ITAR - TASS

Ignorance in Security Council

By: Keeley Campbell

International Telegraph Agency of Russia

February 27, 2011. 12:24PM PST

The information divulged in the Security Council was both appalling and egotistical.  The committee started out by inviting the Somalia delegates on their own incentives to join the Security Council for further questions. The questioning themselves was a poor man’s Tarantino of trying to force questions out of an already fragile country. It was obvious that the US and the UK had a predetermined mindset that ended up dropping a bomb with the equal effect of the nuclear warhead they confiscated. The rest of the Security Council was left in the dust on the “Act of War” performed by the US and the UK. The Russian Federation delegate acted quickly on this matter “Point(ing) out that this didn’t require a resolution and the rest of the council could have been informed.” 

When asked how the Russian Federation felt about this “bomb dropping.” He definitely had something to say, “Joke, completely defeats the actions of the UN. Russian Federation would like to see an accepted committee motion for this interest.”

When the South African delegate pointed out that “This is an act of war,” The UK delegate responded by swiftly staying “We can vote without you, we don’t need their vote.” Something expected from the US delegate but he seemed to have finally run out of politically incorrect things to say.

The reaction from this turn of events rippled through the Security Council, surprising each and every delegate. “South Africa is outraged at the Candor and inhumanity of the UK and the US raid on the Somali soil without the consent of the security council or the Somali Government. This constitutes an act of war and violates countless UN charters and resolutions as well as international law. UK then started that South Africa and Russia were merely “Hurt because they were not involved.” To claim such is astounding arrogance only compounded by their previous actions.

This course of action is in directly violation of many articles of the UN Charter on Security, making this an inadequate move on the UK and the US’s part. A crime against peace, in international law, refers to:

"planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing" ^[1]. This definition of crimes against peace was first incorporated into the Nuremberg Principles and later included in the United Nations Charter. This definition would play a part in defining aggression as a crime against peace.”

The other delegates were open to state that the UK and the US were out of line to act on such an issue without further contact with either the Security Council or the Somali delegates themselves.

The delegate of Brazil questioned the intentions of the US and UK when he asked “Why are you in the UN of you act alone?” Then later when on record further questioned both delegates “Why agree to participate in such a great experience as the UN, if some are coming to act and make decisions without consulting the committee they’re in?”

This issue has yet to be resolved and with the UN and with the US and the UK writing the papers for the rest of the delegates it is unclear if this will ever be resolved. This reporter questions if the UK and the US realize that the Russian Federation has veto power and is not afraid to do so.