The bill did not sever relations with Britain, as many Majlis deputies had been clamoring for many months. It simply ordered the British ambassador, Dominick John Chilcott, to leave Iran within two weeks, and reduced relations to the level of charge d’affaires. Chilcott only took up his post last month. Before that the ambassadorship had been vacant for six months and relations were at the charge d’affaires level then.
The legislation also called vaguely for “economic and trade relations to be reduced to the lowest level.” It did not define that, nor impose any specific restrictions of any kind on exports to or imports from Britain. Analysts generally expected the government would do nothing about trade, though individual traders might look elsewhere for imports on the assumption that many retailers would prefer not to show British goods in their shops because of possible shoppers’ resistance.
Britain may now decide to extradite to the United States Nosratollah Tajik, a former Iranian ambassador wanted by the Americans for trying to arrange the smuggling of American night vision devices to Iran. Tajik was arrested and charged five years ago this month. Successive British ministers have delayed action on the US extradition request.
A WikiLeaks cable from January 2008 that was published a few months ago said Britain had put the extradition on hold for fear of violence against its diplomatic staff in Tehran. Some commentators thought the Majlis legislation was changed from severing relations to downgrading relations so that British diplomats would remain in Tehran as veritable hostages to save Tajik from extradition.
The original legislation approved by the Majlis National Security Committee last December called for a total severing of diplomatic relations. But the bill was quietly redrafted before being brought to the floor last week. The redrafting likely reflected concern for Tajik.
With chants of “Death to England” echoing through the chamber, the legislation was approved Sunday on a vote of 171 to 3 with seven abstentions. Thus, a mere 1 percent of the 290 deputies was willing to stand up in opposition to the bill. However, more than a third of the chamber—109 deputies—chose to absent themselves, including 15 deputies who signed in to the chamber but then walked out without voting.
The very next day, the 12-man Council of Guardians expeditiously cleared the bill as complying with the Constitution and Sharia law, an unusually swift action.
During the Majlis debate, one furious deputy said that red-blooded Iranians were so incensed by Britain’s latest sanctions that they could well storm the British embassy and do to it what red-blooded Iranians did to the US embassy 32 years ago this month.
During the debate, many deputies said booting out the ambassador was a response to Britain’s decision last week to sever banking ties with Iran. However, the bill has been floating around since last December when the National Security Committee approved the first version. The Majlis Presiding Board declined to bring the bill to the floor, however, until after Britain announced the new sanctions and after the bill was made cosmetic.
In Sunday’s debate, Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani joined in the heated rhetoric. “The legislative branch is observing the behavior of the British government and this is just the beginning of the road,” he said heatedly. He did not suggest anything that might lie down the road.
The only criticism of the bill was for it’s being much too mild. “Having any kind of relations with Britain—even with one diplomat—is a total betrayal. We should padlock the British embassy,” said Deputy Mahmud Ahmadi-Bighash. “We should ignore them until they come begging like the Americans,” he said, reflecting the official mythology that President Obama is begging Iran to re-establish diplomatic ties.
Deputy Mehdi Kuchek-zadeh went further. “The British government should know that if they insist on their evil stances, the Iranian people will punch them in the mouth, exactly as happened to America’s den of spies,” he said.
The British embassy responded, “This unwarranted move will do nothing to help the regime address their growing isolation or international concerns about their nuclear program and human rights record.”
Many deputies told reporters they would vote to take similar action if any other countries should follow in Britain’s footsteps. The entire EU was expected to do just that December 1, after the Iran Times went to press. Analysts suspected the reason the bill was brought up now was part of an effort to scare the EU into reducing its sanctions. But the surprisingly mild nature of the punitive bill against Britain might actually encourage tougher sanctions.
In Europe, there is a widespread feeling that the door to diplomacy must be kept open if there is to be any hope to reach a compromise with Iran. But whether that door is held open by an ambassador or a charge d’affaires is irrelevant to most.
Meanwhile, in the newly heated old dispute over Britain’s occupation of the Qolhak Gardens in Tehran, the Tehran Municipality fined the British Embassy 1.6 billion rials ($150,000) for cutting down 340 trees in the garden. The earlier number was 310 trees. Britain has said 31 trees died when the Metro Company cut off the water line to the garden while it was digging a new Metro tunnel nearby.
Britain says the Qolhak Gardens were turned over to the British government as part of its embassy property in the 19th Century. Iran has given various conflicting reports, sometimes saying the British stole the gardens, other times saying the British held a lease that expired in the 1920s.
Qolhak has been one of three active disputes between Iran and Britain. The other two involve Ambassador Tajik and BBC Persian, which has offended the Islamic Republic by drawing far too many regular listeners than the regime is happy with.
President Ahmadi-nejad was quite arch last week in attacking the British action, which would freeze any Central Bank of Iran funds in Britain. In a speech, he miscategorized the British action, saying London was moving to confiscate Iranian funds, calling it a “theft.”
Mahmud Bahmani, the governor of the Central Bank, was one of the few calm voices heard. He said the British sanctions on the bank were meaningless. “It has been a long time since Iran has had any banking relations with Britain, especially at the level of the Central Bank,” he said.
