Analysis of Speeches during draft resolution S/2012/77 - Essay Example

? Analysis of Speeches during draft resolution S 77 Introduction The surfacing of a close relation between the Russian Federation and Chinese is a significant upheaval in the tactical balance of command, and not as the disintegration of relationship of Soviet Union or United States to China. If established on a concrete knowledge of mutual interests, then this forms a serious problem to America’s international leadership and paves way for Eurasia’s role in international affairs. The cooperation of the Sino-Russian is not a new concept. The Shanghai cooperation has been very influential to the Central Asia affairs for a very long time however, this was an affair set on a regional basis. Even though, America and NATO expressed their concern regarding the affairs in that region their worry was the intimidation masqueraded by Islamic terrorism (Amnesty International, 2012, Pg.123-124). The latest Sino-Russian support over Syria in the UN Security Council, the General Assembly and other global meetings is suggestive as it reveals a mutual sense of dangers, and solidarity to develop a policy to resist America, NATO and other regional nations where their course of action threatens Chinese and Russian interests. This paper shall analyze the latest Security Council debate, which led to the resolution S/2012/77, and criticized the extended brutality caused by the Syrian authorities. I shall, particularly analyze the five speeches made by the representatives of the Security members, which includes, USA, China, Russia, Syria and Azerbaijan countries (Khashan, 2011, Pg.120). Analysis of five of the speeches made by the representatives of the SC members In the context of the latest Security Council, debate that led to the veto resolution S/2012/77, the Syrian government is under criticism regarding its brutal actions, and the purpose of this debate was to stop violation of human rights and attacks caused by Syria. Instead of endorsing the motion to full capacity, the Russian and the Chinese ambassadors, Vitaly Churkin and Li Baodong respectively, implemented a mutual policy purposed at creating a resolution that would not be harsh on both the Syrian authorities or remove president Bashar from office. In endorsing their policy, they claimed that implementing such a resolution would provoke external armed intrusion in Syria, and this may cause an outbreak of a bloodier civil war (International Crisis Group, 2011, Pg.100-101). Vitaly Churkin emphasized that Russia’s idea was an objective solution that would eradicate human violence and attacks and commence a political healing in Syria. He said that Russia had already arranged a meeting with President Al-Assad the following week, in order to obtain a concession that would create a peaceful dialogue between the regime and the opposition parties. For this reason, Russian pleaded with the members to delay the voting until Russia meets with Assad for peace talks, however, members refused to wait for Russia’s visit to Damascus, Syria (Debieuve 2011, Pg.187). As a result, the 13 council members voted for the resolution with the exemption from Russia and China. In retaliating to the draft resolution, Ambassador Baodong from China claimed that, going through with the vote when there is a disagreement between the parties, would ruin the unity and the authoritarian power of the Security Council instead of solving the matter, and it was for this reason that China opposed the draft resolution (Zenko 2012, Pg. 34-57). In his speech, he called upon the global community to offer a constructive help in helping create a political settlement in Syria. Along with, the autonomy, liberty, and territorial veracity, the international community should respect the political ideology of Syria. For this reason, the course of action by the Security Council should abide by the Charter of the United Nation and assist eradicate the tension, by enhancing a political negotiation in order to maintain harmony in Middle East, rather than complicating the matter  (Charbonneau, 2012, Pg. 56-76). There are many speculations about the nature of the Russian game to Syrian government. Some suggests that Russian fears that, the resolution might turn out to be a driving force for political change, similar to Libya where humanitarian intrusion change the political ideology used in Libya. Others had different opinions, suggesting that the issue resurfaced from election politics, whereby, Putin influenced the nationalists and xenophobic to support his presidency. Others thought that the source was the Russian arms transaction with Syria and its wish to remain vigilant to its marine base at Tartus. Other people blamed Russia of having a paranoid policy that creates a bad reputation to both Syria and Russia since it considers any Act by America, Europe, and Arab countries as being against Russians welfare. Some