world

Outrage as Russia, China veto U.N. move on Syria

39 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

39 Comments
Login to comment

the second such U.N. veto in four months, triggered a wave of international outrage, with Washington saying it was “disgusted”

So now that the international community has once again failed to do anything useful, will President Obama continue to stand by while Syrian's are slaughtered? Well of course he will - because the UN said so.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Russia and China did raise some valid points. However, their veto was essentially for the protection of their own national interests, and they are completely willing to look sideways while innocent Syrian civilians are being slaughtered, many women and children among them. While it might be worthwhile of Russia to ask who supplies weapons to the Opposition militia, they should also have considered the plight thousands of innocent civilians who were being targeted and killed by the Syrian government itself. Both Russia and China clearly failed to do so because they were blinded by their own personal gains.It is also noteworthy that the resolution did not suggest any sanctions, nor did it call for any military action by the UN Security Council. As such, this veto was a truly despicable act on the part of the Russians and the Chinese.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

Thanks a lot, Russia and China.

Well, since Obama is in the White House, I guess there won't be any coalitions of the willing taking any action here. Good luck, Syrians.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

What a coincidence that Russia and China are both afraid to endorse "regime change".

7 ( +10 / -3 )

And we need more proof the United Nations is a global farce? All countries that want to see an end to Assad's regime should simply call home every one of their United Nations representatives - from the General Assembly through UNICEF and every other UN-sponsored organization and committee, and withdraw funding for that organization. The skeleton that remained would consist of China, Russia and some of its former soviet republics, and a few African and South American cesspools. The UN building would then be far too big for them to maintain (as if they'd be welcome there) and they'd have to meet elsewhere. Then, a real UN could rise like a phoenix from the ashes.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

@Wolfpack -- I agree that Obama has been negligent in taking more serious action in Syria, but I disagree that it is because he's a lackey of the UN. Obama has taken military action without the UN's backing before.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The Russians and the Chinese only care about $$$, Syria has nothing to offer the Russians and Chinese, so they could care less how many people get killed there, IMHO.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Totalitarians defend their own kind.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

In veto, China and Russia now have more Syrian bloods on their hands. I repeat, U.N has deviated from its core principal, for each member state is securing only one's self-interest and becoming a corrupted old boys institution. Of course, no nation is perfect; but humanity expect a decency system to live by. China and Russia favor the dictatorship Assad because they see the same images in the mirror. This is the true nature of China and Russia , no contribution to the world, but taking advantage every turn. What a shame.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

“Disgusted that Russia and China prevented the U.N. Security Council from fulfilling its sole purpose.”

Looks like trouble in the Allied victors of WWII club paradise

U.N has deviated from its core principal

I disagree, its original function was to vanquish Germany, Japan and Italy and cart away whatever means of 'reparation' from them.

Today Japan, Germany and Italy is still denied a permanent UNSC seat and yet they are keen to take very generous budgetary contributions from them. In the current UN financial financial year Japan provided 12.53% of its budget, the second largest contribution by a member state after the United States. Whatever notion the victorious Allied Powers came up with respect to maintaining their new peace is peripheral. When I say peripheral it's not an understatement, why else would the founding members introduce the UNSC permanent seat veto if any one of the 5 great victorious Allied Power should unilaterally disagree on a proposal?

and don't get me started on its "Peacekeeping Role" which is no more than sending military engineers and logistical personnel to tame places in the developing world where the hostilities have already subsided. If tensions rise again they'll be gone before you could say, "Habyarimana is dead"

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

NO need for the USA to take action in Syria, for all those calling for USA to do more, how about getting your country to step-up to the plate and do more or are you afraid to send your children or neighbors children in harms way... I may vote for Obama this time if he lets the rest of the brave world handle this one...

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Russia and China on Saturday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Syria for its lethal crackdown,

Why is this not a surprise. Oh, let's see Russian legislative election protests in Moskva and subsequent crackdowns and subsequent pseudo-incrimination of "western" agitator agents, then, the peasant and Shenzhen protests in the Chinese countryside and factories, not to mention the goings on in Tibet. Yeah, of course, by default protestors are bad anyone who sides with protestors are bad and need to be thwarted.

This is basically Russia getting back at the west for raising alarm at the legislative election irregularities --same with China and the scrutiny regarding Tibet and its increasing militarization. They are, in effect, saying the people of Syria don't matter to them; that their diplomatic tit-for-tat, is of more import.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

It is not a surprise as they(like usual) announced a week ago that they would veto it(same way the USA does).

Nothing gets past the UNSC council as long as any of the 5 states got veto-rights and vote on their own interests only(that includes all members that got veto rights).

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

This is a good thing. Russia and China have stood up to the American regime change monster, that seems to feed just for the sake of feeding. Every country in the Arab world that has been overthrown by the Americans in the last year, no, the last decade is in chaos: more Islamic, less secular, less tolerant and more violent ... and no friendlier to precious Israel, if I might add. The "freedom fighters" in Libya are now torturing their captives to death. There is no longer law and order in the Sinai and Egypt is now going to be run by the Islamic Brotherhood. Tunisia is just as bad. Regardless their motivations, it is nice to see someone say "No" to the United States. Russia tells the USA "No regime change today." So yes, big baby, America is disgusted. It didn't get its way.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

So yes, big baby, America is disgusted. It didn't get its way.

Uhhm, yeah, except it wasn't an American resolution. Nice red-herring, though. Props on that. Be proud.

From the article:

envoy Vitaly Churkin defiantly rejected attacks from the European and Arab nations that proposed the resolution.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

U.N has deviated from its core principal....

I would disagree there. The UN is essentially a group to defuse tensions and prevent war, not to impose democracy. Russia and China are once again on record voting against the populace and for dictatorship. This is neither surprising nor helpful, but the UN has served to spotlight once again where the interests of these two regimes lie.

Hypocrisy by those on the American right never fails to amaze: antipathy towards government in domestic situations is seamlessly replaced by unnerving belief in its ability to direct events when they occur abroad. Assad is isolated, his days numbered. His friends abroad have been overthrown or have deserted him. His twilight struggle to maintain his cruel regime will undoubtedly cause further casualties, but let's be clear - these will be far fewer than if the US succumbed to some ill-conceived attempt to intervene militarily.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

What's with you disgruntled people blaming all this on Obama for some reason? This is about China and Russia vetoing the resolution for no REAL reason except to protect some national interests and side against it's typical 'opponents'. If/When Obama decides to have the US once again do something against another nation in the ME you guys will be howling as you are now. Guys, leave your baggage at the door!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Heh blaming Obama for Russia and China's disgraceful lack of humanity just makes perfect sense.

Romeny/Denial 2012!! GO!!

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Heaven forbid, China supporting a regime change? LOL

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@serrano,

Coaltion of the willing I hear you say laddie?

Heh, those that choose to ignore history and all that...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The Russians and the Chinese only care about $$$, Syria has nothing to offer the Russians and Chinese, so they could care less how many people get killed there, IMHO.

And you think other countries don't think the same? Please.

Russia and China are selling weapons, looking after their interests and well, of course they don't support the public waning freedom and fairness. Look at what is going on in Russia these days. Look at China all the time. In some ways, I kind of "respect" that they are selling outs and doing one thing and saying another. Regardless, it is disgusting and I hope these people will win and get their freedom. I just hope it doesn't turn out like Libya which is a mess - though forgotten now by the media. Armed to the teeth and hating each other.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

What it amounts to is that Russia and China condone the slaughter of civilians. Why am I not surprised?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Hard to know what to believe, really. I thought the West wasn't all that interested in removing Assad since the alternative might be worse. Has something changed in the last few months? Were they going to produce a strongly worded letter and leave it at that, or is there more substance here?

I can see Russia and China voting against it. Refusing an arms embargo, tho, that's a different story. And Russia is selling arms to Syria as we speak? Do they need the money that badly? Or do they think the West figured out a way for regime change?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It is merely a group of totalitarians standing arm in arm. Russia and china can not back any kind of support for humanitarianism as they are guilty of as much themselves. China is the most horrid country on the planet, receiving a pass only because it's hideous regime allows large businesses a slave workforce. Russia is facing its own springtime insurrection,mso it cannot support anything but brut force. This has nothing to do with America. It has everything to do with seeing what countries have any sympathy for humanity.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

China and Russia's human rights record tells us how they would vote! Why is the world community surprised?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It's not the UN's mandate to intervene in a country's internal affairs.

Iraq turned into a bloodbath after the UN/US came in to "save the people". Leave the Syrians alone. And perhaps if the US stops supplies weapons to the insurgency in Syria the fighting will stop.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

There is no obvious side to take in Syria. It has been shown that the conflict is largely tribal, with both sides armed. Not a massacre of unarmed civilians. Nothing to do with democracy.

The Arab states cannot do anything there. If a force intervened how would it keep the two sides from killing each other? Sounds like another Belfast.

The quickest way to end the conflict is for the protestors to go home, and try a different tactic. Even if Assad rsigned, there would be months and years of attrition, as we can see in Egypt... As long as people go out into the streets and turn violent, there will be fighting. Maybe the protestors have gone too far and cannot stop for fear of reprisals later. For this reason they need to push their agenda through, hopefully with the support of the international community. No going back?

The world community does not like to see people killing each other and would like to stop the fighting, but just how exactly is anyone proposing to do this? You can't look at it. You can't ignore it. You can't do anything about it. Should anyone give a push from the outside?

Besides, China and Russia both want to keep Iran friendly, Iran being a huge supporter of Syria, so they will support maintenance of the status quo.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

US veto every vote against isreal crimes.and they are teeling china/russia !double standards.US regime is disgrace to human kind.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The Russians have been deeply disappointed by what has happened in Libya and how the West deliberately abused the U.N. Resolutions. The question should be addressed to France, U.K. etc what they have done in Libya. The same trick used in Syria will understandably not supported by Russia & China ?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I love a good Obama bashing every so often, but this is ridiculous. Obama has only been vaguely mentioned as saying this act of veto is disgusting. Some have hit the nail on the head on the UN's role in the world. The UN was BASICALLY established to prevent future global wars between nations. It was never intended to interfere with a nation's issues such as civil war. As long as this war stays within the borders, then I expect the US AND the UN to stay out of this issue as they have no right to interfere. As for a majority of the countries in the UN having their hands in this war in one form or another, that is for them to live with. As for the UN, I feel it is an obsolete system as they have the permanent ban on Japan, Germany, as well as a few other nations which have more than proven their ability to move on and improve their international relations. They also intervene too much in the international realm using resources which are better suited elsewhere.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It is pathetic to see the US and France et all once again interfering in an Arab country in order to introduce "democracy". Have these fools learned nothing from the disasters in Iraq, Egypt, Libya ,etc?

Once the relatively secular Assad regime is removed, we do not get a wonderful democracy. What we get is another Muslim Brotherhood regime and a Shariah theocracy.

Much as I dislike Russia and China, but it is good to see them put a brake on the idiot Western politicians and their self-destructice schemes.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Thank you Banger. I was waiting for someone to mention the Israeli issue. How is this veto any different from the US veto? Because Palestinians aren't being killed? Ah the hypocrisy!

Good to see the anti-American/anti-Obama folk come out in favour of some arabs though. Thought their hate for Islam would continue unabated.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Russia and China choose to veto, alike the US in matters concerning Israel, end of story. The "democracy" activists are crowing and puffing, however rarely follows a regime better, usually it is a regime supported West and not any better than the prior regime, it merely a realignment of loyalty to the other side. So please spare the world the "Outrage".

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Maurice Wright: then I expect the US AND the UN to stay out of this issue as they have no right to interfere

Which in turn creates the de facto right for Assad to kill his own people, which probably isn't your intent. It's not an easy issue with a one-size-fits-all answer.

Centerlane: Russia and China choose to veto, alike the US in matters concerning Israel, end of story.

Try getting a resolution to a vote that actually mentions violence by Palestinians. Hamas could launch 1,000 rockets into Israel in a single day and people would put forth legislation calling on Israel to end the violence. They are publicity stunts.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Hear, hear Triumvere.

These people are braving death protesting for change in their own backyard.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry for the killing in syria

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Iraq turned into a bloodbath after the UN/US came in to "save the people". Leave the Syrians alone. And perhaps if the US stops supplies weapons to the insurgency in Syria the fighting will stop.

The fighting may stop, but the slaughter will continue. Just because one side can't fight back doesn't mean the other side stops. Just because outsiders can't read about the bloodbath on their news doesn't mean it's not happening.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Another good reason for JAPAN and the USA to leave the UN. Japan and the USA waste millions of yen/dollars on the UN at their taxpayers and future generations expense. The economic value of the UN for New York doesn't even come close to the cost.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Assad is droping bombs on schools and hospitals ??? OMG Where did you get that from ??

The goddamn news. From the BBC world service, who's correspondents have been brave enough to sneak into Syria or slip their Gov't minders to go to opposition rallies and meet with activists. From freaking Youtube and twitter, where you can see the bodies of the dead, if you like.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites