The UN’s “Frothing of Words”

Winston Churchill warned about the potential for the United Nations to turn into “merely a frothing of words.” If Churchill had seen the UN in action these last several weeks trying to deal with crises in Syria and North Korea, he would have concluded that his warning was not heeded. Last December, the UN Security Council passed a resolution unanimously that was supposed to provide a road map for a peaceful solution of the 5 year-old Syrian war that has taken over 250,000 lives. It contained an ambitious timeline under which negotiations between selected opposition groups and Syrian government representatives were slated to begin in January, leading to the establishment of a transition government with full executive powers within 6 months. A year after that, under the terms of a newly drafted constitution to be negotiated, UN-supervised “free and fair” elections were to take place. There was also supposed to be a parallel UN-monitored ceasefire in Syria while the political talks were underway, except with respect to the ISIS-controlled territories where military efforts to degrade and destroy ISIS will continue.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on the day of the Security Council vote, “I’m not too optimistic about what has been achieved today.” As usual, the Obama administration was thrilled with having a piece of paper in hand that laid out a framework for an illusory peace. Hillary Clinton showed how bad her judgment is when she said during a Democratic presidential debate that, thanks to the UN Security Council resolution, “We now finally are where we need to be” in the fight against ISIS and in “bringing the world together to go after a political transition in Syria.” Lavrov was right. The UN Security Council resolution was just a bunch of words. Humanitarian conditions are worse now than when the resolution was passed. The talks that got underway in late January in Geneva foundered almost as soon as they started. Saudi Arabia insisted that only its own hand-picked roster of opposition members could officially represent the opposition. Russia objected. At the very least, Russia pressed for the Syrian Kurds to be included. Turkey, which disdains the Kurds and considers them terrorists, threatened to abandon the talks if the Kurds were part of the opposition team. UN Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura sent out formal invitations to the list of approved opposition representatives, whose names were not made public. The Syrian regime was represented by its UN ambassador. Neither side directly talked to each other. Instead, they were to hold what the UN called “proximity talks,” in which Mr.de Mistura would shuttle back and forth between separate rooms in which each of the delegations sat waiting for something to happen.

---

Nothing happened. Just two days after the talks started, Mr.de Mistura suspended them until at least February 25th. The opposition delegation had insisted on the lifting of all government sieges and cessation of air attacks as a precondition for engaging in any substantive negotiations. The Syrian government, backed by Russia, claimed this was just a pretext to sabotage the talks before they could get off the ground. All the while this back-and-forth was going on, Syrian civilians living inside the besieged cities and towns and other hard-to-reach areas were literally dying from malnutrition or lack of any basic medical care. Bombing intensified as Syrian government forces with Russian air support took more territory back from the Syrian opposition and created even more humanitarian crises in the area around Aleppo. Neither side in the Syrian conflict appears to be budging. The opposition members, backed by their supporters, insist that the sieges and aerial bombings end before they will return to the talks in Geneva. France’s UN Ambassador François Delattre told reporters last week that “the opposition cannot negotiate with a gun to its head.” The Syrian government is not letting up on its military pressure. Russia’s UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin told reporters that the opposition “does not have moral grounds” to object to Russia’s actions since the “terrorists” (by which the Syrian regime and Russia mean just about every element of the opposition) have not stopped their attacks. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said, “I urge the Security Council and the International Support Group for Syria to press the parties to engage seriously with each other on Syria’s future.” In a February 1st press statement, the members of the Security Council “reiterated their grave distress by the continued deterioration of the devastating humanitarian situation in Syria.” The UN has been reduced to “merely a frothing of words.” Meanwhile, nothing meaningful is being done to alleviate the suffering on the ground and people are dying. As for North Korea, its regime continues to flout UN Security Council resolutions banning nuclear tests and missile launchings. In early January, North Korea conducted its fourth nuclear test. The Security Council met in emergency session. After about two hours of closed door consultations, the Security Council issued a press statement condemning the test and vowing further unspecified measures in response. The statement said that “the members of the Security Council will begin to work immediately on such measures in a new Security Council resolution.” No resolution was forthcoming. Over this past weekend, North Korea launched a rocket with technology that could be used in producing a ballistic missile. Again, the UN Security Council met in emergency session, this time on Sunday. After its closed door meeting concluded, the Security Council issued a press statement declaring – once again – its intention to “adopt expeditiously a new Security Council resolution with such measures in response to these dangerous and serious violations.” When U.S. Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power was asked whether there was a target date for new sanctions, she responded, “As quickly as possible.” The members of the Security Council are still looking for agreement on a new resolution, Ambassador Power explained. She added that “it has taken time, but one of the reasons it has taken time – we knew it would take some time at the beginning because a tough and comprehensive sanctions package after we have already put such significant sanctions in place because of prior illegal actions by the government of North Korea was always going to take time.” In other words, past toughly worded Security Council resolutions with sanctions have not worked, but the Security Council members intend to try again and expect a different result – the classic definition of insanity. Or, as Churchill put it, more “frothing of words.”