Ban Ki-moon backs NATO over critics

Posted By David Bosco Thursday, December 15, 2011 - 12:29 PM Share

Reuters' correspondent Louis Charbonneau filed this story yesterday on some remarkable comments by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon:

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday defended NATO against criticism from Russia, China and other countries, which accuse the alliance of overstepping its U.N. mandate to protect civilians in Libya.

It was an unusual move by the cautious head of the United Nations, who will complete his first five-year term at the end of the month and begin his second term in January. Ban has rarely taken public positions that pit him with some permanent members of the 15-nation Security Council against others.

"Security Council resolution 1973, I believe, was strictly enforced within the limit, within the mandate," Ban told reporters in New York. "This military operation done by the NATO forces was strictly within (resolution) 1973."

"I believe this is what we have seen, and there should be no misunderstanding on that," he said.

I have a couple reactions. First, I think the Secretary-General is clearly wrong that NATO's operations conformed strictly to Resolution 1973. But it's not altogether surprising that Ban would rise to NATO's defense. After all, one thing at stake in how the Libya operation is perceived is the Responsibility to Protect, which has been a key project for the UN. Ban's predecessor, Kofi Annan, soft-pedaled criticism of the (clearly illegal) 1999 Kosovo operation for precisely the same reason: he wanted to defend the principle of intervention on behalf of human rights. There are some deep questions raised by this pattern of choices. In essence, the UN's top official is siding with certain UN members who support an evolving normative doctrine over others who, I believe, have black-letter law on their side. At a more tactical level, it's worth noting that these are the kinds of statements that could only be made by a second-term Secretary-General, who no longer needs Russian or Chinese support to stay in office.

(3)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

JEAN LABREK

10:27 PM ET

December 15, 2011

Libya criminal invasion and destruction

Just like with Criminal (Geneva convention and UN) Irak and Yugoslavia wars, lies and justification for illegally attacking a defenceless country, steal its resources, _____Agents were sent several times before to destabilize this country and assassinate its leaders____Humanitarian(sic) killing of 60,000 civilians by NATO, bombing schools health clinics, water and electrical systems to force the population to flee to surrounding countries to destroy and having reconstruction done by European and American contractors paid with the money stolen from Libyan and African Banks and privatize everything including Oil production.____A NO-FLY ZONE means preventing planes and copters to take off, NOTHING ELSE, certainly not bomb to permit a bunch of Al Qaida helped rebels make a revolution, fire hundreds of uranium depleted missile and bomb heads from a ship and fighter jets, and less send land troops from Saudi Arabia and Qatar.___Democracy they say, Libya was more democratic than US and certainly more than SaudiArabia and Qatar. (read the GreenBook and Charter).

JEAN LABREK

10:41 PM ET

December 15, 2011

US wars

More than 40 countries bombed since the second world war by warmonger predator US, none of these countries have real democracy. ____ DICTATOR, really___ ONLY someone who can say to other nations IF YOU ARE NOT WITH US, YOU ARE AGAINST US, who can standardize and legalize torture, remove the rights of its own people with the Patriot Act, CAN be a Dictator, (BushCheneyRumsfeld gang) or someone maintaining these practices.

JEAN LABREK

10:52 PM ET

December 15, 2011

Profitable wars

Shares of companies like Halliburton, KellogBrown and Roots, Carlyle, Raythion, GeneralDynamics, NorthropGrumman, Boeing, Exxon and more, with shareholders of the Saudis, Qataris and Laden very democratic families.