Exactly what act by what ally was being contemplated? I don't read these
two resolutions as comparable. Remember, we're looking for a time when the
US offered or actually used its veto power to prevent a trading partner and
historical ally from taking a contemplated action. That's what the French
did.
Andy
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-admin AT leafe DOT com [mailto:profox-admin@leafe.com]On Behalf Of
Saladin 1175
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 8:06 PM
To: profox AT leafe DOT com
Subject: RE: [OT] : French Products and Companies to Boycott
> Maybe you'd like to enlighten us all on when the US used its
> veto power
MIDDLE EAST
US EXERCISES VETO POWER IN SECURITY COUNCIL - REJECTS RESOLUTION ON THE
MIDDLE EAST.
The proposed resolution demanded the immediate cessation of all acts of
violence, condemned all acts of terror, in particular those targeted at
civilians. It further condemned all acts of extrajudiciary executions,
excessive use of force and wide destruction. The Draft resolution also
called on both sides to implement the Mitchell report. US Ambassador
Negroponte said, "a fundamental flaw of the resolution was that it never
mentioned the recent acts of terrorism against Israelis." The Security
Council vote was 12 in support, Britain and Norway abstaining and the U.S.
vetoing.
http://www.unicwash.org/unnews2001/unnews2001-1221.htm
US exercises veto
Last month, the United States exercised its veto against the renewal of the
mandate of the U.N. Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH) because the
Council refused to exempt U.S. peacekeepers from ICC jurisdiction.
Subsequently, the Untied States agreed to extend the mandate for another
three days, and later for an additional two weeks, ending Jul 15.
If the United States exercises its veto a second time when the Council meets
to renew the UNMIBH mandate next week, the United Nations will be forced to
abandon its peace mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
http://www.cyberdyaryo.com/features/f2002_0712_04.htm
At the United Nations, the US Bush administration cast its first veto in
the Security Council late on Tuesday night, ending a weeklong marathon
debate and decisively scuttling Palestinian hopes for a UN observer force in
the Israeli-occupied territories in the foreseeable future.
The United States has used its veto only five times in the Council since the
waning days of the Cold War in 1990.
Four of the five vetoes have been on resolutions about the Middle East.
On the Council table since last week was a resolution sought by the
Palestinians to align the Security Council behind criticism of Israel and
demands for a protection or observer force.
Britain, France, Ireland and Norway worked through the last week to draft a
compromise. A ''protection mechanism'' was suggested, but only for future
study. Meanwhile, the council had to squeeze in or set aside work on Congo,
Sierra Leone, Macedonia and East Timor.
On Tuesday night, when the Palestinians demanded a vote and the United
States cast a veto, the four European members abstained. Ukraine did not
vote. The nine other council members - China, Russia, Bangladesh, Jamaica,
Mali, Tunisia, Colombia, Mauritius and Singapore - backed the Palestinians.
The United States never agreed even to consider mention of a force, which
Israel has repeatedly rejected and which Secretary General Kofi Annan has
described as unworkable without the consent of both parties.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cache:kkBqhNPoTZQC:www.buenosairesherald.co
m.ar/1_world/2_world/0103/0103-29.htm+%22US+exercises+veto%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
> -----Original Message-----
> From: profox-admin@leafe.com
> [mailto:profox-admin AT leafe DOT com]On Behalf Of Ed Leafe
> Sent:
> Monday, March 31, 2003 5:19 PM
> To: profox@leafe.com
> Subject: Re: [OT] : French Products and Companies to Boycott
>
>
> On Monday, March 31, 2003, at 05:10 PM, Andrew Weiss wrote:
>
> > What I resent is the french setting themselves up as the
> one and only
> > obstacle to the resolution passing. France is a relatively small
> > country with a huge economy that competes ruthlessly around
> the world
> > for markets.
>
> They are a permanent member of the Security Council.
> Every such member can do the same; the US certainly does when
> it feels like it.
>
> It seems rather odd to use your position when it suits
> you, and then complain bitterly when someone else does
> exactly the same thing.
>
> ___/
> /
> __/
> /
> ____/
> Ed Leafe
> http://leafe.com/
> http://opentech.leafe.com
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
©2003 Andrew Weiss |