goes a step further and criticizes Syrian situation as an issue of desiring to grab international power politics. It is fathomless that, Russia and China have combined forces to reject global organizations in using NATO power as their platform. The Sino-Russian coalition has political and economic affairs that are as dignifies as those of its western allies, and the coalition is not to watch the West dominating over the Middle East. The Russo- Chinese coalition is another game that is in the make and another center of authority (Charbonneau, 2012, Pg. 70). It is apparent that, the source of the vetoes is significant and numerous researchers focus on the probable link between the predicaments in Syria and the larger global issues. The underlying framework of the Security Council decision was difficult. The incidences in Syria could turn out to be another arena of the Middle East spring, with the appearance of a dictatorial government encountering street demonstrations and using violence to remain in power. However, Syria is not yet an Arab Regime, it collaborated with Iran, which the Western authorities had to scrutinize in order to eradicate the nuclear program. The Western powers feared that the nuclear program could result into a bomb, which might be a threat to Europe. Israel and Saudi Arabia consider the Iranian bomb to cause tremendous threat and therefore requires prompt action. Therefore, if the resolution goes through, which the Chinese and Russia are against, President Assad is to step down, and this might deteriorate Iran and cut off Iran’s partners, Hezbollah and Hamas. This is a similar case with Saddam’s Iraq; the disintegration of another Arab dictatorial government is a crucial catalyst for the new beginning of the Middle East (Charbonneau, 2012, Pg. 56-76). Israel suggest for an air campaign against Iran, which would damage the nuclear program and impede the production of the bomb. If Israel campaign for an air strike goes through, the, according to the Russian this would create a war. In his speech, Mr. Churkin from the federation said that, Russia does not support the Al-Assad regime in violating human rights, but, the Security members should wait obtain an objective solution, which would assist in putting to an end the crisis. However, instead of the members considering enhancing a political settlement in Syria, they call for a government change, and encouraging the opposition to seize power. He claimed that, the casting of the vote towards a draft resolution overlooked the wellbeing in Syria since the members did not consider asking the Syrian opposing to distance themselves from violence. Together with that, Mr. Churkin said that, there was no effort seen to withdraw Syrian armed forces from the scene of violence, also, the resolution did not consider using the league of Arab States in increasing the chances of political settlement. As Mr. Churkin ended his speech, he said that these circumstances compelled the Russian delegation to oppose the draft resolution. Even though, Russian and China joined forces not to support and pass the draft resolution, it was apparent that they would be liable for the predicaments in Syria. Ms. Rice representing America was very furious and claimed that likewise America was disgusted that some members impeded the council from accomplishing its sole purpose of addressing the security threat in Syria. In her speech, Ms. Rice revealed that Russia and China lacks clear arguments, since they want to accomplish their personal interests and not considerate of killings happening in Syria (Amnesty International, 2012, Pg.150). In addition, it is reprehensible that one of the council members supplies ammunitions to Al-Assad. It was the responsibility and obligation of the Security Council members to maintain global peace and harmony, and, particularly, in Syria, by eliminating Al-Assad regime, but the draft resolution fails to execute its responsibilities. The resolution was almost going through, and Al-Assad had agreed to make peace negotiations. However, the delays caused by Russia and China will be unforgivable when the crisis is over. The Syrian regime had intensified its brutality and butchering hundreds including, women, and children. Moreover, they do not allow the casualties to get medical assistance. For this reason, the International community has a responsibility of safeguarding the lives of the Syrian people from disgusting violence, yet some of the members within the council out rightly sell the lives of the Syrians. As Ms. Rice concluded her speech, she pleaded with Russia and China to reconsider their action, for the sake of the council members, and to save Syria and Middle East. Mr. Ja?afari from the Syrian Arab Republic condemned the governments that supplied the ammunitions to cause terror to the Syrian people (UNSC, 2011). From his speech, it was apparent that Al-Assad had agreed to enter into a peace