce contention between Russia and the West in Libya and the region at large.

Knowing that Russia supports Iran, but Russia also needs to cooperate with the Security Council, perhaps Libya is not going along in part as a favor to Russia. Then again, it could by any one of these countries legitimately exercising their right to say, “Time Out!”

Anyway, it calls to mind that profoundly ignorant comment from Michael Leeden, when he said, “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.” It’s good to see some of the small crappy little countries throwing some small crappy little rocks in the gears of Leeden’s big fat war machine.