U.S. Uses Its Veto to Block Anti-Israel Measure in U.N.

[lukpac]

And people wonder why the Arab world has a problem with the US. Israel can do no wrong!

September 17, 2003

U.S. Uses Its Veto to Block Anti-Israel Measure in U.N.
By FELICITY BARRINGER

UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 16 — The United States today vetoed a Security Council resolution, backed by Islamic and nonaligned nations, demanding that Israel back off its threat to deport the Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat. Eleven Council members voted in favor of the measure, while Britain, Germany and Bulgaria abstained.

The resolution, sponsored by Pakistan, South Africa and Sudan, had three stated aims: a demand for a halt to violence in the area, "including all acts of terrorism, provocation, incitement and destruction"; a demand that Israel cease its threats to deport or assassinate Mr. Arafat; and an expression of support for the peace plan known as the road map.

The resolution expressed concern at "the escalation in extrajudicial executions and suicide bombing attacks, all of which have caused enormous suffering and many innocent victims."

Ambassador John D. Negroponte said the resolution was impossible to support in part because it failed to "take a clear stand against the actions" of three leading Palestinian terrorist groups.

What the resolution failed to mention, Mr. Negroponte said, was "a robust condemnation of acts of terrorism; an explicit condemnation of Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Aksa Martyrs Brigades as organizations responsible for acts of terrorism; and a call for the dismantlement of infrastructure, which supports these terror operations."

The reaction from the resolution's supporters in the Islamic world was swift and, in some cases, angry. The ambassador of Pakistan warned that the vote would have "implications for other situations" like the debate over Iraq's future.

The Syrian ambassador, Fayssal Mekdad, said, "It only complicates a situation in the Middle East."

Outside the Council, the representative of the Palestinian observer mission, Nasser al-Kidwa, said the United States was forfeiting its ability to act as a mediator in the Middle East. "To continue adopting fully the Israeli position and at the same time pretending you are helping the two parties proceed, it's ludicrous," he said.

The vote came after heavy lobbying by Syria for a quick vote and after compromise language proposed by Britain was rejected by the sponsors.

The outcome was greeted with grim satisfaction by the Israeli ambassador, Dan Gillerman, who said after the vote, "This was a resolution which in a very macabre way criticized the victims of terror rather than the perpetrators of terror."

Asked if Jerusalem would take the vote as a green light to expel Mr. Arafat, Mr. Gillerman said: "The Israeli cabinet has decided in principle that Yasir Arafat is an obstacle to peace and he should be removed. The Israeli cabinet and Israel do not seek a green or amber light from anyone."

He added, "It will do what is necessary when necessary in order to protect its people."

On the question of Mr. Arafat, Mr. Negroponte told the Council, "While Mr. Arafat is part of the problem, we believe that this problem is best solved through diplomatic isolation, and we have made this view clear."

The resolution separated the United States from Spain, one of its most reliable diplomatic allies during the Iraq crisis.

The overall impasse, which prompted expressions of deep disappointment from several Council envoys, came at a time when the gap between the United States and France over the Iraq resolution is still wide, though not unbridgeable, both sides have indicated.

The Pakistani ambassador, Munir Akram, alluded to the possible reaction in the Islamic world when he told the Council, "The states which are suppressing the right of peoples to self-determination in the Middle East and South Asia are now joining together in what is advertised as an alliance against terrorism but which is more likely to emerge as an axis of oppression."

Pakistan, along with India and Turkey, is one of the countries that the United States has pressed to send troops to help coalition forces in Iraq.

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

[Rspaight]

And the administration had the gall to act all surprised and hurt when the security council dared to *threaten* to veto our precious Stomp Iraq resolution.

Of course, this is nothing new at all.

Ryan

[lukpac]

Agreed on it being nothing new. What would be interesting to see (and I'm too lazy to look) is how *all* of our votes on resolutions critical of Israel went.

Although regardless of that, it's pretty outrageous that we've singlehandedly stopped such votes over and over again.

[Rspaight]

As you said, after looking at that record, to suggest the Arab world's beef with the US is nothing more than "they hate freedom" is a bit rich.

Ryan