By Joseph A. Klein, CFP United Nations Columnist ——Bio and Archives--August 31, 2011
World News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
"my message is that despite the fall of the Qadhafi regime and the gradual return of security for many Libyans, NATO's mission is not finished yet. We remain fully committed to our mission and to keeping the pressure on the remnants of the Qadhafi regime until we can confidently say that the civilian population of Libya is no longer threatened."In reply to a question concerning the process for ending the NATO mission and whether NATO would look to the UN to make that decision, Oana Lungescu responded that "The decision will be taken by the North Atlantic Council on the military advice of our commanders of Operation Unified Protector and of the military authorities." The NATO spokesperson claimed that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had endorsed this approach, but Ban's associate spokesman in New York as well as Ian Martin refused to confirm whether this was true. The Chinese and Russian UN ambassadors have made no secret of their displeasure with NATO's military actions in Libya, which they claim have exceeded the authority granted under UN Security Council 1973 and contributed to civilian casualties. They are likely to press for a quick end to NATO's mission, now that the conflict is essentially over. Indeed, the Chinese Ambassador Li Baodong made this precise point in remarks to the press on August 30th. As for any further UN Security Council action on Syria, two competing resolutions have been introduced. Russia, supported by at least China, has introduced what amounts to a reiteration of the bland, toothless Security Council Presidential Statement issued on August 3rd. The United Kingdom , on behalf of itself, France, Germany, Portugal and the United States, introduced a much stronger resolution containing economic sanctions. Russia and China point to the civilian casualties in Libya that accompanied NATO's escalation there as justification for not starting down that slippery slope again in Syria. Key non-permanent members India, Brazil and South Africa have not publicly indicated which resolution, if any, they would support, but it is likely they are leaning towards the Russian version. India's UN Ambassador, Hardeep Singh Puri, who has served as the president of the Security Council during the month of August, tipped his hand to the press on August 30th when he used terms like "coercive" and "punitive" to describe the UK version. In a demonstration of how ineffective the Security Council has been in dealing with the ongoing atrocities by the Assad regime against the Syrian people, it has spent days trying to decide which draft resolution was filed first for consideration. Confusion, obfuscation and inaction continue to rein at the United Nations.
View Comments
Joseph A. Klein is the author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom.