UN General Assembly Resolution on Syria demonstrates why the UN Should be Abolished
Christof Lehmann (nsnbc),- The United Nations General Assembly has adopted a highly politicized, non-binding draft resolution on Syria. The resolution contradicts the reality on the ground and the political reality pertaining Syria, contradicts the purpose and Charter of the United Nations, endorses international, state-sponsored terrorism, and obstructs a political solution to end the war on Syria.
The success of the resolution lies in the fact that it is one of the clearest yet demonstrations of the depth of the systemic crisis of the United Nations, for the fact that the United Nations has turned into an instrument of neo-colonialism and imperialism, and that human rights advocates, peace advocates, advocates for international law and justice and progressives, such as the International Progress Organization and Dr. Hans Köchler are seriously mistaken when they suggest, that it would be safe to salvage and reform the United Nations.
The UNGA resolution on Syria ought to become the basis for discussing a new approach to a global community of sovereign nations.
International Justice is not equivalent to Democracy and Majority Rule. Proponents of the United Nations will argue, that 107 nations have voted for the resolution, while only 12, which are Russia, China, Iran, Bolivia, Cuba, the DPRK, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Venezuela, Zimbabwe and Belarus have voted against the resolution, and while 59 countries have abstained. The abstentions came mostly from Africa and Latin America.
Let us for one moment ponder over the 15 central and western African nations, former French colonies, who are members of the UMEOA. These are 15 nations, whose currency, the Franc CFA is printed in Chemaliers, France. The value of the Franc CFA, its exchange rate, parities, interests, are regulated by France.
65 % of these 15 nations foreign currency reserves have to be deposited in France. France is earning about 3 % interests on these currency reserves and lends them back to the UMEOA member states at 5 % – 6 % or more as “developmental aid”.
Discussing this developmental aid, the former French President Jack Chirac is known for having said, that France does not have to act as if it was the benefactor. All it has to do to help these nations is to stop usurping them.
All gold reserves of the 15 UMEOA member states are kept in France at the Tresor National. France has not allowed an audit or otherwise confirmed that these gold reserves are actually, physically present in France.
France has installed commissars with veto rights in the three central banks of the UMEOA. These commissars can, at any time, block for any decisions of these central banks boards of directors. According to international treaties, any of the 15 member states can leave the union at any time.
Reality however, reveals one French-backed coup d´etat after the other. Presidents who want to leave the union, stop the usurpation and use the money and resources as well as the labor of their people for the benefit of the nation and its citizens are ousted, imprisoned, poisoned, or otherwise put out of order, like the former Ivorian President Laurent Gbagbo who is currently being held at the International Criminal Court, in a former Nazi prison. The details about the contemporary French colonialism are described in my article ” French Africa Policy Damages African and European Economies”. An inspection of these 15 nations voting record at the U.N. reveals that France or NATO exercise their modo-colonialist policy through these nations at the United Nations General Assembly.
It would be easy to find other examples for why “Democracy” cannot and must not be confused with international justice or legitimacy.
To understand that this is not a ” pro Russia – China biased opinion”, one could read my recent article about the 2013 Korea Crisis and the fact that both China and Russia have gone along with illegitimate sanctions against the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. The article has been published under the title Korea Crisis and Sanctions Designed to Sabotage Transformation of DPRK Economy in 2013.
All that the draft resolution on Syria by the UN General Assembly demonstrates is, that the United Nations, an instrument that was created by the victors of the second world war, which is still dominated and ultimately controlled by these nuclear armed superpowers has utterly and irrevocably lost its legitimacy as representative for an international community of sovereign nations.
Non of the below discussed details about the resolution, how it came about, the reactions it has prompted by the one or the other UN Ambassador ought to be understood as being separate from the above mentioned fact, which is, that the UN has developed into the geo-political plaything of competing superpowers. Currently Syria is the primary global attention focus for this utterly disgraceful power-play.
The draft resolution itself ignores the crimes and atrocities which are being committed by the armed terrorist groups. Terrorist groups, or mercenary corps, which are backed by the USA, EU member states, the Gulf States and Turkey. This financial support, the aiding in the recruitment of mercenaries, the arming of terrorist organizations is a direct violation of the so-called mercenary convention, to which, as far as I remember, Qatar, Saudi-Arabia and Turkey are signatories.
