SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
un security council
Report Shows How Five Global Powers on UN Security Council Are 'Vetoing Humanity'
"The UNSC is failing people living in conflict, with Russia and the United States particularly responsible for abusing their veto power," said Oxfam.
Sep 19, 2024
As the number of people in need of humanitarian assistance worldwide has skyrocketed by 150% over the last decade, five powerful countries on the United Nations Security Council have had hundreds of opportunities to vote for progress in some of the world's most protracted conflicts—but in dozens of cases, countries including the United States and Russia have instead vetoed peace and security resolutions.
In its report, Vetoing Humanity, Oxfam International pointed Thursday to numerous vetoes made by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council (UNSC), or the P5, which the humanitarian group said have placed their own economic and political interests ahead of the council's mission.
The group examined 23 of the world's longest violent conflicts, including those in the occupied Palestinian territories, Syria, Ukraine, and Yemen, which have collectively been the subjects of 454 resolutions passed by the UNSC since 2014.
But 30 resolutions have been vetoed by one of more of the P5 countries, including eight out of 12 regarding Palestine and Israel, 15 out of 53 on Syria, and 4 out of 7 on Ukraine.
"The UNSC is failing people living in conflict, with Russia and the United States particularly responsible for abusing their veto power," said Oxfam, noting that the two countries have together cast 75% of the 88 vetoes at the UNSC since 1989, with China casting the rest.
The other two permanent members, the United Kingdom and France, have not used their veto power since 1989, but they have still joined the other powerful countries in undermining global peace and security, said Oxfam.
In addition to veto power, the P5 has "pen-holding" privileges at the UNSC, allowing them to lead negotiations and decide how resolutions are drafted or whether they are ignored.
"The erratic and self-interested behavior of UNSC members has contributed to an explosion of humanitarian needs that is now outpacing humanitarian organizations' ability to respond. This demands a fundamental change of our international security architecture at the very top."
The P5 members have "deliberately cherry-picked which conflicts to address in the Council," reads the report. "Over the last decade, over 95% of the resolutions that the UNSC passed relate to just half of the protracted crises, leaving the other half mostly neglected."
France, the U.K., and the U.S. have held the pen on two-thirds of protracted crises over the last decade, allowing them to direct negotiations. For example, the U.K. has pen-holding privileges in talks on Yemen, "where it has interests due to historical colonial links and the strategic desire to maintain maritime routes."
The United States' use of its veto power at the UNSC has come under particular scrutiny in the past year, as it has vetoed three resolutions calling for a cease-fire in Gaza since Israel began bombarding the enclave and blocking humanitarian aid to its 2.3 million people, pushing the population toward famine. It has also vetoed proposals to grant U.N. membership to Palestine, despite the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) voting in favor, 138-9.
"While the UNGA has passed at least 77 resolutions over the last decade supporting Palestinian self-determination and human rights and an end to Israel's illegal occupation, the U.S. has used its veto power six times to block resolutions perceived as unfavorable to its ally Israel," said Oxfam. "The U.S. vetoes have created a permissive environment for Israel to expand illegal settlements in the Palestinian territory with impunity."
P5 vetoes have "more often than not," said Oxfam executive director Amitabh Behar, "contradicted the will of the U.N. General Assembly, in which all states are represented."
The report details other vetoes by the P5, including a 2023 veto by Russia of a nine-month extension of cross-border assistance to northern Syria‚ a decision that left 4.1 million people with little or no access to food, water, or medicine. Russia has also vetoed several resolutions on the country's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, despite the fact that the U.N. Charter states that "a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting."
"China, France, Russia, the U.K., and the U.S. took responsibility for global security at the UNSC in what is now a bygone colonial age," said Behar. "The contradictions of their acting as judge and jury of their own military alliances, interests, and adventures are incompatible with a world seeking peace and justice for all."
While the P5 ostensibly helped form the UNSC with the aim of promoting and maintaining global peace and security, the report notes that "they are providing more resources in the form of military aid than they are in humanitarian assistance," with its assistance being used not just defensively by recipients but also helping "to fuel and perpetuate the conflicts that the UNSC is failing to prevent and resolve."
"In 2019, the USA provided three times as much security assistance as humanitarian aid: $18.8 billion versus $6 billion," reads the report. "China pledged $20 million a year in military aid grants to Africa over 2015–17, whereas its worldwide humanitarian assistance in 2016 totaled less than $21 million."
"Not only have the P5 governments repeatedly failed to act to avert conflict, many have profited from wars by directly selling weapons to warring parties despite violations of international humanitarian law and the human suffering resulting from these wars," the report continues.
Behar said that "the erratic and self-interested behavior of UNSC members has contributed to an explosion of humanitarian needs that is now outpacing humanitarian organizations' ability to respond. This demands a fundamental change of our international security architecture at the very top."
