| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| Kofi Annan Prevents the UN From Saying a Word About Tibet |
| 2004-09-30 |
| From Global Policy Forum, an article by Celine Nahory. The veto has always loomed over the work of the UN Security Council. During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union often brandished their prerogative publicly in Council meetings. Overall, the five permanent members [the United States, the United Kingdom, China, France, and Russia = P5] cast 199 vetoes between 1946 and 1989 - well over four per year - preventing the Council from taking action on many important matters. Since the end of the Cold War, however, the formal use of the veto has diminished dramatically. Between January 1990 and March 2004, the Permanent Five (P5) cast 17 vetoes - only about one per year. In spite of this new appearance of restraint, the P5 continue to pressure the Security Council through a "hidden" veto - the quiet threat of possible veto use. As Ambassador Patricia Durrant of Jamaica put it, "the mere presence of the threat of the veto 
determines the way the Council conducts its business." Permanent members use the hidden veto mainly in closed-door informal consultations, rather than in official open meetings. Since the late 1980s, the Council largely conducts its business in such private sessions. Away from the public and without any record of what has been said, the P5 have more freedom to pressure, threaten, and even bully other members of the Council. By giving private veto warnings before a vote takes place, the P5 can "convince" Council members to shift their position and still persuade the international public of their good intentions. |
| Posted by:MIke Sylwester |
| #6 So, then why does Kofi Annan also prevent the UN from saying a word about Tibet? . |
| Posted by: Glitch Slitch3522 2004-10-01 12:29:11 AM |
| #5 MS: So, Zhang Fei, is Annan bloviating about Israel because the UN members effectively raise the issue? Or does he bloviate about it in order to raise the issue to the UN members? MS obviously thinks Annan raises the issue because that is what UN members want. But the Secretary General doesn't *have* to say anything. He just organizes meetings between ambassadors at the UN. His remarks about Israel are gratuitous, but he won't make the same gratuitous remarks about Tibet. Why the double standard? Because Annan doesn't have a problem with the Chinese sticking it to the Tibetans, but has a real problem with Israel trying to prevent its citizens from getting killed by Arab suicide bombers. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-09-30 7:05:55 PM |
| #4 Let me correct my second set of questions Is Annan not bloviating about Tibet because the UN members have not effectively raised the issue? Or does he not bloviate about Tibet in order to prevent raising the issue to the UN members? . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-09-30 3:11:45 PM |
| #3 Re #1 (Zhang Fei) Annan is forever bloviating on the issue of Israel So, Zhang Fei, is Annan bloviating about Israel because the UN members effectively raise the issue? Or does he bloviate about it in order to raise the issue to the UN members? And please answer the exact same questions about Tibet. . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-09-30 3:05:10 PM |
| #2 The US should draft a UNSC resolution denouncing Israel and then when everybody gets excited to vote on it, veto the damn thing. |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2004-09-30 11:34:11 AM |
| #1 Article: Washington’s constant threat of vetoes on Security Council actions critical of Israel is a notorious example of this abuse, which generally worsens international crises. It's kind of funny, then, that Annan is forever bloviating on the issue of Israel, but has not let the issue of Tibet pass his lips. Could it be that China's veto is more equal than the American one? Mike Sylwester, Jihad Unspun and Kofi Annan, perfect together. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-09-30 11:17:55 AM |