The U.N. General Assembly on Friday overwhelmingly adopted a Saudi-drafted resolution on Syria that expressed “grave concern” at the escalating violence but India was among the 31 nations that abstained.
The 193-member General Assembly passed the resolution that denounced Syria’s crackdown on its people and demanded that the country lockdown its chemical and biological weapons. The resolution also deplored “the failure of the Security Council to agree on measures to ensure the compliance of Syrian authorities with its decisions”.
The resolution got 133 votes in favour, while 12 countries voted against. Thirty one countries, including India, abstained.
An earlier draft of the resolution had provisions that demanded regime change; called on President Bashar Al-Assad to resign; and asked countries to place sanctions against the country for the violence and killing.
India was not in favour of these provisions and a senior member of Indian delegation had said that officials “worked over time” to get these demands dropped from the resolution.
Others countries like Brazil, Russia, China and South Africa too were not in support of the provisions demanding regime change and sanctions.
Provisions
Indian Ambassador to the U.N. Hardeep Singh Puri had also held several rounds of discussion with his Saudi and Qatari counterparts over the provisions of regime change and sanctions in the resolution. Unlike a U.N. Security Council resolution, the General Assembly resolution is not legally binding. It is only moral and symbolic in nature. The resolution strongly condemns “the continued widespread and systematic gross violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms by the Syrian authorities and pro-governmental militias“.
Addressing the 193-member General Assembly before the vote on the resolution, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the violence and acts of brutality being reported in Syrian cities may constitute “crimes against humanity or war crimes”.
He said despite repeated verbal acceptances of the international envoy and six-point plan endorsed by the U.N. Security Council, the Syrian government and the opposition continue to rely on weapons and not diplomacy — believing that they would win through violence.
The Syrian crisis has escalated in the last 17 months when the uprising against President Bashar Al-Assad’s regime began.
More than 10,000 people have been killed and thousands others displaced by the fighting between government and rebel forces.
Efforts to restore peace and stability in the troubled nation were dealt a huge blow when the United Nations -Arab League envoy Kofi Annan announced yesterday that he was resigning from his post — six months after his efforts to end the violence and find a political solution to the Syrian crisis yielded no results.
Mr. Ban said the violence and bloodshed in Syria was “avoidable” if the Syrian government had from the beginning of the uprising not responded to peaceful demonstrations with brutal force, including mass round-ups and torture.
Conflict
He said observers had predicted at the start of the conflict that unchecked spread of violence in Syria would lead to a rise of radicalisation, extremism and terrorism.
“The next step was also forewarned: a proxy war, with regional and international players arming one side or the other.”
“Now, we face the grim possibility of long-term civil war destroying Syria’s rich tapestry of interwoven communities. This would have tragic implications for Syria’s people and could affect stability across the region. We must not let this prediction come true,” Mr. Ban said.
He said mediation to solve the Syrian crisis can only succeed if there is a commitment to solving conflict through dialogue and real leverage to back it up.
Mr. Annan too had blamed a divided international community and U.N. Security Council for lack of action to stop the violence.
Keywords: Syria uprising, Bashar Assad regime, Aleppo offensive, U.N. General Assembly vote, Arab League, Arab Spring, shabiha militia, Free Syrian Army, Syrian Observatory of Human Rights
Anyways, I have a
question, Why, whenever some of us try to show the pathetic conditions
of civilians of Syria, who are badly affected by the regime's cruel
actions( which amounts more than eighty percent) are shown rarely? And
please note, the international news houses have ever been showing the
pathetic condition
II
In the bargain it is the Syrian people who suffer because the civil war is prolonged in the absence of foreign intervention on the side of the rebels.
Meanwhile, in spite of Kofi Annan's best efforts, no good result ensued because Assad was determined to withhold cooperation. Without a resolution of the Security Council, the UN could not have done anything.
This underlines the limitations and uselessness of the UN even for peace-keeping, let alone any other purpose like development and relief to countries in distress. Perhaps there is need to think of saying the requiem for the UN and to think of what can be devised to put in its place.
I
When the draft resolution has been suitably de-fanged, where is the need for a resolution? Why don't they just drop the idea of passing a resolution?
Assad has proved himself unfit for the position that he holds as president of Syria. As leader he should not have been using his army and air force against the rebels who are seeking his ouster because he has done nothing for the people during his tenure. Assad is only seeking to prolong his rule.
Russia and China in any case cannot be expected to go along with any such resolution - at any rate in the Security Council - because they are not champions of even their own people. How can anyone expect that they would care for the Syrian people's suffering at the hands of their president?
The US and other Western powers have been helping and arming the rebels - clandestinely perhaps - but that was sufficient reason for Russia and China to oppose anything that came from the US or any of its allies.
What about the covert military supplies to rebels in Syria by state
actors.
United Nations should also denounce the foreign interference in certain
countries especially in the Muslim thus destroying their economy and all
the infrastructure. Such support have weaken the countries and the
people are facing poverty. UNO should also condemn the hidden forces not
to indulge in the internal affairs of sovereign estates
Please Email the Editor