The report comes as the U.N. prepares for the Summit of the Future, scheduled to kick off next week with the aim of envisioning "a revitalized U.N."
Oxfam made several recommendations to end the P5's ability to undermine the mission of UNSC, calling on member states to:
- Abolish the veto and take the preliminary step of requiring the P5 to refrain from vetoing resolutions related to war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity;
- Increase UNSC membership to include under-represented and unrepresented regions and countries;
- Reform the tradition of pen-holding;
- Make humanitarian funding mandatory for UNSC members; and
- Require that members refrain from transferring weapons to countries when there is a high risk that they will be used in violations of international humanitarian law.
"We need a new vision for a U.N. system that meets its original ambitions and made fit for purpose for today's reality," Behar said. "A Council that works for the global majority, not a powerful few."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Accusations of US Regime-Change Operations in Pakistan and Bangladesh Warrant UN Attention
The very strong evidence of the U.S. role in toppling the government of Imran Khan in Pakistan raises the likelihood that something similar may have occurred in Bangladesh.
Aug 19, 2024
Two former leaders of major South Asian countries have reportedly accused the United States of covert regime change operations to topple their governments. One of the leaders, former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, languishes in prison, on a perverse conviction that proves Khan’s assertion. The other leader, former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheik Hasina, fled to India following a violent coup in her country. Their grave accusations against the U.S., as reported in the world media, should be investigated by the UN, since if true, the U.S. actions would constitute a fundamental threat to world peace and to regional stability in South Asia.
The two cases seem to be very similar. The very strong evidence of the U.S. role in toppling the government of Imran Khan raises the likelihood that something similar may have occurred in Bangladesh.
In the case of Pakistan, Donald Lu, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia and Central Asia, met with Asad Majeed Khan, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the U.S., on March 7, 2022. Ambassador Khan immediately wrote back to his capital, conveying Lu’s warning that PM Khan threatened U.S.-Pakistan relations because of Khan’s “aggressively neutral position” regarding Russia and Ukraine.
The Ambassador’s March 7 note (technically a diplomatic cypher) quoted Assistant Secretary Lu as follows: “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead.” The very next day, members of the parliament took procedural steps to oust PM Khan.
On March 27, PM Khan brandished the cypher, and told his followers and the public that the U.S. was out to bring him down. On April 10, PM Khan was thrown out of office as the parliament acceded to the U.S. threat.
We know this in detail because of Ambassador Khan’s cypher, exposed by PM Khan and brilliantly documented by Ryan Grim of The Intercept, including the text of the cypher. Absurdly and tragically, PM Khan languishes in prison in part over espionage charges, linked to his revealing the cypher.
The U.S. appears to have played a similar role in the recent violent coup in Bangladesh. PM Hasina was ostensibly toppled by student unrest, and fled to India when the Bangladeshi military refused to prevent the protestors from storming the government offices. Yet there may well be much more to the story than meets the eye.
According to press reports in India, PM Hasina is claiming that the U.S. brought her down. Specifically, she says that the U.S. removed her from power because she refused to grant the U.S. military facilities in a region that is considered strategic for the U.S. in its “Indo-Pacific Strategy” to contain China. While these are second-hand accounts by the Indian media, they track closely several speeches and statements that Hasina has made over the past two years.
On May 17, 2024, the same Assistant Secretary Liu who played a lead role in toppling PM Khan, visited Dhaka to discuss the US Indo-Pacific Strategy among other topics. Days later, Sheikh Hasina reportedly summoned the leaders of the 14 parties of her alliance to make the startling claim that a “country of white-skinned people” was trying to bring her down, ostensibly telling the leaders that she refused to compromise her nation’s sovereignty. Like Imran Khan, PM Hasina had been pursuing a foreign policy of neutrality, including constructive relations not only with the U.S. but also with China and Russia, much to the deep consternation of the U.S. government.
To add credence to Hasina’s charges, Bangladesh had delayed signing two military agreements that the U.S. had pushed very hard since 2022, indeed by none other than the former Under-Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, the neocon hardliner with her own storied history of U.S. regime-change operations. One of the draft agreements, the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA), would bind Bangladesh to closer military-to-military cooperation with Washington. The Government of PM Hasina was clearly not enthusiastic to sign it.
The U.S. is by far the world’s leading practitioner of regime-change operations, yet the U.S. flatly denies its role in covert regime change operations even when caught red-handed, as with Nuland’s infamous intercepted phone call in late January 2014 planning the U.S.-led regime change operation in Ukraine. It is useless to appeal to the U.S. Congress, and still less the executive branch, to investigate the claims by PM Khan and PM Hasina. Whatever the truth of the matter, they will deny and lie as necessary.
