Moving
Syria to GA
Preempted by
PGA, Churkin
Rebuts
Rumor, Araud
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 7,
updated -- As
the Gulf
Cooperation
Council
announced
Tuesday that
its members
will recall
their
ambassadors
from
Damascus, and
tell Syria's
to leave, at
the UN the
Permanent
Representative
of a non-GCC
Arab
League member
told Inner
City Press it
is a bad idea.
Of
the Arab
League
pushing after
its next
meeting for a
no fly zone,
he shook his
head
and asked,
"Again?" He
said, we
should wait
and see what
Lavrov can
accomplish,
referring to
trip to Syria
by Russia's
foreign
minister.
On
Tuesday
morning,
Russian
Ambassador
Vitaly Churkin
called a press
conference,
not on
Lavrov's trip
but to address
a story
in the Arabic
press that
he had
threatened
Qatar. He
answered Inner
City Press
that a General
Assembly
resolution on
Syria would be
complex, since
the Security
Council is
"seized."
Inner
City Press
also asked
Churkin about
his
amendments,
which Inner
City Press
exclusively
obtained and
published
while the
Council's
Saturday
morning
consultations
took place,
specifically
the his
proposal that
Syrian armed
forces pull
out of cities
"in
conjunction
with the
end of attacks
by armed
groups against
state
institutions
and quarter
of cities and
towns."
French
Ambassador
Gerard Araud
was quoted in
Le
Monde, and
subsequently
Diplomatie.gouv.fr,
as rendered by
Google
Translate
"the
Russians
wanted to
change the
clause in the
plan of the
Arab League
asking the
military to
withdraw from
the cities,
adding the
condition:
'when the
[armed groups]
recede." In
other words,
the
army would
never have
moved."
Churkin
maintained
that the
amendment has
been
misrepresented,
and that But
the point
is, Araud has
said publicly
that Russia
was proposing
that Assad
would only
leave after
the armed
groups, which
is not what
"in
conjunction"
means.
Churkin said
that
no one in
consultations
questioned the
word. So why
the public
claims?
In other
Google
Translate
news,
Churkin's
press
conference was
to rebut a
story he
said was in
the Arab press
and that he
wanted to
deny.
Inevitably,
this led Inner
City Press to
try to find
the story, and
this
appears
to be it. The
first
paragraph:
"New
York
- broadcast
'France 2' a
record of the
dialogue to
the Security
Council in
which he said
Hamad bin
Jassim to
delegate
Russia
Council,
Vitaly
Churkin, 'I
warn you from
taking any
veto in the
Syrian crisis
and only the
promise of
Russia all the
Arab
countries',
the
individual
Churkin said:
'If I went
back to talk
with me in
this tone
will be there
is nothing
called Qatar
after today.'"
Clearly
the
translation is
clunky. But
the (mis)
reported
threat is
clear. In
response, to
those trying
to "drive a
wedge,"
Churkin cited
a Russian
proverb,"don't
spit in a
well, you may
need it for a
drink of
water."
While
at least one
correspondent
took this too
as a threat,
Inner City
Press heard in
it a reference
to Russia's
stated
willingness to
use its veto
power to
"protect
minorities."
Click
here for what
Churkin told
Inner City
Press on this,
two days
before
Saturday's
dual veto.
After
the dual veto
of the Syria
resolution,
the President
of the
General
Assembly,
Qatar's former
Permanent
Representative
to the UN
Nassir
Abdulaziz
al-Nasser,
issued a
formal
statement
saying he
"was
very concerned
about the
inability of
the Security
Council... to
adopt the
resolution
that had been
supported by
the Arab
League and
favored by 13
members of the
Council" and
urging "the
authorities in
Syria to end
the killings
immediately"
and
"President
Bashar
al-Assad to
listen to the
voices and
aspirations of
his people."
Even
the Moroccan
sponsors,
Western
supported
resolution
that was
vetoed made
reference
to armed
groups in
Syria. But the
Qatari PGA did
not. So Inner
City
Press wanted
to know, for
whom was the
PGA speaking?
Churkin at
stakeout pen,
seen by UN
Photo
From the UN's
February 6
transcript:
Inner
City
Press:
is he speaking
for the
General
Assembly?
Spokesperson:
He is speaking
for the
General
Assembly.
Inner
City
Press: Did
they take a
vote?
Spokesperson:
What do you
mean by take a
vote? This is
a press
statement...
Inner
City
Press:Do you
think that all
Member States
agree with
that? All,
including the
two that cast
vetoes on
Saturday?
Spokesperson:
..The
President of
the General
Assembly is
speaking on
behalf of the
Member States,
because he is
the President
of the body
that includes
all Member
States, 193
Member
States. Any
more
questions?
Thank you.
So
if the
President of
the GA can
issue a
statement,
clearly
consonant with
the
foreign policy
of his country
that he used
to represent
at the UN,
and call it on
behalf of all
193 Member
States, why
bother to try
a
resolution and
vote in the
GA?
In
fact, Russia's
Churkin at
this Tuesday
press
conference,
when asked by
Inner City
Press about
the move to
try a GA
resolution,
called it
complex, since
the Security
Council is
seized of the
matter,and
there is "this
[UN] Charter
thing."
Watch
this site.
, 
