Russia, China Veto Un Security Council Resolution On Syria

[News_Editor]

Russia, China veto UN Security Council resolution on Syria < br />

2012-07-21 05:48:47 GMT+7 (ICT)

NEW YORK (BNO NEWS) -- Russia and China on Thursday vetoed a United Nations (UN) Security Council (UNSC) resolution that would have threatened the Syrian government with new sanctions, calling the draft unilateral and unrealistic.

Eleven of the Council's 15 members voted in favor of the resolution, which was drafted by the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States, and France. Pakistan and South Africa abstained while China and Russia used their veto power, making it impossible for the UNSC to adopt the resolution.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, along with the Joint UN-Arab League Special Envoy, Kofi Annan, had repeatedly expressed the hope that the UNSC could reach an agreement on a course of collective action to end the bloodshed in the Middle Eastern country. Thursday's vote came just a day after a suicide bomber killed senior Syrian government officials.

"I am deeply disappointed by the failure of the Security Council over the situation in Syria," Ban told reporters in Slovenia, where he arrived to begin an official visit. "I had expected that the Security Council and the international community should have been united to send out a strong and united voice to save human lives. So many people have been killed during the last 16 months."

Ban's spokesman, Martin Nesirky, said the vote came at a time when more resolve and pressure is needed to achieve the goals previously endorsed by the UN Security Council, such as a full cessation of violence to protect civilians and of facilitating a Syrian-led political transition leading to a democratic political system.

"The hour is grave," Nesirky said. "The international community has a collective responsibility to the Syrian people. The Syrian government has manifestly failed to protect them. The Secretary-General, together with the Joint Special Envoy and the United Nations as a whole, will spare no efforts in the search to end the violence and human rights violations, and to bring a peaceful democratic Syrian-led transition that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people."

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the draft resolution as "extremely unilateral" in its approach, adding that the resolution's demand for Syrian forces and heavy weapons to be pulled from populated centers within 10 days is "absolutely unrealistic."

"More importantly, the draft resolution failed to lay down such conditions for the Syrian armed opposition," a ministry spokesperson said. "In effect, the co-authors of the resolution proposed to the UNSC that it encourage the opposition in its armed struggle against the Syrian government which will only stoke up the civil war in the country."

In the United States, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney described China's and Russia's veto as deplorable and regrettable. "We need to come together behind a simple proposition that the Syrian President is waging a brutal, murderous campaign against his own people and that we need to come together to do everything we can to bring about a future in Syria that does not include (President) Bashar al-Assad," he said.

He added: "Those nations that vetoed the measure are on the wrong side of history. They're on the wrong side of the Syrian people. They're on the wrong side of all of those who hope for peace and stability in the region, and for democratization in the region.

The UN estimates that more than 10,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in Syria and tens of thousands displaced since the uprising against President al-Assad began nearly 1.5 year ago. The opposition believes the number of deaths has already surpassed 17,000.

On Wednesday, a bomb attack on the National Security Headquarters building in Damascus killed and wounded several senior government officials. Among those killed was Defense Minister General Dawood Rajiha, former Defense Minister Hasan Ali Turkmani and General Asef Shawkat who was Assad's brother-in-law and Syria's Deputy Defense Minister.

Earlier this month, Kofi Annan said he reached an agreement with Assad on an approach to bring an end to the violence. Assad also reassured his government's commitment to the six-point peace plan, which calls for an end to violence, access for humanitarian agencies to provide relief to those in need, the release of detainees, the start of inclusive political dialogue, and unrestricted access to the country for the international media.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-07-21

[maidu]

Ultimately, it will be up to the Syrians to try and fix what's wrong with Syria. The US and Europeans are tired of charging in every couple years and trying to fix things in poorly managed countries. Syrians are paying the price for allowing one family of dictators to gain complete control. Similar happened in Libya and Yemen. Middle Easterners, with few exceptions, don't know how to break the mold of having dictators in charge. SE Asia is not much different, that's partly why there's a movement to bring Thaksin back. The human race is, generally, still a couple hundred years away from embracing concepts of self empowerment, like not needing one man to completely control everything.

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I just watched a video of Architectural wonders of the world. In it were two segments on Syria. The film was shot before the current problems. So sad. Hopefully, when the smoke clears, the Syrians will embrace true democracy, but the chances of that are 1 in a thousand.

[Credo]

Russia and China veto any kind of action, but I notice it's the US, NATO and other Western countries that are deemed the evil ones who are behind most of the troubles in Syria. Before the evil empires were behind Libya and Egypt. They are also responsible for the dictatorial regimes staying in power in Yemen and Saudi Arabia.

I spent some time in Syria. Really liked the country and found the people quite nice and friendly. It's very sad to see such suffering.

