International Justice

CJ354 Endicott College

Russia plans to veto Syrian resolution if considered “unacceptable”

As unrest in Syria continues and shows no apparent signs of slowing, the U.N. Security Council has finally decided to meet and come up with a draft resolution to address the crisis and seek to have Syrian President Bashar Assad cede power.  The decision to come together and develop a resolution comes after nearly an 11-month struggle of the Syrian people against the Assad regime and plenty of pressure from Western nations and the Arab League.  However, there are concerns that Russia and China, who have both resisted the push to develop a resolution, will continue to be an obstacle.  “If the text is unacceptable for us we will vote against it, of course.” Russian U.N. envoy Vitaly Churkin told reporters in Moscow.  The Chinese Ambassador to the U.N. Li Baodong voiced their concerns in saying: “China is firmly opposed to the use of force to solve the Syrian problem and resolutely opposes pushing for forced regime change in Syria, as it violates the United Nations Charter and the basic norms guiding the practice of international relations.”  The U.N. Security Council is meeting in a closed session working on a resolution this afternoon, so we’ll have to wait and see if anything meaningful comes out of the session.

What do you think, will Russian and Chinese opposition lead to a neutered resolution?  Or will they just veto whatever happens to be drafted?



One response to “Russia plans to veto Syrian resolution if considered “unacceptable”

  1. aojustice2012 February 3, 2012 at 12:12 am

    Both Russian and Chinese opposition seem to have posed significant hurdles to any significant UN Security Council resolutions on Syria. Both country’s representatives have made mentions of the imperative of respecting another country’s sovereignty, etc. However, as we mentioned in class and as is mentioned in this article: Russia, at least, has several other motives for wanting Assad’s regime to stay in power.

    Based on reports of the on-going conflict and the continued killing of civilians, I am wondering whether the conflict is still generally understood to be bordering on a civil war? What exactly makes Syria so ‘different’ from Libya? If anything it seemed like the conflict in Libya could’ve been construed much more clearly as a civil war.

%d bloggers like this: