The United Nations adopts the obligation to justify any veto, against the backdrop of Russia’s deadlock over Ukraine

A rare reform was met with applause and revived with the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. Unsurprisingly, the Security Council failed to get its condemnation of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine on February 25, the day after the Russian invasion: Moscow vetoed it. On Tuesday, April 26, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution obligating the five permanent members of the Security Council to justify their use of the veto.

Read also This article is reserved for our subscribers The United Nations is unable to vote on a resolution against Russian “aggression”

The United States, China, Russia, France and the United Kingdom, the sole veto-holders, target the Liechtenstein measure aimed at ‘to pay a higher political price’ When used, the ambassador summarizes a country that does not have an ambassador and requests anonymity. Will the reform encourage the five permanent members to use less of the veto enshrined in the UN Charter? Or would it have the stimulating effect of deliberately raising more against immediately unacceptable texts?

The future will tell us. Some countries may push the United States to veto texts related to Israel. On the other hand, Washington can vote in the Security Council on a draft resolution tightening sanctions on North Korea, which has been under discussion for several weeks now, knowing full well that Moscow and Beijing will veto it.

Text “Do not target anyone”

The reform, first introduced two and a half years ago, calls for the holding of the General Assembly “Within ten working days after the opposition of one or more permanent members of the Security Council, to a discussion on the case in which the veto has been expressed.”.

Nearly a hundred countries have joined Liechtenstein in sponsoring this text, including the United States, the United Kingdom and France, as well as all member states of the European Union. Russia and China did not join the text sponsors. he goes “swears” More so, the UN had criticized before adopting a Russian diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Read also: This article is reserved for our subscribers War in Ukraine: Zelensky challenges UN for inaction

The project “don’t target anyone”reassured Liechtenstein’s ambassador, Christian Wenawesser. Not directed against Russia.He insists that the vote after more than two years of a failed pregnancy coincides with the paralysis of the Security Council to stop the Russian invasion, due to Moscow’s veto.

not binding

For the United States, Russia has been abusing its veto for two decades, and the text adopted should allow this to be addressed. Since the first veto used by the Soviet Union in 1946 in the Syrian and Lebanese files, Russia has used it 143 times, far ahead of the United States (86 times), the United Kingdom (30 times), China and France. (18 times each).

Read the analysis: This article is reserved for our subscribers The War in Ukraine: Russia’s Historical Isolation at the United Nations

The decision wants “To strengthen the role of the United Nations, multilateralism, and the voice of all of us who do not have veto power nor sit in the Security Council on matters of international peace and security”Christian Wenawesser argued.

The text is non-binding and nothing prevents a country that has vetoed from not attending to explain it to the General Assembly. its application, with immediate effect, “Highlight” On the use of this right and on “obstacles” The Security Council, however, argues the ambassador, who requested anonymity. In addition to the five permanent members of the Security Council, the Security Council also has ten members who are elected for two-year terms, without veto power.

Among the sponsors of the resolution — in addition to Ukraine — are Japan and Germany, two that aspire to permanent membership in a potential expanded Security Council — an expansion that has been deadlocked for years — to better represent the real world. But neither Brazil, which indicated on Tuesday that a veto could be useful for ensuring peace, or India, the other potential candidates for a permanent position on the council, were not on the list of sponsors obtained by AFP.

The world with AFP

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.