Even though the USA and others may not be a signatory to this convention, arguably, their NATO membership, the fact that Turkey, a NATO member and signatory of the convention is a state sponsor of terrorists or mercenaries, and the fact that the USA and other are allied with signatories of the convention, who are violating it, places direct responsibility for the violation of the convention with the USA, the UK, France, and others.
The UN General Assembly´s resolution utterly ignores the most heinous crimes which have been brought upon the Syrian people since 2011, including countless massacres, attacks with chemical laden missiles and with sarin gas. Sarin gas, which according to UN´s envoy Carla del Ponte may have been provided by Turkey. It does not mention with a single word, that the government of the Syrian Arab Republic has written numerous letters to the U.N. Secretary General ban Kyi-moon in which it has detailed these atrocities, provided detailed evidence for the state-sponsored terrorism, and pleaded that the UN Secretary General responded according to international law, condemned the state sponsored terrorism, and initiated measures against it.
The resolution also ignores the principle of non-interference into the the internal affairs of sovereign nations. The bearing of this fact cannot be understood separate from the historical context of the Treaty of Westphalia, which after 30 years of sectarian war in Europe should once and for all end wars, caused by empires interference into other nations or empires internal affairs.
In a previous article, in response to Dr. Henry Kissinger who argued, that the principles which are enshrined in the Treaty of Westphalia and by implication the UN Charter, were not applicable for “former colonies whose borders had been arbitrarily drawn by colonial powers”.
I have detailed the dangers of Kissinger´s line of reasoning. The article was published under the title A Response to Henry Kissinger on Syria and the Global Order by Christof Lehmann.
Effectively, the UN resolution on Syria represents a UN endorsed return to anarchy, barbarism and tyranny. An article written by Black, Fetzer, Mezyaev and Lehmann has detailed the trend and demonstrated the bearing of this development. It is published under the title South East China Sea; A Perfect Crisis for the International Crisis Group.
Since western mainstream media will omit Syria´s response let us hear the official Syrian response.
Syria’s permanent Envoy to the UN Bashar al-Jaafari said his country regrets the adoption of a biased and unbalanced UN resolution, thanking the countries that rejected the resolution for their responsible positions which support the UN principles and the international law articles.
Sadly, being s a diplomat, Al-Jafaari is restrained by the social syntax of diplomatic language.
In a statement released after the vote on the UN draft resolution on Syria, al-Jaafari said, that the decrease in the number of countries that voted in favor and the increase of numbers of those who abstained from voting indicates the growing international understanding of the reality of what is happening in Syria of the foreign interference, support of terrorism, the spread of extremism and incitement besides the refusal of dialogue.
“We rely on the UN and its member states to support Syria and its people against the culture of extremism and terrorism, and to encourage the comprehensive national dialogue to peacefully resolve the Syrian crisis,” he said.
“We expect the UN to, carefully, read the map of current events in our region away from the interests of certain countries within or outside the region to safeguard the principles of international law and protect the Syrian people’s aspirations, “he added.
He said that everyone should realize that although Qatar had submitted the draft resolution, it was not a Qatari project, indicating that ” Qatar was a tool of execution. “
Al-Jaafari expressed surprise at the Secretary-General’s appreciation of the help provided by Qatar and others in securing the release of the four peacekeepers, despite the involvement of Qatari intelligence in kidnapping the four Filipino peacekeepers operating within UNDOF contingent in the occupied Golan .
He wondered how Qatar could have such effect on the terrorist groups that had kidnapped members of the peacekeeping forces if it was not involved with these groups.
Al-Jaafari stressed that the involvement of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey in funding jihadist terrorism coming to Syria through borders with the neighboring countries is no longer a surprise for anyone.
“The UN envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, in his last speech at the UN Security Council, stressed the existence of 40.000 foreign terrorists shedding the blood on the Syrian territories including more than a thousand Europeans belonging to al-Qaeda,” he said.
Sadly, al-Jafaari stopped short of explaining that al-Qaeda is a euphemism for a NATO mercenary organization, which NATO implicitly admitted up to and during the 25th NATO Summit in Chicago in 2012. The details of this audacity are explained in my article NATO`s 25th Summit in Chicago in Preparation of Global Full Spectrum Dominance
Al-Jafari confirmed the unprecedented hypocrisy of the French government, wondering how France claims that it wages war against al-Qaeda linked terrorist groups in Africa and the coast region while it encourages, sponsors and supports the same terrorist groups in Syria.
