Pages

Friday, July 28, 2006

China: "US Threatened Veto if Israel Criticised!"

China, one of the UN Security Council (UNSC) permanent members revealed why the UNSC could only expressed its shock, rather than outrage, over the ‘deliberate’ murder of 4 unarmed UN observers by an Israeli war plane.

This has been so despite UN Sec-Gen Kofi Annan condemning Israel for the 'deliberate' murderous attack. Wang Guangya, the Chinese ambassador, spoke bluntly on TV that the USA threatened to veto anything that criticised Israel.

The US demanded that the Chinese watered down its original draft which had a paragraph saying "the Security Council condemns any deliberate attack against UN personnel", along with a phrase which would have called on the UN to be involved in any Israeli inquiry.

That paragraph was deleted, and the Israelis get to do its own inquiry which we may safely say will exonerate the pilot's deliberate attack on a very distinctively marked UN post as an unfortunate mistake.

Why then did the Chinese accept the US demand? Because a US veto would have meant nothing would emerge from the UNSC.

Wang lamented that the revised document, expressing shock and omitting UN involvement in the inquiry, was the ‘minimum’ that could be expected from the UNSC if the American veto was to be avoided. The Chinese must be extremely pissed off to make such an undiplomatic media release.

Some people have been condemning the UN for not acting against the Israeli atrocities in Lebanon. The correct accusation should be against the US because it had been threatening to use its veto against any ceasefire or criticism against Israel, let alone condemnation of a renegade terrorist barbaric state.

Wang said: "Any killing of innocent life has to be condemned."

China lost one of its officers among the 4 UN observers murdered.

Wang was asked how the negotiations over the statement would influence talks on a resolution regarding Iran's nuclear programme. He responded by revealing that nearly (obviously not including UK) every delegation in the council was frustrated over the US position.

He threatened: "Definitely this frustration will have its negative impact."

He alluded to a possible non-cooperative tit for tat response from the other UNSC members when the US (though without mentioning the US by name) call upon them on issues such as the Iranian nuclear question.

Later I saw the Israeli ambassador to the UN strutting cockily to the media conference and said defiantly in response to an accusation of employing disproportionate force against Lebanon. He boasted: “You’re damn right we’re using disproportionate force. If your country is being attacked you would too.”

The ar$e-h*le was so arrogant because he knew the US would veto any criticism of its behaviour. But he didn’t hesitate to spin away the fact that the Israelis had been the one who launch the unmitigated attacks on Lebanon first, maliciously bombing infrastructure, regardless of whether the targets were Hezbollah’s or not.

The fact has been that the Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers who went across the border in the first place, rather than the spin Hezbollah was prowling around for nasty tricks against Israel, but these were inconvenient facts and equally inconvenient sequences of events.

And of course with Tai Koh looking after his ar$e, he didn’t give two hoots about the accusation of using ‘disproportionate force’. Oh no, not with those Old Testament rabid rabbinic killers.

No comments:

Post a Comment