Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Wednesday, 4 November 2015

David Singer: Security Council Permanent Members Herald Armed Action Against Islamic State

Photo of Assyrians in Teheran: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images
Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and internaional affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

An international conference in Vienna on 30 October – attended by all five Permanent Members of the UN Security Council – America, China, France, Russia and the United Kingdom – has made an important breakthrough towards defeating Islamic State and ending the conflict in Syria and Iraq.
Together with Egypt, the EU, Germany, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and the United Nations – the Permanent Members reached a mutual understanding that
“Da'esh (Islamic State), and other terrorist groups, as designated by the U.N. Security Council, and further, as agreed by the participants, must be defeated."
This is the first time the five Permanent Members have reached such a consensus – acknowledging that prior measures not involving the use of armed force under Security Council Resolutions 2170 and 2178 have failed to defeat Islamic State and other designated terrorist groups – a prerequisite before there can be any hope of restoring stability and reaching lasting political solutions in Syria and Iraq.

International co-operation to defeat Islamic State through a Security Council Resolution authorising the use of armed force had previously risked being vetoed by either Russia or America in the face of earlier American objections against co-operating with any armed force which included President Assad’s troops. Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, had declared as recently as 29 September. 
“We think it is an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian government and its armed forces, who are valiantly fighting terrorism face to face. We should finally acknowledge that no one but President Assad’s armed forces and Kurds militias are truly fighting the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria.”
However, speaking at a joint press conference with US Secretary of State John Kerry after the historic Vienna meeting,  Lavrov made an important concession to America’s stance of non-co-operation with Assad – opening the way for the passage of a Security Council Resolution authorising the use of armed force under article 42 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter: of Chapter VII of the UN Charter:
“Russia is committed to fighting terrorism based on the solid basis of international law, whether we’re talking about the military interventions from air or the ground operations. These need to be conducted in agreement with the [Assad] government or with the UN Security Council.” 
Lavrov signalled an early end to the current separate American-led coalition and Russian-Iranian interventions in Syria aimed at defeating Islamic State: 
“I believe that neither the U.S. nor Russia want to go back to the so-called proxy war, but the fact that this situation makes the cooperation between the militaries ever more important is very apparent to me. We have a common enemy and we need to make sure that this enemy does not come to power in Syria or in any other country.” 
Agreement by the five Permanent Security Council Members calling for armed action by air, sea and land forces against Islamic State and other designated terrorist groups has now become a distinct possibility – meeting President Obama’s preferred position as expressed by him on 6 September 2013:
“And I respect those who are concerned about setting precedents of action outside of a U.N. Security Council resolution. I would greatly prefer working through multilateral channels and through the United Nations to get this done.” 
The Vienna participants reconvene within the next ten days to continue their crucial discussions.

Hopefully they will agree on pursuing the long-awaited and elusive Security Council Resolution authorising armed action  – with the long-suffering Syrian people being its ultimate beneficiaries after five horrific years of war, 250,000 deaths and millions being internally displaced and externally dispersed.

2 comments:

  1. To what end though? Kick over the hornet's nest and then...? Just replay all the leftwing sound bytes of a decade ago scolding the US for toppling Saddam and then leaving a smoking hole in the ground from which more chaos develops. If anything, the UNSC just gave legitimacy to ISIS AS a REAL country. And let's be rational here - The UK, France and China aren't going to actually DO anything. Obama will send, what, another 50 SEALs? That leaves Russia doing what Russia is already doing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Empress

    Military action taken under a Chapter VII article 42 resolution will prevent the kind of criticism heaped on America and its allies in the Iraq operation that tackled Saddam and in the Syrian operation currently trying to oust Assad.

    Who will constitute and lead the UN authorized armed force will be decided by the terms of the resolution.

    Continuing as at present has not worked and is a recipe for disaster.

    If you know a more effective way of destroying Islamic State then please offer your solution.

    BTW - it can be argued that Islamic State can claim to be a state since it complies with the requirements laid down in the 1933 Montevideo Convention. Whether it is recognised by other states is irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete