On
R2P, Brazil Cautions Against Regime Change, US Cites Libya
Lesson
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
July 12 -- During the debate on the Responsibility to
Protect in the UN General Assembly on Tuesday, Brazil's Permanent
Representative Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti cautioned against R2P being
used for “regime change.”
Moments
later, US
representative Rick Barton said that the “decisive action in Libya”
shows that the UN has learned its lesson.
If
the lesson was
Rwanda and the UN's inaction, largely at the instigation of the US
after the Black Hawk Down incident in Somalia, then the passage by
the Security Council of Resolution 1973 to authorize air strikes to
save Benghazi can be seen as learning the lesson of inaction.
But
when months
later the
resolution is cited in support of air dropping weapons into
another part of Libya, and of bombs viewed as intended to simply
kill
Gaddafi, some think the concept of Responsibility to Protect has gone
too far, or been abused.
This
is an issue
that should have been addressed head on by UN R2P expert Ed Luck and
his Prevention of Genocide colleague Francis Deng.
The evening
before
the debate, Inner City Press asked Luck if he thought the session
would involve some R2P bashing, as occurred at a previous session
organized by then President of the GA Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, or
in last December's budget negotiations.
No, no, Luck
said, backing
away. “I think it will be productive.”
Whether
it was or
not remains to be seen. By late Tuesday afternoon, PGA Joseph Deiss
announced there were still 18 speakers, so each would be limited to
three minutes. He tried to cut Kenya off as its representative spoke
out against collective punishment and selectivity.
PR Viotti & PGA Deiss, on answers on R2P, good Luck
Georgia
spoke out
against one country -- Russia -- using R2P to invade, without
Security Council approval. That was the argument cited when George W.
Bush went into Iraq, but it seems to have been forgotten. France,
which criticized the action in Iraq, is now air dropping weapons into
Libya in the name of R2P, or at least protection of civilians.
Where
will this debate be had? Watch this site.
Footnote: in reporting out this story, a number of
Western diplomats told Inner City Press they found Brazil's statement
consistent with what they called its "obstruction" of a draft
resolution on Syria. But it's worth noting that Brazil was out in
front of the EU members when the US demanded a carve out for itself
from the referral of Libya and Gaddafi to the International Criminal
Court...
* * *
While
France
"Parachuting" Weapons into Libya is Criticized, UN Committee
Does Not Act: Not "Masochistic," Chair Says
By
Matthew
Russell
Lee, Exclusive
UNITED
NATIONS,
July
7 -- During an hour-long meeting of
the Libya Sanctions
Committee of the UN Security Council behind closed doors on
Thursday
afternoon, France's admitted dropping of weapons into Libya's Nafusa
Mountains was criticized by Council members including Russia, South
Africa and India, as violating the arms embargo in Resolution 1970.
But
afterward when
Inner City Press asked the Committee's chairman, Portugal's Permanent
Representative Cabral, if the committee's requirement of consensus
means that France could block any formal condemnation of its actions,
Cabral said “we're not a kind of masochistic society.”
One
of the
representatives criticizing France, who told Inner City Press that on
this topic four spoke against France and three to varying degrees in
support, said that “if a Permanent member violates sanctions, what
can you do?”
The
representative
pointed to paragraphs 13-16 of Resolution 1970 and said that if
France thought that its provision of weapons into Libya was legal, it
had a procedure to use, but didn't.
Another
delegation
went
further, saying that France “parachuted” weapons in, not
knowing if they might fall into the hands of Al Qaeda, and asking,
“why not weapons of mass destruction, too?” This representative
said of Cabral, “He has to be serious, this is a precedent -- if
you are not going to enforce them, why even have a committee on
sanctions?”
Sarkozy glad-hands Ban, notification under
Reso
1973 and top DPKO post not shown
Inner
City
Press
asked Russia's Deputy Permanent Representative what had been
accomplished in the meeting. Pankin distinguished between
interpretation -- “legal stuff” -- and the practical, that
objections were voiced and “I hope we will not have such a [case]
again, that's the most practical.” We'll see.
, 
