42 Reasons Why Susan Rice's Anger Is Unconvincing...

BEIRUT -- I chuckled softly to myself last week when I followed the worldwide news coverage of how angrily US

Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice condemned the Russian and Chinese vetoes of the UN Security Council Resolution that sought to end the escalating conflict in Syria. The media emphasized that Susan Rice was really, really angry, as only a righteous American ambassador can be when condemning moves by other great powers to use their veto to stop collective action by the council in the service of applying the rule of law.

She was “disgusted” by the double vetoes, and said that, "A couple of members of this council remain steadfast in their willingness to sell out the Syrian people and shield a craven tyrant."

She is correct, of course, and we should all share her anger at the double veto, because the ongoing killings by all sides in Syria are unacceptable by any standards. We should take her position seriously because displays of public anger by ambassadors are noteworthy in themselves, and this is especially true for ambassadors of powerful countries like the United States that send their army around the world at will, usually at great cost to all involved.

Yet I chuckle nevertheless, because I am not sure whether we should assess Ms. Rice’s outburst at the level of Russian and Chinese policy, conditions in Syria, the work of the UN Security Council, or the foreign policy consistency or duplicity of the United States. Each of these domains is significant. Yet try as I may, I cannot take Ms. Rice and the United States seriously here, because the US sets the world’s gold standard on using vetoes in the Security Council to shield criminal activity -- by Israel in particular. I am not sure if Ms. Rice and the US government think the world is stupid or merely perpetually servile to American swagger.

The problem she has in being taken seriously is that the United States has used its veto power in the council 42 times since 1972 to kill resolutions that sought to affirm international law and stop assorted Israeli actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Virtually every major Israeli contravention of international law, UN resolutions, and basic human decency has been shielded at one time or another by the United States through the use of the veto power -- including land expropriations, settlements expansion, murder and assassinations, respecting holy sites, attacking civilians in neighboring countries, applying the 4th Geneva Convention to occupied lands and populations, intercepting civilian aircraft, respecting UN resolutions, killing UN employees, and others.

The latest American veto was a year ago on February 18, 2011, when Washington blocked the council’s attempt to declare all Israeli settlements activity since 1967 as illegal and to call for a halt to such construction (a full listing by resolution and votes is available athttp://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html.) In most cases, the United States alone vetoed resolutions that affirmed international law and were critical of Israel. Most recently in September-October 2011 Washington adopted a new tactic, the pre-emptive veto. It made it clear in public beforehand that it would veto a resolution at the Security Council recognizing an independent Palestinian state in the 1967 borders (regardless that the US voted for a Palestinian state in 1947).

So what should we make of the angry and disgusted Susan Rice who does not take kindly to other big powers selling out defenseless citizens in third countries that are under military assault? Well, nothing, really. We can pretty much ignore her and her government’s public display of anger, because they lack that essential combination of consistency, sincerity and credibility that are so vital for those who wish to be taken seriously. If she is so disgusted by this veto episode, can she imagine how it feels to be at the receiving end of such actions by her government 42 times over the past four decades?

I realize that I am not saying anything new here, but only pointing out one of many reasons why powers like the United States, the UK, Russia and others steadily find themselves with less influence around the world, regardless of their military power. The United States deserves particular criticism, though, because of the chronic nature and large scale of its diplomatic duplicity, for priding itself on being a shining example of the rule of law, and for sending its military around the world to make this clear.

Susan Rice’s anger and disgust at the Russian-Chinese veto at the UN last week loom largely hollow and meaningless, because in reality that are a reflection more of American hubris and pride than of any credible diplomacy. This is doubly tragic because at once it neutralizes the collective power of the Security Council to be a force for peace, security and stability, and it also reduces the capacity of the United States itself to do good and be taken seriously around the world. This leaves Washington in its current dilemma of finding that across the world many of its policies, and all of its anger, elicit mainly a soft and sad chuckle.

Rami G. Khouri is Editor-at-large of The Daily Star, and Director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut, in Beirut, Lebanon.

WE NEED YOUR HELP SO WE CAN HELP! PLEASE DONATE TODAY ZAKAT U.S.A.

اضغط هنا:
Zakat U.S.A. At A Glance OPOW

Donate To Zakat U.S.A. Donations Tax Deductable

ZAKAT USA ON FACEBOOK

Crisis In The Horn Of Africa Pictures 1432 AH

Click Here: OPOW Slide Show

OPOW NEEDS YOUR HELP

If you like this article please consider donating to : Oppressed Peoples Online Word

Mission Statement Of Oppressed Peoples Online Word

Oppresses Peoples Online Word On Facebook

O.P.O.W. Email: oppressedpeoplesonlineword@gmail.com

Recent Stories On Oppressed Peoples Online Word

World News Up-dated : Mosaic World News

Press TV Live