Russia casts 10th U.N. veto on Syria action, blocking inquiry renewal

[webfact]

Russia casts 10th U.N. veto on Syria action, blocking inquiry renewal

By Michelle Nichols

 

Representatives of Russia and Bolivia vote in the United Nations (UN) Security Council on a bid to renew an international inquiry into chemical weapons attacks in Syria during a meeting at the UN headquarters in New York, U.S., November 16, 2017. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

 

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Russia on Thursday cast its 10th veto of United Nations Security Council action on Syria since the war began in 2011, blocking a U.S.-drafted resolution to renew an international inquiry into who is to blame for chemical weapons attacks in Syria.

 

The mandate for the joint inquiry by the U.N. and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which found the Syrian government used the banned nerve agent sarin in an April 4 attack, expires at midnight Thursday.

 

A resolution needs nine votes in favour and no vetoes by the United States, France, Russia, Britain or China to be adopted. The U.S. draft text received 11 votes in favour, while Russia and Bolivia voted against it and China and Egypt abstained.

 

The vote sparked a war of words between Russia and the United States in the council, just hours after White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said President Donald Trump believed he could work with Russian President Vladimir Putin on issues like Syria.

 

The April 4 sarin attack on Khan Sheikhoun that killed dozens of people prompted the United States to launch missiles on a Syrian air base. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley warned after the council vote on Thursday: "We will do it again if we must."

 

"The Assad regime should be on clear notice - the United States does not accept Syria's use of chemical weapons," she told the council, referring to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

 

Russian U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said the U.S. draft resolution was not balanced and that an aim by Western powers to disparage Russia had "surpassed the importance of safeguarding the mechanism."

 

"We need a robust, professional mechanism that will help to prevent the proliferation of the threat of chemical terrorism in the region and you need a puppet-like structure to manipulate public opinion," Nebenzia said.

 

RUSSIAN BID FAILS

 

Syrian ally Russia withdrew its own rival draft resolution to renew the inquiry, known as the Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM), after unsuccessfully pushing for its proposal to be considered second and not first, as council rules required.

 

However, following the vote on the U.S. draft, Bolivia then requested a vote on the Russian text. It failed, receiving only four votes in favour, seven against and four abstentions.

 

Nebenzia said he was "deeply disappointed" and that those who voted against the Russian draft "bear the full brunt of responsibility for the cessation of operation of the JIM."

 

Ahead of the council votes, Trump on Thursday urged the Security Council to renew the inquiry, saying it was needed to prevent Assad from using chemical weapons.

 

While Russia agreed to the 2015 creation of the JIM, it has consistently questioned its findings, which also concluded that the Syrian government used chlorine as a weapon several times.

 

Russia has now vetoed 10 resolutions on Syria, including blocking an initial U.S. bid on Oct. 24 to renew the JIM, saying it wanted to wait for the release two days later of the inquiry's report that said the Syrian government used sarin.

 

"Russia has killed the Joint Investigative Mechanism ... Russia has undermined our ability to deter future attacks," Haley said. "In effect Russia accepts the use of chemical weapons in Syria. How then can we trust Russia's support for supposed peace in Syria?"

 

Syria agreed to destroy its chemical weapons in 2013 under a deal brokered by Russia and the United States.

 

"We condemn the use of chemical weapons by anyone, whatever the circumstances are. The perpetrators of such crimes must be held accountable," Nebenzia said.

 

(Reporting by Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Editing by James Dalgleish)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-17

[craigt3365]

Horrible that the accused can veto independent investigations into alleged wrongdoings.  The UNSC desperately needs an overhaul.

[selftaopath]

There is NOTHING Russian I will embrace.... ever. 

 

[Enoon]

4 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Horrible that the accused can veto independent investigations into alleged wrongdoings.  The UNSC desperately needs an overhaul.

 

Russia would veto that.

 

(Actually they all would)

 

Coup by the General Assembly, holding the SC hostage at gunpoint?

 

 

Edited November 17, 2017 by Enoon

[Golgota]

Nothing new under the sun,

Russia vetoes everything related to Iran

US vetoes everything related to Israel

France and Britain veto everything related to Africa

[craigt3365]

25 minutes ago, Golgota said:

Nothing new under the sun,

Russia vetoes everything related to Iran

US vetoes everything related to Israel

France and Britain veto everything related to Africa

I don't think the US, France or Britain were vetoing investigations into their involvement with chemical weapons....

[Golgota]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

I don't think the US, France or Britain were vetoing investigations into their involvement with chemical weapons....

You would be surprised of the vetoes and how quiet the governments and  media are when they are issued by their country of origin..You would be surprised of the vetoes and the cost they had in term of Human lives...

The vetoes should be simply removed from the security council

[Golgota]

7 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I don't think the US, France or Britain were vetoing investigations into their involvement with chemical weapons....

And US vetoed a couple of bloody things in Israel and settlements as well as West bank, the list of all vetoes are available on the internet

[Morch]

24 minutes ago, Golgota said:

You would be surprised of the vetoes and how quiet the governments and  media are when they are issued by their country of origin..You would be surprised of the vetoes and the cost they had in term of Human lives...

The vetoes should be simply removed from the security council

 

Segments of Western media are often critical of Western governments' usage of veto rights. Can't recall a whole lot of that with regard to Russia and the PRC. As for broad brush comments regarding the cost of such decisions in terms of human lives etc., doubt there's any serious way of tallying it.

 

23 minutes ago, Golgota said:

And US vetoed a couple of bloody things in Israel and settlements as well as West bank, the list of all vetoes are available on the internet

 

The USA is not directly involved with regard to said vetoes, whereas Russia is, with regard to the current one. 

 

[craigt3365]

32 minutes ago, Golgota said:

You would be surprised of the vetoes and how quiet the governments and  media are when they are issued by their country of origin..You would be surprised of the vetoes and the cost they had in term of Human lives...

The vetoes should be simply removed from the security council

BS.  The free press in the US would be all over it.  Impossible for them to pass up a big story like that.  The vetoes are publicly recorded.

 

But yes, the ability for one member to block an entire action wrong.

[KKr]

On 11/17/2017 at 11:41 AM, selftaopath said:

There is NOTHING Russian I will embrace.... ever. 

 

obviously never been to Russia ;-)

[buick]

let's assume the inquiry was approved by all parties (no veto).  and then it was discovered who was to blame for the chemical attack.  what would happen then ?  nothing.  so it is better to have the veto and just forget about the whole process.  why waste the time and money when nothing will come of the 'discovery' anyway. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 3:23 PM, Golgota said:

You would be surprised of the vetoes and how quiet the governments and  media are when they are issued by their country of origin..You would be surprised of the vetoes and the cost they had in term of Human lives...

The vetoes should be simply removed from the security council

That would allow a majority of countries to over rule the original security council members and they will never allow that to happen. The US didn't set up the UN just to allow a load of minor countries to tell them what to do, especially over Israel, which would have been sanctioned into oblivion long ago without the US veto.

 

The vote sparked a war of words between Russia and the United States

Ironic seeing as the US always uses the veto to save Israel against everyone else.

 

 

[craigt3365]

2 hours ago, KKr said:

obviously never been to Russia ;-)

You are saying Putin doesn't "rule" Russia?

[Andaman Al]

Its a BS system and there is no point with the US getting mad at this. Look at the following diagram of the number of times the permanent members of the UN Security council have used their veto power.

 

 

Neither France nor the UK have used their veto since 1991. Interestingly since 1970 the Russians have only used the veto 26 times but the USA has used their veto 79 times. Most of the use of the Russian veto was 1946-69.

 

Really this is a completely failed system and despite how abhorrent this particular veto is concerning the very necessary investigation the USA has no grounds to complain about anything.

[buick]

39 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Really this is a completely failed system and despite how abhorrent this particular veto is concerning the very necessary investigation the USA has no grounds to complain about anything.

i agree about the failed system and that USA has no grounds to complain about it (i have never been more sure of anything !!).  but what makes this a 'very necessary investigation' ?  if it is found to be assad, nothing will be done.  if it is found that it is 'another entity' nothing will be done.  although assad would be 'cleared' in that case (but i imagine the west would find some errors in the report....). 

[Morch]

45 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Its a BS system and there is no point with the US getting mad at this. Look at the following diagram of the number of times the permanent members of the UN Security council have used their veto power.

 

 

Neither France nor the UK have used their veto since 1991. Interestingly since 1970 the Russians have only used the veto 26 times but the USA has used their veto 79 times. Most of the use of the Russian veto was 1946-69.

 

Really this is a completely failed system and despite how abhorrent this particular veto is concerning the very necessary investigation the USA has no grounds to complain about anything.

 

There's a difference between acknowledging the failings of the system and questioning the merits of a particular veto right exercised.

 

The problem with calls to tear this system down is that they do not offer a realistic acceptable working alternative. As imperfect as the current system is, it is not completely useless, especially not when compared with how things might be without it. I'm aware status quo is a bad word for some, but chaos is worse.

[jerojero]

UN is disfunctional. No one country should have veto powers. Majority or super-majority should rule. One wild dog in the pack, a Putin or a Trump, should not decide on world affairs instead of majority.

Sent from my SM-G950W using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[buick]

On 11/19/2017 at 5:06 AM, jerojero said:

UN is disfunctional. No one country should have veto powers. Majority or super-majority should rule. One wild dog in the pack, a Putin or a Trump, should not decide on world affairs instead of majority.

so let's assume the majority voted in favor of the investigation (and they did).  how would they get access to to syria ?  russia would block any entry of investigators to syria.  it is nice that the countries of the world have a place where they can voice their concerns.  but it can be difficult for the UN to resolve those concerns (unless all relevant parties are truly in favor of resolving such concerns).

 

 

[KKr]

On 11/19/2017 at 8:27 PM, craigt3365 said:

You are saying Putin doesn't "rule" Russia?

Russia is ruled by the Duma and Senate and its Leader is the elected President.
However, I was not referring to embracing V.V.Putin, but to the earlier poster who had obviously never been to Russia otherwise he would not categorically deny himself the pleasure of ever embracing any Russian ;-)

[craigt3365]

3 hours ago, KKr said:

Russia is ruled by the Duma and Senate and its Leader is the elected President.
However, I was not referring to embracing V.V.Putin, but to the earlier poster who had obviously never been to Russia otherwise he would not categorically deny himself the pleasure of ever embracing any Russian ;-)

I've only been in Russia for a month while doing the Transsiberian. Which was one of my top experiences. And had some wonderful times with locals. As with other nations, their leadership is not the best for the average person.