A Quote by Hassan Nasrallah
The U.N. Security Council did not to condemn the Qana massacre, due to the U.S. veto.
Related Quotes
We saw there was no consensus in the U.N. Security Council. It was impossible, due to the threatened veto by some.
It is clear that there would nothing a U.N. Security Council resolution that condemned Syria because Syria is Russia's ally, and Russia has a veto in the U.N. Security Council.
The [UN Security Council] P5 ought to be dissuaded from using their veto power, which can paralyze the United Nations. The country blocking action ought to have to explain its decision and propose an alternative solution. It has been suggested that a veto only becomes effective if the vetoing state has the support of two or three other permanent members.
The abuse of the veto power has become so predictable that frequently resolutions are not even tabled because of the certainty of a veto against their adoption. Necessary discussion is thereby suppressed. Concerted action by the Security Council, the General Assembly and other United Nations agencies is necessary to prevent major human rights violations, stop ongoing breaches and provide remedies to victims.
The unfair composition of the Security Council is largely acknowledged. The principal defects are the anachronistic privileges of the five permanent members of the Council and the Council's insufficient representativeness.
In order for the U.N. to be effective, there must be consequences if people thumb their nose at the United Nations Security Council. And we will work with people on the Security Council to achieve that objective.
When one's greatest 'world stage' ambition is a non-voting seat on the U.N. Security Council five years down the road, one would not want to say anything to hurt the feelings of the veto holders in Moscow or Beijing. We get it. But let's at least be honest about all this, please. Enough of the 'Canada is back' slogans already.
The Trump administration has done some bad stuff in the international realm, picking needless fights with allies like Mexico and Australia, even using some idiotic and intemperate language about Iran, but there was one thing they did about Iran that I agree with. Which is if Iran is testing anti-ballistic missiles, it's in violation of a UN Security Council resolution. And we can't ignore that ... And they did condemn the anti-ballistic missile test. And I think they're right about that.
The United States of America is a threat to world peace. Because what [America] is saying is that if you are afraid of a veto in the Security Council, you can go outside and take action and violate the sovereignty of other countries. That is the message they are sending to the world. That must be condemned in the strongest terms.
The work of the CSSF and Prosperity Fund is guided by the National Security Council. As chair of the National Security Council Sub-Committee that oversees both funds, I am working to ensure that they are accountable and measurable against their intended objectives.
The United Nations' founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America's consent, the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.
The U.S. - the idea that the U.S. has introduced and imposed principles of international law, that's hardly even a joke. The United States has even gone so far as to veto Security Council resolutions calling on all states to observe international law. That was in the 1980s under Reagan.
In the era of Khruschev the Soviet Union had publicly declared itself a supporter of the Indian stand on Kashmir. In 1962 a Russian veto had defeated a Security Council resolution on the plebiscite issue. By 1965, and after the fall of the Kruschev regime, Russian attitudes were significantly modified.
There's a sense that we've obtained from various quarters in the Security Council that the notion of an international tribunal is not really practical. Certainly Indonesia is not convinced, and we get a sense that the rest of the Security Council will need to be convinced about the recommendations.
To go to war without the Security Council will not be in conformity with the Council.
The Security Council should be seen as the executive committee of the global security system set up after World War II. Its members, and especially the Permanent 5 (P5), have a special responsibility for international peace and security.
Related Authors
Ali Shariati Quotes
Iranian
Revolutionary
Buenaventura Durruti Quotes
Spanish
Revolutionary
Che Guevara Quotes
Argentinian
Revolutionary
Emiliano Zapata Quotes
Mexican
Revolutionary
Georges Jacques Danton Quotes
French
Revolutionary
Ho Chi Minh Quotes
Vietnamese
Revolutionary
Johann Most Quotes
German
Revolutionary
Leon Trotsky Quotes
Russian
Revolutionary
Marquis de Lafayette Quotes
French
Revolutionary
Mikhail Bakunin Quotes
Russian
Revolutionary
Nathan Hale Quotes
American
Revolutionary
Peter Kropotkin Quotes
Russian
Revolutionary
Samuel Adams Quotes
American
Revolutionary
Simon Bolivar Quotes
Venezuelan
Revolutionary
William Wallace Quotes
Scottish
Revolutionary