The Russian-Chinese Veto and the American Veto
Published in al Dustour
(Jordan) on 10 February 2012
by Nazeeh Goussous (link to original)
(Jordan) on 10 February 2012
by Nazeeh Goussous (link to original)
Translated from
by Brian Jones.
Edited by Peter McGuire.
The United States, and with it the countries of Europe, weep because Russia and China exercised their right in the Security Council to veto a resolution on Syria. We have heard dozens of declarations from powerful officials from these countries. They feel bitter about the positions of Russia and China in the Security Council.
Russia and China used the veto one time to cause the resolution on Syria to fail, but the United States used its veto against dozens of decisions that the Security Council intended to adopt against Israel for occupying Arab and Palestinian lands; killing, arresting and displacing unarmed Palestinian people; building settlements in occupied Palestinian lands; building tens of thousands of houses on these lands for the sake of Judification; or refusing to withdrawal or give the Palestinians the right to set up an independent state on the lands that Israel occupied in 1967.
The question that political observers ask is: Why didn't the American administration use the veto against itself when it occupied Iraq by force without any convincing justification, killing more than a million Iraqis and leaving millions more displaced, leaving the state exhausted and dismembered after the U.S. destroyed its infrastructure and exposed its people to murder by sowing the seeds of ugly sectarianism? Then America left agents to obey its commands, practice suppressive policies and try to monopolize power.
Likewise, why didn’t the United States justify occupying Afghanistan and the killing of tens of thousands of innocent Afghan citizens while its troops engaged in immoral practices in this poor country in front of the eyes and ears of the world?
In Yemen, dozens of massacres took place at the hands of President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who also killed of thousands of Yemenis, but we have not heard about the United States or the West going to the Security Council in order to issue a decision condemning these acts. However, it seems that their jealousy of the Syrian people is what pushed them to go to the Security Council and to weep over the Russian and Chinese veto.
There are international moral tendencies, a commitment to which is imposed by the great countries. These commitments are heralded on the basis of one standard only; it does not permit the condemnation of a particular action if it happened in a particular place in the world, nor does it allow the condemnation of the spirit of this action if it happened in any other place. These behaviors are supposed to reveal the trustworthiness of states. Indeed, these actions cause them to lose their trustworthiness in a conclusive way. This is what is happening now after Russia and China used the right of veto in the Security Council.
Instead of the United States weeping over the victims that fell in Syria, why does it not weep in the same way about eight million homeless Palestinian refugees in the Arab countries and in some of the (other) countries of the world?
Why doesn’t it weep over the Palestinians that live in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, who are considered prisoners inside their own cities and villages? Why doesn’t it weep over the 11,000 Palestinians found in the prisons of the Israeli occupation?
As for Afghanistan, the U.S. troops and the troops of NATO practice killing in the streets, homes and schools, and not one official in the White House or in the capitals of the NATO countries bats an eyelid as a result of these practices.
Finally, no one is the world or in Washington or in the European capitals can sit down due to of the Iranian nuclear issue, fearing that Iran will engage in manufacturing nuclear weapons. However, these countries do not move and are silent toward the Israeli nuclear issue and the ready-made Israeli nuclear bombs.
Russia and China used the right of veto in the Security Council against the plan of a special decision on Syria because these two countries have (shared) strategic interests with Syria. However, the United States of America used the right of veto against all of the decisions that condemn the inhuman practices against the unarmed Palestinian people. Therefore, the U.S. has no right to aim any criticism at the Russian-Chinese veto.
Russia and China used the veto one time to cause the resolution on Syria to fail, but the United States used its veto against dozens of decisions that the Security Council intended to adopt against Israel for occupying Arab and Palestinian lands; killing, arresting and displacing unarmed Palestinian people; building settlements in occupied Palestinian lands; building tens of thousands of houses on these lands for the sake of Judification; or refusing to withdrawal or give the Palestinians the right to set up an independent state on the lands that Israel occupied in 1967.
The question that political observers ask is: Why didn't the American administration use the veto against itself when it occupied Iraq by force without any convincing justification, killing more than a million Iraqis and leaving millions more displaced, leaving the state exhausted and dismembered after the U.S. destroyed its infrastructure and exposed its people to murder by sowing the seeds of ugly sectarianism? Then America left agents to obey its commands, practice suppressive policies and try to monopolize power.
Likewise, why didn’t the United States justify occupying Afghanistan and the killing of tens of thousands of innocent Afghan citizens while its troops engaged in immoral practices in this poor country in front of the eyes and ears of the world?
In Yemen, dozens of massacres took place at the hands of President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who also killed of thousands of Yemenis, but we have not heard about the United States or the West going to the Security Council in order to issue a decision condemning these acts. However, it seems that their jealousy of the Syrian people is what pushed them to go to the Security Council and to weep over the Russian and Chinese veto.
There are international moral tendencies, a commitment to which is imposed by the great countries. These commitments are heralded on the basis of one standard only; it does not permit the condemnation of a particular action if it happened in a particular place in the world, nor does it allow the condemnation of the spirit of this action if it happened in any other place. These behaviors are supposed to reveal the trustworthiness of states. Indeed, these actions cause them to lose their trustworthiness in a conclusive way. This is what is happening now after Russia and China used the right of veto in the Security Council.
Instead of the United States weeping over the victims that fell in Syria, why does it not weep in the same way about eight million homeless Palestinian refugees in the Arab countries and in some of the (other) countries of the world?
Why doesn’t it weep over the Palestinians that live in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, who are considered prisoners inside their own cities and villages? Why doesn’t it weep over the 11,000 Palestinians found in the prisons of the Israeli occupation?
As for Afghanistan, the U.S. troops and the troops of NATO practice killing in the streets, homes and schools, and not one official in the White House or in the capitals of the NATO countries bats an eyelid as a result of these practices.
Finally, no one is the world or in Washington or in the European capitals can sit down due to of the Iranian nuclear issue, fearing that Iran will engage in manufacturing nuclear weapons. However, these countries do not move and are silent toward the Israeli nuclear issue and the ready-made Israeli nuclear bombs.
Russia and China used the right of veto in the Security Council against the plan of a special decision on Syria because these two countries have (shared) strategic interests with Syria. However, the United States of America used the right of veto against all of the decisions that condemn the inhuman practices against the unarmed Palestinian people. Therefore, the U.S. has no right to aim any criticism at the Russian-Chinese veto.