The French cooperation in manufacturing the war in Mali is, among other described in my article Mali(gn) French and NATO Pivot in North-West Africa threatens Regional Stability. and in Alexander Mezyaev´s article Military Intervention in Mali: Special Operation to Recolonize Africa
Al-Jafaari said that the French delegation had foiled the issuance of a number of UN press releases to condemn the terrorist acts committed by al-Qaeda-linked armed groups in Syria which claimed the lives of thousands of Syrians as it foiled a UN release to condemn the attempt of assassination of the Syrian Premier.
Al-Jaafari concluded by saying that since the fight against terrorism in France is legal, so it is legal all over the world.” We, in Syria, are fighting the same terrorism which the French government is fighting.”
Al-Jafaari could as well have added that the USA has vetoed a Russian sponsored resolution to condemn terrorism in all of its forms, regardless by whom or when it is committed. That diplomatic scandal, by the way, occurred prior to the so-called act of terrorism during the 2013 Boston Maraton.
Earlyer al-Jafaari stated, “It is surprising that the draft resolution was presented within the item titled- prevention of the outbreak of armed conflicts- while the context of the draft totally contradicts this noble address as it has sought to escalate the crisis and instigate violence in Syria through creating a dangerous precedent in the international relations, which try to give legitimacy to offering weapons to the armed terrorist groups in Syria”.
He stressed that the UN has documented operations for smuggling various types of weapons into Syria from Libya and other places, in addition to barbarian and unprecedented crimes and violations of human rights perpetrated by the armed terrorist groups in Syria.
He added that systematic assassinations and kidnapping operations against Muslim and Christian scholars and the destruction of the oldest synagogue in the region were perpetrated by the armed terrorist groups.
Al-Jaafari pointed out that the “Syrian National Coalition” which was invented in Qatar includes theoretically at least 63 members, but practically it includes only 53 members because those who invented this extremist coalition which opposes dialogue have left 10 vacant seats to be occupied by secularists from the Syrian opposition.
If the situation was not so serious, one could almost laugh about the irony of the next fact al-Jafaari states, namely, that:
the Qataris and their allies have not yet found ten secular people from the Syrian opposition to be part of this coalition.
Al-Jafaari stressed that the Syrian Government dealt positively with all initiatives to resolve the crisis in Syria peacefully, reiterating that the Syrian government is committed to the issue of the comprehensive national dialogue under the leadership of Syria.
The Chinese response. The Chinese Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Li Baodong , stressed that China believes in the political solution to the crisis in Syria. Li Baodong stated that Syria’s future will be decided by the Syrian people without foreign interference.
How wonderful would this Chinese statement have been, was it not for the fact that China went along with the US-sponsored sanctions against the DPRK in late 2012 and early 2013. Forgetting this, one would almost be able to hope that the UN as a whole was safe to salvage. However, given the urgency of the situation in Syria, it is at least positive that China is so consistent in maintaining international law when it comes to Syria.
Addressing the UN General Assembly, the Chinese representative said that China is concerned about the resolution which will be presented for voting, calling for solving the crisis in Syria.
He said that the result is not in favor of the Syrian people, regional countries and the international community in general, adding that the international community should respect the independence and territorial integrity of Syria.
“China urges the Syrian government and opposition to fulfill their commitments and stop violence to start political talks as soonest,” the Chinese representative stated.
The Russian response. The Russian Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Alexander Pankin, stressed that the UNGA draft resolution on Syria is “irresponsible, unconstructive, and it aggravates the situation in Syria, in addition to hindering the international efforts to implement the Geneva Communiqué.”
Addressing the UNGA session, Pankin said, “the Russian delegation regrets presenting this draft resolution that aggravates the crisis in Syria.”
He added that Russia opposes the draft resolution because it promotes the so-called “National Coalition for Revolutionary and Opposition Forces” as the only legitimate representative for the Syrian people.
Pankin noted that accepting the Arab League’s decisions which were made last March means legitimatization of arming the opposition.
Let me be clear on this. It is wonderful that Russian policy with regard to Syria is consistent with international law. That however, does not imply that it would be safe to salvage the United Nation, or that Russia, or any of the victors of the second world war should be able to adopt UN Security Council resolutions which contradict international law. Neither should it be possible for a UN General Assemble to lend apparent legitimacy to UN resolutions which contradict international law. The examples of Libya, the DPRK come to mind.
Besides that, it would be a mistake of historical proportions if the fact that the Syria crisis, or war on Syria has been caused by a number of factors, including geo-political factors, energy security factors, economic factors, which are systematically held outside of the public political discourse.
These factors are being described in the article The Syria War, Preventing a General War in the Middle East, Europe and Beyond ( 1/3)
The Iranian response. Iranian permanent Representative to the UN Mohammad Khazaee stressed that the draft resolution on Syria submitted to the General Assembly undermines efforts exerted on the international level to reach a peaceful solution to the crisis in Syria. He added that the draft deviated from principles of the international law and UN Charter.
“Iran refuses the draft resolution on Syria because it doesn’t indicate to Israeli aggression on Syria as a flagrant violation, which jeopardizes regional and international security, and it is considered a violation of the UN Charter, especially the items regarding banning the use of force against any member state,” the Iranian representative said in a speech in front of the General Assembly.
He added that the UN´s role should be to find a peaceful solution to the crisis in Syria, while the draft resolution doesn’t help bringing together the two sides to end the crisis peacefully. He added, that the draft resolution undermines the efforts of the special envoy of the UN to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi.
He pointed out that the armed terrorist groups are the side which used chemical weapons, causing the killing and injury of several citizens and this was affirmed by the UN Human Rights envoy Carla Del Ponte.
The Iranian position is a refreshingly honest description of the situation, but also Iran failed to discuss the underlying geo-political causes.
South Africa. South Africa’s UN envoy, Dumisani Kumalo, said that his country was disappointed with this resolution and depicting it as ” unacceptable, unbalanced and biased to one side,”….. ” Such resolution would worsen the situation in Syria,” he affirmed.
He reiterated his country’s commitment to Syria’s sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity, stressing that the only solution to reach a peaceful solution, is through the implementation of the Geneva statement which was supported by the international community including the Security Council.
Venezuelan Permanent Representative, Jorge Valero, depicted as “biased, politicized and unbalanced” the draft resolution on Syria, saying it hinders dialogue violates Syrian sovereignty, fuels the situation in the region. ” It would have dangerous consequences on the world’s security and stability.” Valero said.
The representative of Bolivia stressed his country’s rejection of the draft resolution since ” it is hampering the efforts of a peaceful solution carried out by Russia and the United States and the UN Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi.
He stressed that the draft resolution is unbalanced and biased and doesn’t reflect the reality. ” It doesn’t hold the opposition groups responsible for the atrocities committed in Syria rather than it tries to legitimize these groups and their crimes.”
Bolivia’s Representative said that the approval of the draft resolution also means giving priority to the war crimes and the escalation of violence in Syria, rather than giving it to build a long-term peace.
The Representative of Tanzania, Daudi Mwakawago, said the draft resolution does not put an end to the violence and bloodshed in Syria, which must be stopped, warning that the flow of arms and terrorist groups to Syria pose a threat to stability in the region.
The DPRK Ambassador to the UN, So Se Pyong, rejected the draft resolution because it is a breach of the UN Charter and the rules of international law, stressing the need to respect the sovereignty of Syria in accordance with the UN Charter.
Nicaragua also rejected the draft resolution as it does not help resolve the crisis in Syria, but encourages war and continuing violence.
The Representative of Ecuador rejected the draft resolution since it violates the sovereignty of Syria and increases the bloodshed and legitimizes the illegitimate behaviors.
The representative of Cuba rejected the draft resolution on Syria because it does not lead to a political solution to the crisis or stopping the violence.
The Pakistani delegate stressed that the solution to the crisis in Syria will not be but a political one that will be determined by the Syrian people.
The UN General Assembly Resolution on Syria is representative of a return to a new cold war. A new bi-polar world in which sovereign nations are at he mercy of superpowers decisions. It is an abomination, as much as the UN System as a whole is an abomination that has to be abolished and replaced with an international community of sovereign nations.
I would like to end this editorial with a quote of the Russian Ambassador to NATO Alexander Grutchko who described the situation in Syria and its causes and the illegality in solving the crisis better than anyone else when he said:
“Someone here in Brussels made a most profound point by saying that if you are holding a hammer, you should not think that every emerging problem is a nail. We think the world has ample opportunity to engage in energy cooperation and to ensure energy security without making use of military-political organizations as an instrument”.