Saudi Arabia Declines U.N. Security Council Seat

[rmi5]

Barack Obama the Nobel Prize winner in 2009

Thank you Obama for being half black and half white and for killing many civilians with your drone attacks in various countries, for killing civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan during 2009. You really did a lot for peace. Sadly I can't remember any of your initiatives that resulted in peace. During the Syrian conflict you have been sleeping.

Nobel peace prize is absolutely BS. whenever I take a look at the list of noble peace prize winners, I just laugh at it.

 

[A.Rafay]

KSA, Pakistan and other nations like Turkey should demand veto power should be abandoned and voting power should be given to every country, more countries will join the campaign, five members having a veto power is not democracy.

 

[Serpentine]

Having '5 permanent members' in a council deciding for 'world's security' is not any better than rules of jungle.
Ironically, all of those 5 powers have nuclear weapons and 3 of them (U.S, UK and France) have participated in too many wars and killed too many people in those wars in the name of 'security and peace'.
The UNSC should be dismantled as soon as possible, enough for deciding for the world based on your own interests.

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

KSA seems to be hurt by the syrian incident.

Not Syria solely - even though we were startled when we knew Chemos had been used - but over many issues.

Having '5 permanent members' in a council deciding for 'world's security' is not any better than rules of jungle.
Ironically, all of those 5 powers have nuclear weapons and 3 of them (U.S, UK and France) have participated in too many wars and killed too many people in those wars in the name of 'security and peace'.
The UNSC should be dismantled as soon as possible, enough for deciding for the world based on your own interests.

Salute my friend!

 

[al-Hasani]

I am against the concept of veto rights in a organization such as UN. Yes, some countries are bigger, more populous, more powerful on all levels and more influential. We all know that. This will not change. But those facts they already use to gain influence OUTSIDE the UN. Why not make it fair for all WITHIN the UN? Why is it that a country like South Africa for example have a lesser vote than France? Or Brazil?

UN is only relevant because there are very few similar organizations. The sad thing is that its evolved into a coffee club where only 5 powers (all permanent members of the security council with veto rights) dictate the world policies and only preach what they say when it suits their agenda and remain silent/indecisive in other issues that do not concern them directly or issues they deem less important.

No, EVERY SINGLE UN member state should have equal rights and should demand it. They have as much a say in international/world matters as anybody else. Because they are part of the world just like every other country. As we all are.

When a country like Nigeria raises an important issues such as the after effects of colonial rule and the exploration of their natural resources by other state actors they are laughed at and not taken seriously because they are just an African country somewhere in Africa. If they had a equal vote that would not be the case.

The Nigeria thing was just an example.

 

[Wright]

I am against the concept of veto rights in a organization such as UN. Yes, some countries are bigger, more populous, more powerful on all levels and more influential. We all know that. This will not change. But those facts they already use to gain influence OUTSIDE the UN. Why not make it fair for all WITHIN the UN? Why is it that a country like South Africa for example have a lesser vote than France? Or Brazil?

UN is only relevant because there are very few similar organizations. The sad thing is that its evolved into a coffee club where only 5 powers (all permanent members of the security council with veto rights) dictate the world policies and only preach what they say when it suits their agenda and remain silent/indecisive in other issues that do not concern them directly or issues they deem less important.

No, EVERY SINGLE UN member state should have equal rights and should demand it. They have as much a say in international/world matters as anybody else. Because they are part of the world just like every other country. As we all are.

When a country like Nigeria raises an important issues such as the after effects of colonial rule and the exploration of their natural resources by other state actors they are laughed at and not taken seriously because they are just an African country somewhere in Africa. If they had a equal vote that would not be the case.

The Nigeria thing was just an example.

You have the Arab league and OIC - Im not sure about their influence but it is an alternative.

 

[al-Hasani]

You have the Arab league and OIC - Im not sure about their influence but it is an alternative.

Wright, those are not world organizations but limited to a geographical/ethnic/religious perspective. Can any non-Arab states join the Arab League? The answer is no. No matter how big the Arab world is or how populous and rich it is it cannot be as influential as the UN or even come close to it simply because UN is for EVERY single country in this world. OIC has only like 57 member states. Yes, Muslims make up 25-30% of the world's population but once again the OIC is not the UN.

I would like to hear your opinion on the concept of certain countries (5 in this case) having veto rights and a permanent seat in the security council unlike that of the remaining 188 UN member states.

