Hard Evidence: Who Uses Their Veto In The UN Security Council The Most – And What For?
On Thursday July 17, 298 people lost their lives when Flight MH17 was downed in eastern Ukraine. Almost immediately accusations were made that the aircraft had been shot down by pro-Russian separatists operating in the area. The same day, 25 Palestinians lost their lives (despite a five-hour humanitarian ceasefire being apparently in force) as Israel launched phase two of Operation Protective Edge, among whom were four boys killed as they played football on a beach.
Two international crises for the UN Security Council to handle. But the responses could not have been more different. Responding to the downing of MH17, on July 22 the Security Council passed a resolution drafted by Australia that called for for an independent investigation and full access to the site and asked Russia to ensure separatist groups allowed this. Russia was also enjoined to use its influence to bring the conflict in eastern Ukraine to a close. While the resolution may be criticised for not going far enough, it may be seen as a success for the pursuit of international justice in the face of previous Russian intransigence on the eastern Ukraine situation.
Russia had previously vetoed a resolution on the situation in eastern Ukraine and, a mere two months later, chose not to exercise its veto.
Debate on the escalation of Operation Protective Edge in Gaza was heated, with more than 60 states participating and on the day after the Security Council passed its resolution on MH17, the president of the Security Council, Eugène-Richard Gasana of Rwanda, made a statement deploring the number of civilian deaths and calling for a cessation of hostilities but recognising Israels right to self-defence.
This fairly rote statement, made with the death toll standing at more than 600 civilians (it is now estimated at more than double that) is in stark contrast to the rapid and unanimous resolution on MH17 and as ever, the pressure is on the Security Council to act to protect civilians. But, as ever, the possibility of a US veto looms over the Council, casting doubts on whether humanitarianism will prevail over national interests.
And here is the irony. When a resolution was mooted over the downing of MH17, many observers expected Russia to exercise its veto right as a member of the P5 the five permanent members of the Security Council which also includes the US, China, Britain and France. But Russia voted with the rest of the Security Council (and, lets not forget, it may well have been in Moscows interests to do so, given that it may be that a full investigation finds that Russia is not in any way implicated in the incident as is so widely believed).
MORE...
https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-who-uses-their-veto-in-the-un-security-council-the-most-and-what-for-29907
4now
(1,596 posts)Supporting countries that commit blatant war crimes while complaining about Russia.
Uncle Joe
(58,349 posts)Thanks for the thread, Purveyor.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)The US' veto next week at the UN will be the 43rd time it has been the solitary veto on resolutions condemning Israel.
Last Modified: 18 Sep 2011 14:21
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/09/201191785718812831.html