This is where the UN should step in. Covert regime change operations are blatantly illegal under international law (notably the Doctrine of Non-Intervention, as expressed for example in UN General Assembly Resolution 2625, 1970), and constitute perhaps the greatest threat to world peace, as they profoundly destabilize nations, and often lead to wars and other civil disorders. The UN should investigate and expose covert regime change operations, both in the interests of reversing them, and preventing them in the future.
The UN Security Council is of course specifically charged under Article 24 of the UN Charter with “primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.” When evidence arises that a government has been toppled through the intervention or complicity of a foreign government, the UN Security Council should investigate the claims.
In the cases of Pakistan and Bangladesh, the UN Security Council should seek the direct testimony of PM Khan and PM Hasina in order to evaluate the evidence that the U.S. played a role in the overthrow of the governments of these two leaders. Each, of course, should be protected by the UN for giving their testimony, so as to protect them from any retribution that could follow their honest presentation of the facts. Their testimony can be taken by video conference, if necessary, given the tragic ongoing incarceration of PM Khan.
The U.S. might well exercise its veto in the UN Security Council to prevent such a investigation. In that case, the UN General Assembly can take up the matter, under UN Resolution A/RES/76/, which allows the UN General Assembly to consider an issue blocked by veto in the UN Security Council. The issues at stake could then be assessed by the entire membership of the UN. The veracity of the U.S. involvement in the recent regime changes in Pakistan and Bangladesh could then be objectively analyzed and judged on the evidence, rather than on mere assertions and denials.
The U.S. engaged in at least 64 covert regime change operations during 1947-1989, according to documented research by Lindsey O’Rourke, political science professor at Boston Collage, and several more that were overt (e.g. by U.S.-led war). It continues to engage in regime-change operations with shocking frequency to this day, toppling governments in all parts of the world. It is wishful thinking that the U.S. will abide by international law on its own, but it is not wishful thinking for the world community, long suffering from U.S. regime change operations, to demand their end at the United Nations.Keep ReadingShow Less
'Unhinged' Israeli Ambassador Literally Shreds UN Charter Ahead of Palestine Vote
"Shame on you," said Israeli Ambassador Gilad Erdan shortly before the U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution supporting full membership for Palestine.
May 10, 2024
Shortly before the United Nations General Assembly approved a resolution Friday supporting full U.N. membership for Palestine, Israel's ambassador took to the podium and put a prop copy of the U.N.'s founding document through a handheld paper shredder.
In a speech that one journalist described as "unhinged," Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. Gilad Erdan described Palestinians as "modern-day Nazis" and condemned the U.N. General Assembly for choosing to "reward" them with "rights and privileges."
"You are shredding the U.N. Charter with your own hands," Erdan said as he fed a small copy of the document through a miniature paper shredder. "Shame on you."
Watch:
Watch: Israeli ambassador to the UN @giladerdan1 used a paper shredder to shred the UN charter on the podium of the UN general assembly ahead of a vote that will give new privileges to the Palestinians at the UN pic.twitter.com/mWQ85c8uwK
— Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) May 10, 2024
Erdan's bizarre performance came just before the U.N. General Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution urging the Security Council to reconsider Palestine's request to become a full U.N. member following a U.S. veto last month. Palestine is currently a nonmember observer state of the U.N.
The General Assembly voted by a margin of 143 to 9—with 25 abstentions—in support of the resolution. The nine countries that voted no were the United States, Israel, Argentina, Czechia, Hungary, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, and Papua New Guinea.
In addition to backing its bid for full U.N. membership, the resolution gives Palestine "the right to introduce and co-sponsor proposals as well as amendments within the assembly," The Guardianreported.
Riyad Mansour, Palestine's permanent observer at the U.N., said ahead of Friday's vote that support for the resolution "is a vote for Palestinian existence."
"I stand before you as lives continue falling apart in the Gaza Strip," said Mansour, noting that "more than 35,000 Palestinians have been killed, 80,000 have been maimed, 2 million have been displaced, and everything has been destroyed" by Israeli forces over the past seven months.
"No words can capture what such loss and trauma signifies for Palestinians," Mansour added.
"The U.S. and Israel are isolated and the world is on the side of Palestine."
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, called the U.N. General Assembly's passage of the resolution "an unprecedented move that shows once again how unbelievably isolated [U.S. President Joe] Biden has made the U.S."
In anticipation of Friday's vote, a group of Republican U.S. senators led by Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) introduced legislation that would halt U.S. funding for any entity—including the U.N.—that gives Palestine "any status, rights, or privileges beyond observer status."
Current law requires the U.S. to "cut off funding to U.N. agencies that give full membership to a Palestinian state—which could mean a cutoff in dues and voluntary contributions to the U.N. from its largest contributor," The Associated Pressreported Friday.
Craig Mokhiber, a former U.N. official who resigned in October over the body's failure to act in the face of Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza, wrote that Friday's vote further shows that "the U.S. and Israel are isolated and the world is on the side of Palestine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular