Originally published on the CGS blog on October 29, 2013.
What if you could help prevent the next Rwanda, Darfur or Syria? Would you?
Time and time again as atrocities unfold, the United Nations Security Council is called upon to act but cannot due to the threat of a veto by one of the permanent members. It’s time for that to change.
It’s time for countries to agree that permanent Security Council members have a “Responsibility Not to Veto” when it comes to genocide and other mass atrocities.
GlobalSolutions.org has just launched a petition to asking President Obama to be part of a discussion about the responsible use of the veto at the Security Council.
We envision a Security Council that works. Imagine a Security Council that pledged not to use the veto in situations of genocide and other mass atrocities. That’s a world we want to live in. Unfortunately, permanent Security Council members have used (or threatened to use) their veto power far too often. The veto power stopped immediate life-saving action in the Rwandan genocide, Darfur, and Syria.
No leader should ever use helicopter gunships, artillery, chemical weapons or even machetes on unarmed women and children and get away with it. 800,000 people were killed in Rwanda, 300,000 so far in Darfur, and close to 115,000 in Syrian. Actions to stop each of these genocides and mass atrocities were slowed by vetoes or the threat of a veto at the Security Council. We cannot stand for inaction in the face of senseless killings.
Our vision isn’t just a pipe dream. It’s serious. France’s Foreign Minister is calling for the Security Council to “voluntarily regulate their right to exercise their veto.” And he isn’t alone. He’s joined by U.N. Secretary General’s Ban Ki Moon and Kofi Annan as well as former Secretaries of State and Defense Madeline Albright and William Cohen and many other dignataries. Check out my post with links to resources and history for more info.
The world needs to stop the violence in Syria, but we also need to focus on how to prevent these situations in the future. That’s why we’re asking the Obama administration to be part of a discussion on the responsibility not to veto.
