China and Russia were both worried about Western military action in Libya. So why didn’t they veto it when they had the chance?
While the debate continues over the question of just how far the Western coalition should go in assisting Libya’s rebels, one diplomatic achievement during this whole crisis has been largely overlooked— the fact that the West managed to avoid a major row with China and Russia.
Given the history of Chinese and Russian objections to such interventions, this was no mean feat.
Like all Security Council resolutions, Resolution 1973—which authorised the creation of a no-fly zone over Libya, and the bombing of ground targets—left considerable room for interpretation. The resolution authorizes UN members ‘to take all necessary measures…to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamhariya.’ The question that has arisen in subsequent debate, of course, is how extensively the coalition is now authorized to use air power against Col. Muammar Gaddafi’s ground forces to assist the rebels’ advance.
China and Russia didn’t exactly back Resolution 1973, but they didn’t exercise their veto rights either. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said last month that the ‘Chinese side stresses that UN Security Council’s actions should be in line with the organization’s charter and existing international norms, respect Libya’s right for sovereignty, independence, indivisibility and territorial integrity, (and) resolve the existing crisis through dialogue and other peaceful means.’
The problem that should probably have been foreseen, though, is that the resolution’s approval of force has meant different things to different people, and there is now uncertainty over where the line should be drawn between protecting civilians and assisting in the overthrow of the Libyan regime.
Certainly, Russia and China quickly saw Operation Odyssey Dawn as having overstepped any line that might have existed. The Russian government, for example, called on Britain, France, and the United States to cease their air strikes, describing them as ‘non-selective use of force’ against non-military targets. In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu expressed ‘regret’ over the Western military strikes.
In a statement posted on the ministry’s website, Jiang added that, ‘We hope stability can be restored in Libya as soon as possible so as to avoid more civilian casualties caused by the escalation of military conflict.’
Chinese concerns over the potential for a protracted civil war aren’t surprising—China is still trying to manage the break-up of the Sudan, an important oil supplier, and Beijing therefore isn’t keen to repeat the experience anytime soon.
Photo Credit: US Navy
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
avatar singh
china would be and shoudl be regrettinbg in not confronting that resolution and kicking the west. sho shoudl russia.(but medvedev is a wetern agent nbot liekd by majority of russians)
From– ‘US To Recoup Libya Oil From China’
Interview with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of US Treasury
by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24366
“
Press TV: With regards to the expansionist agenda of the West, when the UN mandate on Libya was debated in the UN Security Council, Russia did not veto it. Surely Russia must see this expansionist policy of the US, France and Britain.
Roberts: Yes they must see that; and the same for China. It’s a greater threat to China because it has 50 major investment projects in eastern Libya. So the question is why did Russia and China abstain rather than veto and block? We don’t know the answer.
Possibly the countries are thinking to let the Americans get further over- extended, or they may not have wanted to confront the US with a military or diplomatic position and have an onslaught of Western propaganda against them. We don’t know the reasons,
Washington is trying to cripple its main rival, China, by denying China energy. That’s what this is really about; a reaction by the US to China’s penetration of Africa.
In my opinion, what is going on is comparable to what the US and Britain did to Japan in the 1930s. When they cut Japan off from oil, from rubber, from minerals; that was the origin of World War II in the pacific. And now the Americans and the British are doing the same thing to China.
If the US was concerned about humanitarianism, it wouldn’t be killing all these people in Afghanistan and Pakistan with their drones and military strikes. Almost always it’s civilians that are killed. And the US is reluctant to issue apologies about any of it. They say we thought we were killing Taliban or some other made-up enemy.
Washington wants to rule Russia, China, Iran, and Africa, all of South America. Washington wants hegemony over the world. That’s what the word hegemony means. And Washington will pursue it at all costs.
reality
China is still an infant in influence over decisions made in UN..
China has no strong allies.China has only begun its journey in diplomacy.
Unfortunately media has “glamourised” China’s actual position in world politics.
Michael
The title of this propaganda article should read “FEAR OF THE WEST TRUMPS CHINA’S DIPLOMACY”!
guest
Westerners flattering themselves as usual.
Michael
“the West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do.”
–Samuel P. Huntington
Frank
Richard Weitz needs to read more about China before write an article.
Libya does not sell oil to China, and is supporting China’s separatist SB Chen. Those who support China’s separatist are no different than trying to kill Chinese.
Therefore, China is happy to see Libya being punished for its arrogance.
China also would like to see UN resolution is followed in precision. Killing Libya people is not UN resolution.