webmaster
© Copyright DEHAI-Eritrea OnLine, 1993-2011
All rights reserved
From: wolda002@umn.edu
Date: Thu Jan 20 2011 - 02:09:52 EST
UNSC: An organization for injustice
http://baltimorechronicle.com/2011/011911Ziabari.shtml
by Kourosh Ziabari from Iran
Wednesday, 19 January 2011
UN governance needs drastic change: UNSC veto power should be dissolved,
there should be a permanent UNSC seat for a representative of the Islamic
world, and the power to authorize sanctions or military expeditions should
be handed over to the UN General Assembly.
Since its very inception in 1946, the United Nations Security Council
demonstrated that it cannot be trusted as a podium of justice for the world
countries, specially the oppressed and defenseless nations which eye the
assistance and patronage of the powerful and economically influential
nations for tackling their political predicaments and crises, and showed
that it merely pursues the interests of its small bloc of five permanent
members and undemocratically discriminates against a multitude of countries
who don't have a say in the policies which directly affects them.
United Nations Security Council is said to be one of the principal organs
within the operative system of the United Nations and is "allegedly" charged
with the maintenance of international peace and security. The authorities
possessed by UNSC are the establishment of peacekeeping missions, imposition
of international sanctions and authorization of military actions whenever
necessary.
UNSC has five permanent members: China, Russia, Britain, France and the
United States. What's the reason? Why should the UNSC have permanent members
which cannot be removed from power and must wield an unyielding and resolute
authority to make decision over the international affairs? The answer is
simple: these five countries are the victorious powers of the Second World
War. Their victory in a war which took place and was concluded more than
half a century ago minimally accounts for the eternality and endlessness of
the power which they possess.
UNSC has also 10 non-permanent members which are elected on a rotating basis
and through the vote of the members of United Nations General Assembly.
According to the Article 27 of the UN Charter, a draft resolution on
non-procedural matters is adopted if nine or more of the fifteen members of
the UNSC vote for the resolution, provided that none of the permanent
members veto it.
What is the veto power? The answer is simple. It's a discriminatory and
biased privilege given to five countries to dictate their own will to some
200 countries as they wish. If a draft resolution, put forward by one of the
fifteen members of the UNSC, is vetoed by any of the five permanent members,
its adoption will be precluded. Veto power, seen by many as the most unfair
and inequitable law of the world which enables a powerful and authoritative
minority to determine the fate of an indispensable and subjugated majority,
is unquestionably an insult to the insight and perception of the
international community.
The permanent members of the UNSC are free to exercise their right of veto
whenever they wish to, and nobody can question the legitimacy or
justifiability of this approach. Several international organizations,
lawyers and lawmakers, journalists, politicians and even statesmen have put
forward alternatives to the right of veto wielded by the Big 5, but all of
their efforts have been in vain, as the United Nations Security Council has
showed the least flexibility with regards to the reformation of its
autocratic and undemocratic structure.
Interestingly, all of the permanent members of the UNSC are the countries
which we've long got used to hearing their claims of being the pioneers of
democracy and freedom; nevertheless, in the very approach which they've
implemented over the past fifty years and the manner of their interaction
with the other countries of the world, one can hardly trace the footsteps of
democratic and civilized behavior.
Unfortunately, the United Nations Security Council has become an instrument
for the five superpowers to further their political will in the arena of
international politics and alter the political equations according to their
interests. They put forward a draft resolution whenever their interests are
jeopardized and pressure the rest of members to vote for it, and veto the
resolutions in which the interests of their allies are endangered.
Since its establishment up to now, the UNSC has adopted 1966 resolutions.
Now the question lies: how many of these resolutions have become operative
and come into effect? How many of these resolutions have been fair, lawful
and defendable? Whose interests are met through these resolutions? Is the
will of five nations more valuable or worthy than the will of 200 countries
who don't have access to UNSC?
Let's bring up some examples. UNSC's treatment with Iran is a notable and
clear example of discrimination and prejudice exercised by the Security
Council against an independent nation which wants to stride on its own path
towards self-sufficiency and progress, free from the pressure of bullying
powers. Since 2006 UNSC has adopted seven resolutions against Iran's
civilian nuclear activity and imposed four rounds of sanctions against the
country for what it claims to be "Iran's failure to halt its uranium
enrichment program". The imposition of four rounds of sanctions against an
independent country which tries to achieve a scientific breakthrough is an
ironic drama. All of the reports published by the International Atomic
Energy Agency attest to the legality and rightfulness of Iran's nuclear
program. There has been not a single paper of evidence signifying that Iran
wants to develop nuclear weapons. All the international community knows
about Iran's nuclear program is that Iran enriches uranium, and enriched
uranium, to some certain extents, might be used to fuel a nuclear bomb! At
the same time, the international community is well aware of the fact that
the regime of Israel possesses 170 to 200 nuclear warheads, and this is a
figure which is confirmed by the Federation of American Scientists, an
organization within the country which is the staunchest ally of Israel. So
why did the UNSC, being headed by the Big 5, impose four rounds of crippling
sanctions and pass seven resolutions against Iran instead of condemning
Israel and imposing sanctions on it?
Ironically, 118 members of the Non-Aligned Movement and 57 members of the
Organization of Islamic Conference unconditionally backed Iran's peaceful
nuclear program; however, the country should face financial sanctions
because 5 countries like this way. Is it fair, not? Five is bigger than 118!
World superpowers don't tolerate the emergence of a new political and
scientific power. Iran is an inspiring example for the developing world and
should be obstructed at any rate, so the UNSC can effectively function as an
impediment on the way of Iran and any country such as Iran which looks for
improvement and progress.
However, UNSC's treatment with Iran was a simple example of the
discriminatory approach of this unfair and unjust organization with the
world nations. Hundreds of unfair and unjust resolutions have been passed
against the oppressed nations of the world, from the Latin America to
Africa, adding to the pains and problems of these impoverished nations.
UNSC needs a drastic reformation. The veto power should be dissolved as soon
as possible. There should be a permanent seat for the representative of the
Islamic world with more than 1.5 billion population. The power to authorize
sanctions or military expeditions should be handed over to the UN General
Assembly rather than the Security Council. The members of UNSC should be
held accountable for the decisions which they make. Their responsiveness to
the international community should be built up. The impunity of UNSC members
should be abolished. They should not be able to make any decision which they
want and get away with it. It's only with the implementation of such reforms
that we can be hopeful for a successful future for the UNSC; otherwise, this
organization will forever remain an organization of injustice and bias.
------------------------------
[image: Kourosh Ziabari]
*Kourosh Ziabari* is an Iranian media correspondent, freelance journalist
and interviewer. He is a contributing writer of Finland’s Award-winning Ovi
Magazine and the the Foreign Policy Journal. He is a member of Tlaxcala
Translators Network for Linguistic Diversity (Spain). He is also a member of
World Student Community for Sustainable Development (WSC-SD). Kourosh
Ziabari's articles have appeared in a number of Canadian, Belgian, Italian,
French and German websites. He can be reached at kziabari@gmail.com
Mr. Ziabari's stories are republished in the *Baltimore Chronicle* with
permission of the author.