Edited July 21, 2012 by Scott
formatting

[coma]

Good decision by China and the Russians. I bet the US and Europeans are half happy about it also as I don't think they are keen to go into this hornets nest. This isn't Libya. I guess they just need to be on the record for supporting thier version of human rights so they cannot be held accountable for what is/or maybe happening on the ground there now and in the future. Smart cricket for once.

[ddpffft]

why cant they make a peoples referendum in such cases...

put up the ballots, supervice the vote by the UN, and ask the people what they want...

if the majority wants a change to democracy, which should be supported by the world, then the current ruler has to step down - no discussion...

[coma]

why cant they make a peoples referendum in such cases...

put up the ballots, supervice the vote by the UN, and ask the people what they want...

if the majority wants a change to democracy, which should be supported by the world, then the current ruler has to step down - no discussion...

What is going on in Syria right now is a referendum. And had the majority wanted change then change would have occured along time ago. It is just that some people cannot/do not want to come to terms with the fact that the majority of Syrians are Assad loyalists. FACT!!!

[midas]

i take great delight at watching the frustration of the US Ambassador each time

they are vetoed

Thank god for Russia and China

[Jingthing]

This thread seems to be more about America bashing than any sincere interest for the people of Syria.

[simple1]

why cant they make a peoples referendum in such cases...

put up the ballots, supervice the vote by the UN, and ask the people what they want...

if the majority wants a change to democracy, which should be supported by the world, then the current ruler has to step down - no discussion...

Will not happen when the minority is in power i.e. the Alawites who comprise about 10/15% of the population

[Scott]

You are probably right, JT, but those that cross over the line will get in trouble. In the meantime, I hope everything in Syria works out well. If it does, then perhaps the Russians and the Chinese have some magic diplomatic formula that works. And perhaps the US can learn something.

My time spent with Department of State contract work would lead me to believe that the US has minimal interest in Syria and certainly wouldn't want someone to call them out and have them do something. There will be lip-service, but that's about it.

The US has very few, if any, interests to protect in Syria. The relationship has been strained for far too long. US interest in Syria have a lot more to do with security issues in the region than Syria in particular. Assad will most likely be replaced something just as bad if not worse.

I spent a fair amount of time in Syria--it was work related. I very much enjoyed my time there. I found the people to be very nice. With the exception of flying on a Syrian airplane to Kamishlee, I felt quite safe.

My thoughts are with the people of Syria every day.

Edited July 21, 2012 by Scott

[GiHadOrange]

This thread seems to be more about America bashing than any sincere interest for the people of Syria.

What is "America bashing"?

In the United States, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney described China's and Russia's veto as deplorable and regrettable. ...

He added: "Those nations that vetoed the measure are on the wrong side of history ...

[GiHadOrange]

i take great delight at watching the frustration of the US Ambassador each time

they are vetoed

Thank god for Russia and China

It happens not that very often that Russia or China or both come up with a veto,

Both states have voiced their reasonable concerns quite often previously and made clear what kind of resolution is for them acceptable and what is not.

Those who have drafted that resolution should have taken that into consideration. Or perhaps it was written just that way with the intention to get the veto, only to start the blame game afterwards and calling Russia and China the bad guys and responsible for the ongoing suffering of the Syrian people.

But its illusionary to believe that this resolution would be the solution and bring finally peace, stability and democratization to the country and the region.

[Ulysses G.]

But its illusionary to believe that this resolution would be the solution and bring finally peace, stability and democratization to the country and the region.

No one thinks that it would, but it might help stop Assad from slaughtering his own people in huge numbers.

[midas]

i take great delight at watching the frustration of the US Ambassador each time

they are vetoed

Thank god for Russia and China

It happens not that very often that Russia or China or both come up with a veto,

Both states have voiced their reasonable concerns quite often previously and made clear what kind of resolution is for them acceptable and what is not.

Those who have drafted that resolution should have taken that into consideration. Or perhaps it was written just that way with the intention to get the veto, only to start the blame game afterwards and calling Russia and China the bad guys and responsible for the ongoing suffering of the Syrian people.

But its illusionary to believe that this resolution would be the solution and bring finally peace, stability and democratization to the country and the region.

yeah well before they make Russia sound like the bad guys for doing that.... at least the world

should know a bit more about the details ... i mean you never hear this from the Russian Ambassador

on CNN, BBC, or even Al Jazeera.

You know, they are quite good and bad and loud about their propaganda. I think that’s what they have been doing by criticizing Russia and China stridently. Today it was the British and French [uN] perm reps who went out of their way, unfortunately, piling all sorts of falsehoods on the foreign policies of Russia and China. They should focus more on the need to help Kofi Annan. Unfortunately, they have not done anything at all in order to set and train a productive and positive process in Syria. Instead, they have been working with the so-called “Friends of Syria”. In fact, this is a group of countries who are enemies of the Syrian government

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31933.htm

[GiHadOrange]

yeah well before they make Russia sound like the bad guys for doing that.... at least the world

should know a bit more about the details ... i mean you never hear this from the Russian Ambassador

on CNN, BBC, or even Al Jazeera.

Thats actually quite normal. What you expect from TV station of NATO states and their mainstream news format.

In China or Russia the standpoint of their own governments gets also much more airtime or press.

[Jingthing]

A clue here. It is in the interest of the Syrian regime (close friend of Iran), Iran, and Russia to have global oil prices rise. Less clear about China. BRIC loyalty? Doesn't like other countries messing with their internal human rights atrocities so returning the favor?

Edited July 21, 2012 by Jingthing

[GiHadOrange]

A clue here. It is in the interest of the Syrian regime (close friend of Iran), Iran, and Russia to have global oil prices rise. Less clear about China. BRIC loyalty? Doesn't like other countries messing with their internal human rights atrocities so returning the favor?

Ahh, Syrian, Iran, Russia, China and BRIC bashing and the oil price argument.

And those from the other side of the history are just in it for humanity and peace loving and without any selfish interests.

[Jingthing]

A clue here. It is in the interest of the Syrian regime (close friend of Iran), Iran, and Russia to have global oil prices rise. Less clear about China. BRIC loyalty? Doesn't like other countries messing with their internal human rights atrocities so returning the favor?

Ahh, Syrian, Iran, Russia, China and BRIC bashing and the oil price argument.

And those from the other side of the history are just in it for humanity and peace loving and without any selfish interests.

All countries foreign policies are about their national self interests. That is elementary and nothing about bashing.

However, there is something about objective truth too. It's clear to me the Syrian regime WILL fall and those that support it (most dramatically Iran) are indeed going to be on the wrong side of history. Similar to those that clung to Gaddafi till the bitter end.

Edited July 21, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Assad has slaughtered something like 17,000 of his own people. THAT is what it is all about.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed. Please stay on-topic.

[Jingthing]

Assad has slaughtered something like 17,000 of his own people. THAT is what it is all about.

Well Russia and China ain't buying that and/or they don't care.

[GiHadOrange]

Assad has slaughtered something like 17,000 of his own people. THAT is what it is all about.

Well Russia and China ain't buying that and/or they don't care.

They do care.

If those from the other side of history had sincere interests they would not have drafted a resolution that had left Russia and China with no other choice then to Veto against it.

You should also inform yourself what kind rebels are these rebels who are fighting there against Assad.

[GiHadOrange]

However, there is something about objective truth too. It's clear to me the Syrian regime WILL fall and those that support it (most dramatically Iran) are indeed going to be on the wrong side of history. Similar to those that clung to Gaddafi till the bitter end.

Objective truth would be to realise that there is an other side of history. Calling the other side the wrong side is just a subjective "truth".

[simple1]

Seems to me that China and Russia are playing the game to their domestic agenda, as well as for their "clients". As Jingthing has observed Russia and China are talking to the theme of non interference in a sovereign country domestic affairs. Chinese equivalent would be Tibet and Russia with Chechnya. Did the Western powers take any effective action in either of these two cases? No. In reality does either country really believe Assad will retain power, as they must know that eventually his regime will not retain control unless he unleashes unrestricted war on their own population - probably questionable with all the defections taking place within the military.

So what's the true strategic game plan being played out? Obviously the rapidly approaching issue of finalising the Israeli/US response to Iran and in parallel attempting to keep the Near & Middle East stable for western economic interests. At the same time trying not to completely irritate Russia and China. Sorry to say Syria is just a sideshow. e.g. look at the Congo with millions killed in the past twenty years, with a minimal response from the Western powers

Edited July 21, 2012 by simple1

[midas]

Assad has slaughtered something like 17,000 of his own people. THAT is what it is all about.

but that is because the West has been ' fanning the flames ' in the words

of the Russian Ambassador

Edited July 21, 2012 by midas

[midas]

Seems to me that China and Russia are playing the game to their domestic agenda, as well as for their "clients". As Jingthing has observed Russia and China are talking to the theme of non interference in a sovereign country domestic affairs. Chinese equivalent would be Tibet and Russia with Chechnya. Did the Western powers take any effective action in either of these two cases? No. In reality does either country really believe Assad will retain power, as they must know that eventually his regime will not retain control unless he unleashes unrestricted war on their own population - probably questionable with all the defections taking place within the military.

