Results 1 to 20 of 162

Thread: Syria: the case for action

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Cuz the P-5 didn't trust each other,

    nor did they trust the lesser members, as Curmudgeon said.

    Everyone gamed the system and they still do.

    I ran into this in Googling whether Eric Stein (my faculty advisor) had anything to say or do about early UNSC voting. This cable was signed by Mr Dulles (John Foster), but drafted by David Popper and Eric Stein, The Secretary of State to the Embassy in France (29 Apr 1953). Here's a couple of telling snips:

    2. SC appears best UN organ since consideration by it will emphasize danger to international peace and is least subject to pressure for undue extension of debate by extreme anti-colonial group.
    ...
    6. Although accurate prediction vote in SC not possible without consultation with other members, we believe 4 permanent members (UK, US, France, China) would vote for above resolution as would at least 3 non-permanent members (Greece, Colombia, Denmark). At least one of three remaining members (Chile, Lebanon, Pakistan) might also vote for resolution. Since this would be case under Chapter VII of Charter right of France to vote could not be challenged. Soviets virtually certain veto resolution so that SC will not be able take any effective action. However, large vote in SC despite veto would in our view achieve principal advantages outlined above.
    and then (appears to be an addition by Mr Dulles):

    I talked to Bonnet yesterday recommending action in SC by Laos, but did not go into details. Bonnet stated French are afraid matter might get into Assembly and lead to political attacks on France because of its alleged imperialistic policies. Such attacks, he said, might well create a public opinion in France which would force complete withdrawal from Indochina.

    We are, of course, aware likelihood matter may arise in GA. However, this possibility exists regardless whether matter raised in SC, and prior initiative in SC would, in our view, set narrower and more manageable framework for any GA consideration.
    The UNSC in 1953 had 11 members; passage required 7 votes (with 5 P-5 affirmative; or if a P-5 abstained or was absent, an added non-P member). The game was to get 7 votes, knowing a P-5 would veto, and then go to whatever friendly media that could be found. See Chaper V Wiki.

    Prof Stein died in 2011 at 98; a Prague JD, Czech army, a Michigan JD and US army (all between 1937 and 1945) - a very personable guy with a gentleman's genuine manners.

    Regards

    Mike
    Last edited by jmm99; 09-10-2013 at 02:34 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Today's Wild Geese: Foreign Fighters in the GWOT
    By SWJED in forum Adversary / Threat
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 02-09-2018, 02:06 PM
  2. Crimes, War Crimes and the War on Terror
    By davidbfpo in forum Law Enforcement
    Replies: 600
    Last Post: 03-03-2014, 04:30 PM
  3. Replies: 534
    Last Post: 09-20-2010, 01:18 PM
  4. "Hot Pursuit" Doctrine
    By MattC86 in forum Law Enforcement
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-22-2008, 06:37 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •