India abstains from voting against Syria at UNGA

Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by Yusuf, Aug 5, 2012.

  1. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,281
    Location:
    BANGalore
    NEW DELHI: India worked hard behind the scenes on Friday to dilute a Saudi Arabia-drafted UNGA resolution, which severely indicted Syria for the situation prevailing in the country, but finally abstained from voting after the draft could not be rid of reference to the July 22nd League of Arab States resolution that called upon Syrian president Bashar al-Assad to step down. The decision has further brought into focus India's growing contrariness with the Arab League over Assad's fate.

    India was among the 31 countries that abstained from voting on the 'strongly-worded resolution'. Russia and China were among the 12 countries that voted against the resolution, but it still found overwhelming approval in the form of support from 133 nations.

    Insisting that the government did not duck the issue by abstaining, sources indicated that India may still have gone with the majority but for the reference to the League of Arab States resolution, which called upon Assad to step down. The original draft, though, was tougher on Syria calling upon nations to impose sanctions on the war-ravaged country. "We said that no country is going to impose sanctions on the basis of a UN General Assembly resolution," said a source.

    "Other countries too took this line and it was withdrawn but the reference to the League of Arab States resolution forced us to abstain. In fact, looking at it hypothetically, had it not been for this reference, we could have gone with the majority,'' he added. Despite its serious attempt to do a balancing act by not antagonizing the Arab League, it has not found common ground with them over Assad's fate. India is averse to any talk about regime change maintaining instead that the decision should be left to the Syrians only.

    Unlike a Security Council resolution, UNGA resolutions are not legally binding. According to Indian officials, the resolution also failed to address the issue of violence being perpetrated by opposition groups and instead only focused on violence by government militia and other Assad supporters. While stressing upon oppression by Syrian authorities, the resolution only hints at violence by the other side on page 3 where it condemns "all violence, irrespective of where it comes from, including terrorist attacks''.

    When asked about Saudi Arabia and Qatar arming Syrian rebels, a government source said that the "sophistication of weapons used by the rebels was very high" and that this is a very dangerous trend.

    While India officially called for resolving the crisis through "dialogue and political processes" in its explanation of vote, government sources admitted that the fast deteriorating situation may no longer allow that. In the explanation of vote at the UN, India's permanent representative Hardeep Puri said that even though special envoy Kofi Annan had resigned, his efforts have put in place "a set of valuable documents, which, if implemented, can facilitate a political resolution of the Syrian crisis without any further bloodshed".

    The Times of India on Mobile
     
    ejazr, amitkriit and pmaitra like this.
  2.  
  3. venkat

    venkat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    904
    Likes Received:
    195
    sensible thing to do!!!!
     
  4. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,124
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Excellent find Yusuf. Thanks for sharing.
     
  5. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,281
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Second best thin to do. First being opposing the resolution.
     
    spikey360 likes this.
  6. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    If I remember correctly, we supported a resolution last time, after dumping a resolution in August. Seems to me like a flip flop but what do I know ! :)
    Doesn't the abstaining give a colliding message if we want to project ourselves as a major player. That we can't take a Yes/No stand on important issues ?
     
  7. SPIEZ

    SPIEZ Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,507
    Likes Received:
    1,009
    With all that's happening in Syria, wonder if it is really good for India to abstain from voting.
     
  8. skumar7777

    skumar7777 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    416
    Likes Received:
    309
    I agree. We should have actually gone ahead and opposed the resolution. This western inclination towards shaping non-western societies in their image has done more harm than good for the said non-western societies while the western bloc enjoys the support of the 'democratic' despots it installs and the economic windfalls thereafter.
     
  9. natarajan

    natarajan Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    750
    We will surely have rebellion like thing in india if congress comes back in 2014 ,so india needs support at that time .so it wont vote in favour of syria and also there is no regional parties pressure :laugh:
     
  10. sky

    sky Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    25
    If India wont's a seat at the UN top table it will require support from the USA , voting to abstain on crucial matter's that are the focus of the UN won't help .

    Leaders must be brave and stick there neck's out and damn the consequences .

    I feel India should either vote yes or no rather then keeping quite so not to rock the boat .
     
  11. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The issue of a seat in the UN is more of an ego trip.

    And India is chasing the will o' the wisp.

    A carrot to ensure India held by the short and curly and it walks the straight and narrow.

    A total waste of time to be a head honcho of an impotent organisation and presiding over impotency of a huge magnitude.

    My personal opinion.
     
  12. sky

    sky Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    25
    Theres a big push to get a fairer representation at the UN and also reform at places at the security counsel . When you look at who there now and the relative decline of RUSSIA ,FRANCE ,UK . There will be a catalyst for change at some point in time and INDIA need's to make sure she is ready to grasp that opportunity .

    The combined strength of the UN security counsel is weaker now then when it was formed , Power comes from strength and the strong should help the weak . By doing so INDIA's standing in the world will rise.
     

Share This Page