So what's the true strategic game plan being played out? Obviously the rapidly approaching issue of finalising the Israeli/US response to Iran and in parallel attempting to keep the Near & Middle East stable for western economic interests. At the same time trying not to completely irritate Russia and China. Sorry to say Syria is just a sideshow. e.g. look at the Congo with millions killed in the past twenty years, with a minimal response from the Western powers

Sorry to say Syria is just a sideshow

that is exactly what the Russian Ambassador says and i agree with him

Russia: Western pressure over Syrian conflict is 'all about Iran'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9413554/Russia-Western-pressure-over-Syrian-conflict-is-all-about-Iran.html

[Steely Dan]

Seems to me that China and Russia are playing the game to their domestic agenda, as well as for their "clients". As Jingthing has observed Russia and China are talking to the theme of non interference in a sovereign country domestic affairs. Chinese equivalent would be Tibet and Russia with Chechnya. Did the Western powers take any effective action in either of these two cases? No. In reality does either country really believe Assad will retain power, as they must know that eventually his regime will not retain control unless he unleashes unrestricted war on their own population - probably questionable with all the defections taking place within the military.

So what's the true strategic game plan being played out? Obviously the rapidly approaching issue of finalising the Israeli/US response to Iran and in parallel attempting to keep the Near & Middle East stable for western economic interests. At the same time trying not to completely irritate Russia and China. Sorry to say Syria is just a sideshow. e.g. look at the Congo with millions killed in the past twenty years, with a minimal response from the Western powers

Sorry to say Syria is just a sideshow

that is exactly what the Russian Ambassador says and i agree with him

Russia: Western pressure over Syrian conflict is 'all about Iran'

http://www.telegraph...about-Iran.html

Politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. I'm sure Israel for instance would be delighted in action were taken to depose Assad if it were indeed a precursor to action against Iran. However there is a dilemma, namely the rebels who are trying to depose Assad may turn out to be a Muslim brotherhood lead coalition, which seems to hold no fears for the current U.S administration, but I'm not sure Israel, or Jordan for that matter would be so sanguine, Jordan fearing a domino effect.

What a tangled web, and though it is heartbreaking that so many people are suffering there is no guarantee they would end up with anything better when the smoke clears.

Edit: And to illustrate my last point.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18930876

Edited July 21, 2012 by Steely Dan

[midas]

Politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. I'm sure Israel for instance would be delighted in action were taken to depose Assad if it were indeed a precursor to action against Iran. However there is a dilemma, namely the rebels who are trying to depose Assad may turn out to be a Muslim brotherhood lead coalition, which seems to hold no fears for the current U.S administration, but I'm not sure Israel, or Jordan for that matter would be so sanguine, Jordan fearing a domino effect.

What a tangled web, and though it is heartbreaking that so many people are suffering there is no guarantee they would end up with anything better when the smoke clears.

Edit: And to illustrate my last point.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-18930876

There are 304,000 active personnel in the Syrian Army and 342,500 reserves . How many rebels are there

exactly ? I can' t see how a group of rebels can win against an army of 640,000 - without

Western intervention.....?

And if that happens let us not forget Russia's warning just a few weeks ago in May

http://www.reuters.c...E84G18M20120517

Edited July 21, 2012 by midas

[GiHadOrange]

Politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. I'm sure Israel for instance would be delighted in action were taken to depose Assad if it were indeed a precursor to action against Iran. However there is a dilemma, namely the rebels who are trying to depose Assad may turn out to be a Muslim brotherhood lead coalition, which seems to hold no fears for the current U.S administration, but I'm not sure Israel, or Jordan for that matter would be so sanguine, Jordan fearing a domino effect.

What a tangled web, and though it is heartbreaking that so many people are suffering there is no guarantee they would end up with anything better when the smoke clears.

Edit: And to illustrate my last point.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-18930876

here is an other story about the "rebels" and the strange bedfellows:

However, the international jihadists, many of them so-called Salafists linked to al-Qaeda, have agendas of their own that don’t stop at forcing Mr. al-Assad from office. To them, the real target is Shiism, the religion of Iran, and the crescent of Shia forces that Tehran has promoted that stretch from Iran to the Mediterranean.

Many Sunni Muslims, and certainly Salafi jihadists, view Shia Muslims as heretical and the Alawite sect of Shiism, (the sect to which the al-Assads and many other powerful Syrians belong) as positively diabolical. As such, it is not out of the question that ethnic massacres of Alawites would take place in the aftermath of an Islamist victory in Syria.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/islamic-fighters-flocking-to-syria/article4432160/?cmpid=rss1

[ttelise]

i take great delight at watching the frustration of the US Ambassador each time

they are vetoed

Thank god for Russia and China

Yes, China and Russia treat their citizens so well and are such serious advocates for the human rights of the citizens of their country.

China and Russia could give a crap less about anything in that region except who controls the oil. China gets some oil from Syria and both China and Russia get nervous the more influence USA has over region.

So nice you place economic interests over the deprivation of human rights and condone the whole sale slaughter of thousands if innocent civilians. I guess as long as it does not affect you . . .

Edited July 21, 2012 by ttelise