Member states of the United Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Wasim Aasim]

Barack Obama the Nobel Prize winner in 2009

Thank you Obama for being half black and half white (so, so special!) and for killing many civilians with your drone attacks in various countries, for killing civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan during 2009. You really did a lot for peace. Sadly I can't remember any of your initiatives that resulted in peace. During the Syrian conflict you have been sleeping.

I can understand your pain brother. You tried your best to convince them to attack Syria but it did not work that is why so much hue and cry from KSA. Why do you need America for everything ? Why don't you take the initiative and liberate Syrians from Al Asad ?

 

[Sugarcane]

Scrap UN and form regional gangs

 

[ResurgentIran]

Wait a second here.
UNSC is useless because war in Syria did not happen?

If anything UNSC served to DETER such a horrific event. It is useless because you dont get your way and bombing the **** out of nations left and right, unless you do it against international law?
It seems that some idiots think the only way to solve a conflict is major war, and if it does not happen, everything is useless.
Grow up.

 

[-SINAN-]

Gül expresses hope Saudi rejection of Security Council seat will draw attention to UN’s failures

Turkish President Abdullah Gül called for respect for Saudi Arabia’s rejection of the U.N. Security Council seat, expressing his hopes that the move will draw global attention to some of the international body’s failure.

“It seems like Saudi Arabia is trying to grab the world’s attention and to give a meaningful response. If they have chosen such a path, it should be met with respect,” Gül told reporters as he was leaving a mosque in Istanbul’s Emirgan neighborhood, near the Tarabya Palace following Friday prayers.

Gül also shared the Saudi’s frustrations regarding the Security Council’s long paralysis on Syria.

“The United Nations lost a lot of credit in the eye of human conscience. I was always criticizing [the U.N.] during the General Assembly meetings for its failure to counter many incidents,” Gül said, referring to his address at this year’s U.N. General Assembly last month.

During his speech, Gül openly criticized the United Nations, calling its failure on Syria a “disgrace.” Gül also urged for a reform of the U.N.'s structure, openly criticizing the world body and emphasized the necessity of a Security Council, “which is truly democratic, representative, effective and accountable.”

Speaking to reporters on Oct. 18, Gül said he wished for a stronger global focus on the failures of the international body. “I hope the world’s attention will be drawn on this issue after [Saudi Arabia’s rejection],” Gül said.

Saudi Arabia rejected membership of the U.N. Security Council on Oct. 18, a day after it was elected to the body, accusing it of “double-standards” in resolving world conflicts.

“Work mechanisms and double-standards on the Security Council prevent it from carrying out its duties and assuming its responsibilities in keeping world peace,” the foreign ministry said, according to Agence France-Presse.

“Therefore Saudi Arabia... has no other option but to turn down Security Council membership until it is reformed and given the means to accomplish its duties and assume its responsibilities in preserving the world’s peace and security,” a statement said.

For the first time ever, oil-rich, conservative Saudi Arabia won a seat on Oct. 17 on the 15-member council, which has a key role in dealing with world conflicts.

Failure to tackle regional conflicts

Saudi U.N. Ambassador Abdullah al-Mouallimi said that reflected Riyadh’s “long-standing policy in support of moderation and in support of resolving disputes in peaceful means.” But the foreign ministry said Saudi Arabia declines to be a member of a body unable to tackle long-standing conflicts in the Middle East or rid the region of the threat of nuclear war.

It pointed specifically to the nearly three-year civil war in Syria and the protracted Palestinian-Israeli conflict, as key reasons.

“Failing to find a solution to the Palestinian cause for 65 years” it said, has led to “numerous wars that have threatened world peace.”

Likewise, it said, “allowing the regime in Syria to kill its own people with chemical weapons... without confronting it or imposing any deterrent sanctions... is a proof of the inability of the Security Council to carry out its duties and assume its responsibilities.”

The ministry also criticized the body’s “failure” to turn the Middle East into a region free from weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms -- in a reference to nuclear disputes around Iran and Israel.

 

[al-Hasani]

Gül expresses hope Saudi rejection of Security Council seat will draw attention to UN’s failures

Turkish President Abdullah Gül called for respect for Saudi Arabia’s rejection of the U.N. Security Council seat, expressing his hopes that the move will draw global attention to some of the international body’s failure.

“It seems like Saudi Arabia is trying to grab the world’s attention and to give a meaningful response. If they have chosen such a path, it should be met with respect,” Gül told reporters as he was leaving a mosque in Istanbul’s Emirgan neighborhood, near the Tarabya Palace following Friday prayers.

Gül also shared the Saudi’s frustrations regarding the Security Council’s long paralysis on Syria.

