The UN Security Council failed again Saturday in its attempt to agree on a truce call for the parties involved in the bitter fighting in Georgia’s breakaway region of South Ossetia.
On Saturday afternoon, the 15-member body concluded its third round of an emergency session in the past 48 hours without adopting a statement that would have called for a cease-fire.
In a briefing to the council at the closed-door meeting, UN Assistant Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations Edmond Mulet said hostilities are continuing in Georgia and there have been a “substantial number of casualties, refugees and destruction.”
Citing reports from UN peacekeepers in the region, Mulet expressed concerns that the conflict may spread into Abkhazia, another rebel enclave inside Georgia.
Belgian UN Ambassador Jan Grauls, the council’s president this month, told reporters that several council members expressed “grave concern on the further deterioration of the situation in Georgia.”
“It is clear that the conflict has now expanded in other areas than only South Ossetia,” he said.
When asked about the council’s attempt to call for a cease-fire, Grauls said it would be nearly impossible for the council to take any actions at the moment.
“Regrettably I have come to the conclusion that it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to find common ground within the council on a draft statement to the press,” Grauls said.
The Security Council had met late night Thursday and early Friday but failed to agree on a Russia-drafted statement that would call on Georgia and South Ossetian rebels to renounce the use of force.
Georgia, backed by the United States and some other council members, rejected the wording calling for the renunciation of force.
——-
Well, that is pretty clear, ain’t it? Saakashvili is talking about a truce, but he refuses to call for a renunciation of force. And, of course, the USA is “backing” (read: controlling) him.
The statement called for Georgia and the Rebels to renounce force, sounds good but for 3 problems:
1. It says nothing about Russia, and Russia’s using a fair amount of force right now.
2. Saying nothing about Russia, it automatically paints Georgia as solely responsible for the conflict and absolves by omission Russian actions.
3. Of the two, Ossetia has no international standing to be harmed by ignoring it, while Georgia would be bound to honor it or end up in an even worse situation, no matter what circumstances they face.
If this were a ceasefire proposal, or a statement which included ALL parties, that would be one thing. But this was neither, endorsing it would solve nothing.
@Moose: Russia did not initiate this war, Georgia did. Russian PEACEKEEPING forces were attacked and killed. The 58th Army units were send in primarily to evacuate the wounded Russian peacekeepers. Can you name me one single country in the world which would have let that kind of aggression go unpunished?! The USA maybe?
And by your logic (“all parties”) the USA should be the first country to sign a ceasefire proposal, right? It is, after all, the main player behind the scenes, the main sponsor of this war and, like with Israel’s attack on Lebanon in 2006, the main obstacle to a cessation of hostilities.
The “rebels” which you refer to lived for 16 years without a war until a US stooge came into power in Tbilissi when suddenly it became an urgent matter to “restore constitutional order” ASAP, right?
And then, since you seem to think that some parties are more equal then others (“no international standing”) – I wonder what your view of the Kosovo conflict is. Scratch this, I don’t. I can easily imagine what it is.
All this is to say that your bias, your lack of *basic* intellectual honesty is the trademark doubleplusgoodthink of your garden variety Western imperialist who can easily re-package any situation to make it look like to moral right is on the side of the aggressor.
You and your likes have failed to learn the lessons of 2006, Moose. The US delaying tactics at the UN only got Israel into *worse* pain and trouble and the same thing will happen to Georgia.
No ceasefire? Fine. Let that conflict be solved on the ground.
I’d point out that Georgia/US rejected a statement, but it was RUSSIA which rejected a ceasefire proposal.
My apologies on the word “Rebels,” if its any consolation its not a negative in my view, just a descriptor.
I’m not an American Imperialst, I don’t support this war just like I haven’t supported any this Century. And nowhere do I place blame on Russia or advocate the US position, I was merely pointing out WHY the statement was rejected and why its foolish to wave that rejection around as evidence of anything other than the political stances of those involved.
However, I don’t expect YOU to believe any of that because YOUR mind has already been made up about all US citizens, their views, and attitudes. YOU would rather blame the US for the state of the world than seek to understand the nature of ALL parties’ positions and how that understanding can prevent wars. For that, I pity you.
My mind is made up that US citizens, like any other peoples, come in all sorts of flavors and variants. As an example, I can look at own my wife and kids :-)
Imperialists, however, basically come in one variety and their ‘arguments’ are always the same. They were best expressed by FDR: “He may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch”.
From this basic axiom flow not only policies, but an entire worldview. Like yours.
As for me blaming the US I will say this: only a total ignoramus or somebody of truly breathtaking intellectual dishonest would *not* blame the US for the war in South Ossetia.