treaty, but, after some members supplied some ammunition into Syria, he withdrew. In addition, the league of Arab states was already in the process of maintaining peace and unity in Syria. Mr Ja’afari emphasized that Syria should be given a chance to create a political dialogue, without any intervention from the international community. He claimed that some of the influential members within the Security Council did not portray true intentions they had on Syrians and its government. Mr. Musayey from Azerbaijan also presented his deep concern in the ongoing predicaments and prevalent brutality in Syria that led to death of numerous people (UNSC, 2011). Even with the continued calls from the global community, Syria situations go on deteriorating. Since the beginning, Azerbaijan endorsed the increased efforts from the league of Arab States and he continues to support their efforts in ending the calamity and finding a lasting solution using political dialogue. Similar to Russian, Chinese and Syria positions, he believed that the only possible way to find a solution to the crisis is creating a political process that addresses the rightful aspirations and issue of Syria people, without international intrusion (Shaikh, 2011, Pg. 23-26). Conclusion The Security Council drafted a resolution to eradicate violence in Syria and endorse the League of Arabs States to create a political transition. Russian and China joined forces to prevent the continuity of the draft resolution based on various reasons. Firstly, they claim that, the International community should not intervene with the aim of ending Al-Assad regime for their own interest; rather they should assist in bringing peace in Syria, through enhancing a political dialogue between the government and the opposition. The 13 members states agree cast a vote for the continuity of the draft resolution, but Russia and China appeals to the members to go through the draft and ascertain that the sovereignty and the autonomy of Syria are respected. As discussed, the speeches from the different persons from various countries maintain that, for a lasting solution in Syria, there is a need for a political transition (UNSC, 2011). Bibliography Amnesty International, UN Security Council Syria statement completely inadequate, media release, 4 August 2011, viewed 3 July 2012, http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/un-security-council-syria-statement-%E2%80%98completely-inadequate%E2%80%99-2011-08-04 Khashan, H. ‘The View from Syria and Lebanon’, Middle East Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 3, summer 2011 International Crisis Group, ‘Popular Protest in North Africa and the Middle East: The Syrian Regime’s Slow-Motion Suicide’, Middle East/North Africa Report, No.109, 13 July 2011 Debieuve, L, ‘Syria and the rising risk of civil war’, Gulf News, 9 November 2011, available at http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/syria-and-the-rising-risk-of-civil-war-1.926328.  Charbonneau, L, ‘Syria conflict now a civil war, UN peacekeeping chief says,’ Reuters, 12 June 2012, viewed 3 July 2012, Rafizadeh, M, ‘Is Syria Descending into Civil War?’ Huffington Post, 12/4/11, available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/majid-rafizadeh/syria-civil-war_b_1127586.html Zenko, M, ‘By overreaching in Libya, NATO has left Syria to fend alone’, Council on Foreign Relations, 11 October 2011, available at http://www.cfr.org/nato/overreaching-libya-nato-has-left-syria-fend-alone/p26153 Abdulrahim, R, ‘Syria unrest: a popular uprising or civil war?’ LA Times, 6 December 2011, available at http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2011/12/syria-unrest-a-popular-uprising-or-civil-Development of Conflict in Arab Spring Libya and Syria: From Revolution to Civil War war-.html ‘Syria Unrest: Arab League Adopts Sanctions in Cairo’, BBC News, 27 November 2011, available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15901360. S. Kaplan, ‘A New US Policy for Syria: Fostering Political Change in a Divided State’, Middle East Policy, Vol. 15, No. 3, fall 2008. S L Myers, ‘US Joins Efforts to Equip and Pay Rebels in Syria’, The New York Times, 1 April 2012, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/world/middleeast/us-and-other-countries-move-to-increase-assistance-to-syrian-rebels.html Shaikh, S, ‘Preventing a Syrian Civil War’, New York Times, 12 October 2011, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/13/opinion/preventing-a-syrian-civil-war.html UNSC, Security Council, in Statement, condemns Syrian authorities for ‘widespread violations of human rights, use of force against civilians’, media release, 3 August 2011, viewed 3 July 2012, http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10352.doc.htm UNSC, Draft Resolution: S/2011/612, New York, UNSC, 4 October 2011, viewed 3 July 2012, http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/2011/612 Read More