TWO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS ON SYRIA, ONE LATE, THE OTHER WORSE

TWO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS ON SYRIA, ONE LATE, THE OTHER WORSE
Hugo Adan
August 4, 2012


THE FIRST LATE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION (A/66/L.57).
July 31, 2012
Sixty-sixth session
Agenda item 34: PREVENTION OF ARMED CONFLICT

-----------------------------------------------------

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/66/L.57

EXTRACTS:

CONSIDERATIONS

Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic and to the principles of the Charter,

RESOLVE:

3. Condemns all violence, irrespective of where it comes from, including terrorist acts;

4. Demands that all parties immediately and visibly implement Security Council resolutions 2042 (2012) and 2043 (2012) in order to achieve a cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties, thereby creating an atmosphere conducive to a sustained cessation of violence and a Syrian-led political transition that meets the aspirations of the Syrian people;

------------

NOTE 1:

THIS ONE CAN BE CALLED UN RESOLUTION (it has considerations and resolutions though they did not mentioned as so). The most important thing is that THIS ONE was much more impartial & inclusive

HOWEVER, it was intended to prevent the armed conflict when in fact the conflict was in full bloom .

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/66/L.57


---------------

NOTE 2

THE RECENT ONE (FRIDAY 3, 2012) broke the rule of impartiality, it is totally skewed and misleading. It is presented as Resolution when it is not YET, the intention is to force the countries who voted in favor to sign the final document that NATO and Qatar associates will send to them IN THE NAME OF THE UN, the institution that they kidnapped. It is expected some more tricks to pave the way for the NATO humanitarian disaster that they will call "humanitarian intervention". Be aware of that!


===================


THE WORSE UN RESOLUTION: THE ONE IN PROCESS FROM AUGUST 3/12

THIS IS a ONE SIDE STORY INTENDING TO PRESENT THE STATE OF SYRIA AS MONSTER FOR TRYING TO RESPOND TO THE HEAVY ARMED MERCENARIES THAT SAUDIS & QATAR PLANTED INSIDE SYRIA WITH THE COMPLICITY OF THE US-UK and TURKS, SINCE 9 MONTHS AGO.THIS DOCUMENT DOESN'T MENTION THEM, BY DOING SO, they are delivering a WRONG message to them: you have the international support, the UN is with your cause, god bless your terrorism, you are destined to succeed. .

-------------

THE UN NON-BINDING “RESOLUTION” better called “STATEMENTS” OF THE SIXTY-SIX GENERAL ASSEMBLY
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2012/ga11266.doc.htm


Sixty-sixth General Assembly
Plenary: 124th & 125th Meetings

GENERAL ASSEMBLY, IN [PROCESS] RESOLUTION, DEMANDS ALL IN SYRIA ‘IMMEDIATELY AND VISIBLY’ COMMIT TO ENDING VIOLENCE THAT SECRETARY-GENERAL SAYS IS RIPPING COUNTRY APART

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ‘AGAIN PROVES ITS POWER AND AUTHORITY’, SAID ITS PRESIDENT FROM QATAR;


SYRIA’S SPEAKER DENOUNCES RESOLUTION AS ‘MISLEADING AND HYSTERICAL’

TEXT

Gravely concerned by the escalating violence in Syria, the General Assembly today strongly condemned Damascus’ indiscriminate use of heavy weapons in civilian areas and its widespread violations of human rights, demanding that all parties “immediately and visibly” commit to ending a conflict that United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called “a test of everything this Organization stands for”.

By a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 12 against, with 31 abstentions, the Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution expressing its concern about a raft of gross human rights violations being carried out by Syrian Government forces, systematic attacks against civilians, and the increasing use of “heavy weapons, armour and the air force against populated areas”. It was also concerned by the humanitarian impact of the violence, including repression of fundamental rights, and the influx Syrian refugees into neighboring countries. (See Annex.)

Deploring the Security Council’s failure to agree on measures to ensure the Syrian authority’s compliance with its decisions — most recently when, on 20 July, China and the Russian Federation vetoed a Council resolution that threatened sanctions if demands to end the spiraling violence were not met — the Assembly expressed its determination to seek ways and means to provide protection for the Syrian civilian population.

Its four-part resolution drafted by the Arab Group and sponsored by scores of other countries covered accountability, the humanitarian situation, political transition and follow-up. In it, the Assembly stressed that rapid progress on a political transition represented the “best opportunity” to resolve the 18-month-long crisis peacefully. It demanded in that regard that all the parties to the conflict work with the Office of the Joint Special Envoy of the United Nations and the League of Arab States to implement rapidly the transition plan for Syria set forth in the final communiqué issued by the Action Group on 30 June.

While the Assembly’s action came less than 24 hours after the Special Envoy, Kofi Annan, announced in frustration that he would not renew his mandate when it expired at the end of August, the resolution nevertheless fully backed his demand that the first step in ending the violence must be made by the Syrian authorities, and therefore called on the Government to fulfil immediately its commitment to cease the use of heavy weapons and complete the withdrawal of Government troops.

Following threats by the Syrian authorities to use chemical or biological weapons in the conflict, the resolution also demanded that the Government refrain from using or transferring such weapons to non-State actors, and that it respect international obligations regarding those weapons. The text went on to condemn all violence, “regardless of where it comes from, including terrorist acts”, and demanded that all parties immediately implement Security Council resolutions 2042 (2012) and 2043 (2012), both adopted in April, in order to achieve a cessation of all armed violence, “thereby creating an atmosphere conducive to […] a Syrian-led political transition that meets the aspirations of the Syrian people”.

Before the vote, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon drew chilling comparisons between the current deadly fighting in Aleppo — “the epicentre of a vicious battle between the Syrian Government and those who wish to replace it” — and Srebrenica, which he said represented one of the darkest chapters in United Nations history, “when the international community failed to protect civilians from slaughter”.

“Today, we are all witnesses to the horrors of Syria being ripped apart by violence,” he said, noting that the acts of brutality being reported might constitute crimes against humanity or war crimes, which must be investigated and the perpetrators held to account. Despite repeated verbal acceptances of the six-point plan endorsed by the Security Council, both the Government and the opposition continued to rely on weapons, not diplomacy, in the belief that they would win through violence. “But there are no winners in Aleppo today, or anywhere else in the country. The losers in this escalating battle are the people of Syria,” he said, reiterating his regret that sharp divisions had paralyzed action in the Security Council.

Continuing, the Secretary-General noted that last week in Geneva, Foreign Ministers of the Action Group, including the five permanent Council members, had agreed on an action plan. “Now, with the situation having worsened, they must again find common ground. The immediate interests of the Syrian people must be paramount over any larger rivalries of influence,” he declared. The conflict in Syria was a test of everything the Organization stood for, he said, adding: “I do not want today’s United Nations to fail that test. I want us all to show the people of Syria and the world that we have learned the lessons of Srebrenica.”

Opening the meeting with a strong call for action, Assembly President Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser also spotlighted the situation in Aleppo, where, he said, intensified military operations by the Syrian Government forces had led to daily “gross human rights violations”. The League of Arab States and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights had repeatedly indicated that such acts might amount to crimes against humanity and other international crimes, he added.

“I am deeply concerned about this horrifying escalation,” he said, condemning the continued widespread atrocities and violations of international humanitarian law by the Syrian authorities, as well as “horrifying” reports about mass killings, extrajudicial executions, and deliberate targeting of civilians. All parties to the conflict had responsibilities under international law to adhere to. Those responsible must be held accountable. “It is time to act. Words are not enough. The international community is responsible to act without further delay.”

He said that the deadlock in the Security Council “sends the wrong signals to all parties in the Syrian conflict”. Yet, in such times of deadlock, the General Assembly, under the United Nations Charter, had a role to play in the maintenance of international peace and security. “Today, once again, the Assembly proves its power and authority,” he declared, adding: “We have to provide the necessary assistance to the people of Syria to find an all-inclusive and peaceful solution to the crisis.”

Taking the floor ahead of action, Syria’s representative, who requested that the resolution be put to a vote, denounced the text as “misleading and hysterical” and a violation of the principles of international law, which was not intended to protect Syrians. In fact, the resolution would send the wrong message to terrorists inside and outside of Syria, and would escalate violence in the region. He also noted the “strange paradox” that the States sponsoring the text were the same ones that were providing weapons to the terrorist groups in Syria.

Those States were also providing political media coverage to the armed groups and were enforcing unilateral sanctions, which not only conflicted with the six-point plan, but also violated international law. He said that if those States were truly concerned, they would channel all of the billions of dollars they were spending to arm terrorist groups to humanitarian aid instead. No one in Syria had seen any such humanitarian assistance thus far, despite agreements reached with the United Nations on a response plan some months ago. “I am proud to stand here to defend against all conspirators against my nation,” he said, adding that a General Assembly President should be neutral in his role, but the current President, from Qatar, had violated that principle for probably the tenth time.

Among the more than 30 delegations speaking before and after the vote, most echoed serious concern for the civilians in Aleppo and other areas gripped by violence. Many speakers hailed the Assembly’s decision to act, especially in the face of the ongoing stalemate in the Security Council. Yet, while some decried Syria’s brutal repression of what had begun as peaceful protests, and expressed concern that the crisis was sliding into civil war, several speakers stressed that the Assembly resolution should have included specific and equally strong calls on the opposition to end the violence. Calling the text “one sided” and “politically motivated”, others lamented its omission of references to the growing influence on the conflict of outside actors, including those with ties to Al-Qaida.

As he introduced the text on behalf of the Arab Group, the representative of Saudi Arabia, said that in response to Mr. Annan’s six-point plan, the international community had received in return six massacres carried out by the Syrian “Government killing machine” in Baba Amr, Al-Rastan, Houla, Traimsh, Foquir and today in Aleppo. Moreover, a political process was “nowhere to be found”. The Assembly’s action aimed to show that the time was now to begin a peaceful transfer of power in order to achieve the aspirations of the Syrian people “and preserve the blood of their children”. It also aimed to guarantee security, safety and equality of rights and duties for all Syrian people of different ethnic, religious and sectarian affiliations.

Yet, the representative of the Russian Federation regretted the adoption of the text, which, he said, would only exacerbate confrontation and hamper the search for a peaceful solution. “Behind the façade of international rhetoric, it hides support for the Syrian opposition,” he declared, and added that it was no coincidence that the countries backing the Syrian opposition were the most vocal supporters of the resolution. He also said that members of the Security Council should work hand-in-hand and not go outside that body to find solutions.

Speaking in explanation of position before action were the representatives of Venezuela, Cuba, South Africa, Bolivia, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Ecuador, Iran and Bahamas.

Taking the floor after the vote were the representatives of Chile, Brazil, Costa Rica, Viet Nam, Israel, United Republic of Tanzania, China, Uruguay, Argentina, Nigeria, Serbia, Dominican Republic, India, Guyana, New Zealand, Canada, Germany, Libya, Qatar and Saudi Arabia (on behalf of the Arab Group).

A representative of the delegation of the European Union also addressed the meeting.

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply were the representatives of Iran, Bahrain and Syria.

The General Assembly met this morning to consider the item on prevention of armed conflict, for which it had before it draft resolution on the situation in Syria (document A/66/L.57).

===================