When The Security Council Violates the UN Charter

Resolution1559 , the latest to be passed by that body, goes beyond its powers and violates UN principles. In fact it is a direct call to defy the UN charter. This is something that has not ever happened before.

The resolution deals with an amendment to the Lebanese Constitution and the presence of Syrian forces in Lebanon, both of which are not legitimate concerns of any international body. Such an attempt to dictate how sovereign nations should conduct their affairs violates the UN Charter, which says that “there is nothing in this document that allows the United Nations to interfere in affairs that are part of the internal structure of the country.”

Amending its constitution and extending the term of its president are the internal issues Lebanon. No one has the right to interfere with them. Further, both the decisions where taken according to the principles of the democratic system: The constitutional amendment was approved by the Parliament and does not threaten or endanger international security or peace.

Hence it does not concern the Security Council. As for the presence of Syrian forces in Lebanon, they are there at Beirut’s request, as part of the Taif peace formula that brought an end to the long civil war in that country. Since they are in Lebanon at the request and desire of its government and Parliament, their presence does not defy any international law and does not touch upon issues of international peace or security. In fact, on various occasions when divisive politics threatened to start another civil war, it was the essence of Syrian forces that preserved the country’s unity and integrity by preventing sectarian bloodbath. Hence, it is a mystery why a decision that defies international law and the charter of the United Nations itself, asked for by France and the United States, was approved by the council.

It is obvious that the decision primarily serves Israel and is seen as an important step toward breaking up Arab countries into small fragments, resurrecting the old divisions in Lebanon, and threatening Syria with an invasion. Israel fears a trilateral alliance of Lebanon, Iran and Syria. The withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon will make it easy for it to realize its global and regional ambitions.

It serves US interests also. That will be quite in step with the plans it has drawn up for the Middle East to make it a colony in every sense but name. It will also help it to contain Iran, encircling it with a string of client states — Afghanistan and Iraq already and Syria if the present machinations succeed. As for France, its position is still mystifying. Its role in all this is unclear and its reasons are unconvincing. The enigma deepens when you remember that France was considered a special friend of Syria and Lebanon.

However, one thing is clear. If the exercise, accompanied with overt and covert threats directed at the country and its people, was meant to scare Lebanon into accepting the US as an overlord, it was a failure: Even before the resolution could be passed, the Lebanese nation stood firm in the face of superpower pressure.

While the Security Council was threatening dire consequences, the Parliament went ahead and ratified the constitutional amendment and presidential extension — with 96 members voting for and 29voting against, which is a clear mandate for rejecting any suggestion to force Syria to withdraw its forces from Lebanon. The Middle East cannot be reshaped to American specifications or to suit Israel’s ambitions.

http://arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=51421&d=13&m=9&y=2004