Russia Holds Out In Security Council

Published on Monday, 16 Jul 07:00 am

Russia, meanwhile, remains at odds with both the Syrian opposition and the Americans and their allies at the UN. The 11 July visit to Moscow of a delegation from the opposition Syrian National Council (SNC) clearly failed to produce anything like a meeting of minds, with SNC leader ʹAbd al-Basit Sida telling reporters that "we have made it very clear that any transition period must start with Asad's departure, as otherwise we are really not dealing with the problem."  Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov for his part "decisively called on counterparts to take a clear and unequivocal position confirming the readiness of the SNC to carry out its obligations."

At the UN, after the Russians tabled a draft resolution on 10 July extending UNSMIS's mandate for three months without mentioning anything about sanctions, Mr Annan appealed to the Security Council on 11 July to make clear to the Syrian government and its opponents that there would be "clear consequences" for non-compliance with his peace plan. The British then countered the Russians with a resolution drafted in consultation with the US, France and Germany extending UNSMIS for 45 days and placing the Annan plan under chapter 7 of the UN Charter authorizing sanctions and possible military intervention. US ambassador Susan Rice argued that a mere rollover of the current mandate would be "insufficient" and that "our view is that this council needs to put that kind of plan under Chapter 7."

However, Russian deputy UN ambassador Alexander Pankin made it clear that the differences within the Security Council remained as deep as ever when he declared that "Kofi Annan did not ask us to apply sanctions. He just said that the Security Council should…send a signal that its suggested recommendations and actions have to be implemented or there will be consequences. But consequences does not mean necessarily actions under a certain chapter or certain article. Chapter 7 is a last resort." And just in case that was not clear enough, Mr Pankin reiterated the next day that "we are definitely against Chapter 7. Anything can be negotiated, but we do not negotiate this, this is a red line."

Log in or register to post a comment

There are no comments yet.