“The United Nations lost a lot of credit in the eye of human conscience. I was always criticizing [the U.N.] during the General Assembly meetings for its failure to counter many incidents,” Gül said, referring to his address at this year’s U.N. General Assembly last month.

During his speech, Gül openly criticized the United Nations, calling its failure on Syria a “disgrace.” Gül also urged for a reform of the U.N.'s structure, openly criticizing the world body and emphasized the necessity of a Security Council, “which is truly democratic, representative, effective and accountable.”

Speaking to reporters on Oct. 18, Gül said he wished for a stronger global focus on the failures of the international body. “I hope the world’s attention will be drawn on this issue after [Saudi Arabia’s rejection],” Gül said.

Saudi Arabia rejected membership of the U.N. Security Council on Oct. 18, a day after it was elected to the body, accusing it of “double-standards” in resolving world conflicts.

“Work mechanisms and double-standards on the Security Council prevent it from carrying out its duties and assuming its responsibilities in keeping world peace,” the foreign ministry said, according to Agence France-Presse.

“Therefore Saudi Arabia... has no other option but to turn down Security Council membership until it is reformed and given the means to accomplish its duties and assume its responsibilities in preserving the world’s peace and security,” a statement said.

For the first time ever, oil-rich, conservative Saudi Arabia won a seat on Oct. 17 on the 15-member council, which has a key role in dealing with world conflicts.

Failure to tackle regional conflicts

Saudi U.N. Ambassador Abdullah al-Mouallimi said that reflected Riyadh’s “long-standing policy in support of moderation and in support of resolving disputes in peaceful means.” But the foreign ministry said Saudi Arabia declines to be a member of a body unable to tackle long-standing conflicts in the Middle East or rid the region of the threat of nuclear war.

It pointed specifically to the nearly three-year civil war in Syria and the protracted Palestinian-Israeli conflict, as key reasons.

“Failing to find a solution to the Palestinian cause for 65 years” it said, has led to “numerous wars that have threatened world peace.”

Likewise, it said, “allowing the regime in Syria to kill its own people with chemical weapons... without confronting it or imposing any deterrent sanctions... is a proof of the inability of the Security Council to carry out its duties and assume its responsibilities.”

The ministry also criticized the body’s “failure” to turn the Middle East into a region free from weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms -- in a reference to nuclear disputes around Iran and Israel.

I can understand your pain brother. You tried your best to convince them to attack Syria but it did not work that is why so much hue and cry from KSA. Why do you need America for everything ? Why don't you take the initiative and liberate Syrians from Al Asad ?

Eh, we want the war to stop. It's not in our interest to have a war next to our backdoor/neighborhood. Russia and Mullahistan are the ones supporting the murder of Muslims, Syrians and Arabs inside Syria and they are doing their utmost to keep a child-murdering dictator that have lost ALL legitimacy INSIDE Syria and OUTSIDE of it in power knowing fully well that he will never rule Syria again.

Besides nobody has talked about an invasion but military strikes on strategic military targets that the "armies" and militias of the Child-Murderer control to weaken him and ultimately stop the killing of innocent Muslims and Syrians and obviously to put an end to the conflict.

Besides this conflict is not an internal Arab conflict alone. You have major players involved (USA, Russia etc.) having their tit for tat there. KSA cannot just do it alone although it could destroy Al-Assad's amateur army within days in an all out war.

Besides as influential and important as KSA is then it is not the only Arab or Muslim country in this world. As Muslims and humans we ALL have a obligation to stop the massacres. Pakistan has a responsibility too. And even more so being probably the strongest Muslim military or certainly among the strongest.

Why do some people think that KSA should and can solve every single conflict in the Muslim world?

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

You have the Arab league and OIC - Im not sure about their influence but it is an alternative.

We don't act out upon these two either Sometimes we are forced to carry out an action unilaterally. For example, I took us along period of time lobbying in Algeria to expel Syria from the AL.
@Sinan

We received two letters from Turkey backing the decision we took in the UN in addition to Egypt, the UAE, and France.

 

[JonAsad]

Saudi Arabia should Decline OIC seat aswell- its even more useless than UN-

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

Wait a second here.
UNSC is useless because war in Syria did not happen?

If anything UNSC served to DETER such a horrific event. It is useless because you dont get your way and bombing the **** out of nations left and right, unless you do it against international law?
It seems that some idiots think the only way to solve a conflict is major war, and if it does not happen, everything is useless.
Grow up.

Dude,

Check out @Serpentine 's post. It sums up the issue fashionably.