POLITICS: Security Council Stops Short of Sanctions on Syria

By Haider Rizvi Reprint | | Print |

Haider Rizvi

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 31 2005 (IPS) - In their attempt to threaten Syria with possible sanctions, the United States and Western powers have failed to gather full support from the United Nations Security Council.

Last week, the United States, Britain and France jointly drafted a resolution that would have warned Syria of possible sanctions, but consistent opposition from Russia and China forced them to retreat.

As a result of the last-minute diplomatic compromise Monday, the Council unanimously endorsed a new resolution demanding that Syria must cooperate fully with the ongoing probe into the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri.

If Syrian authorities fail to cooperate with the U.N.-sponsored Independent Inquiry Commission in the next two months, the Council said in its resolution that it would take “further action, if necessary”.

The amended version of the original draft may have given Syrians some relief, but statements by the sponsors of the resolution suggest that the threat of sanctions against Syria remains desirable for Washington and its allies.

“With our decision today, we show that Syria has isolated itself from the international community,” said U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Council minutes after it adopted the new resolution. “Now the Syrian government must take a strategic decision to change its behaviour.”

Jack Straw, the British foreign secretary, appeared to be much harsher in his criticism of Syria than his counterpart from Washington.

Describing Syria’s attitude as “grudging and evasive,” he said Damascus has now been put on notice that the “U.N. patience has limits”.

Both Rice and Straw did not directly say that “further action” could mean possible military action or imposition of sanction against Syria. Nevertheless, their statements did imply that possibility.

“It’s very explicit about what means,” Rice told a journalist in response to a question about the phrase “further action”.

Rice accused Syria of causing “difficulties” for Palestinian Authority (PA), and said that Damuscas’s “destabilising behaviour is being noted”. Syria remains on the U.S. State Department’s list of nations that support terrorist groups.

In response, the Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk Al-Sharaa called the investigation into Hariri’s death “a medieval inquiry, where the accused is guilty until proven innocent”. He reiterated the Syrian assertion that it has fully cooperated with the Inquiry Commission.

Last week, the Commission released a more than 600-page report implicating many senior Syrian officials in Hariri’s assassination, but stopped short of saying that its conclusions were final.

“Until the investigation is complete, all new leads and evidence are fully analysed, and an independent and impartial prosecution mechanism is set up, one cannot know the complete story of what happens,” the authors of the report told the Security Council.

“Even the judge says these are presumptions,” said the Syrian foreign minister about the suspected involvement of Syrian officials, adding that his government had asked the chief investigator if he wanted to return to Syria for further investigations. “He said, may be, may not be.”

“We want to uncover the truth with conclusive evidence, not for any other reason,” he said.

Despite voting for the resolution, both Russia and China and embraced the Syrians’ assertion that they must not be treated as guilty before proven innocent and that the international community must wait until the investigators have reached a final conclusion.

“It is inappropriate for the Security Council to prejudge the investigation outcome,” said China’s Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing, whose country is empowered to veto any Security Council resolution. “The Commission itself believes that the investigation is yet to be completed and there is no final conclusion.”

Commenting on the resolution, Russian Foreign Minister Sergie Lavrov said the Council “is not an investigative body”, and therefore it would be “wrong to mix criminal procedural mechanism with interstate relations”.

The foreign ministers of Brazil and Trinidad also held similar views.

Both Zhaoxing and Lavrov made it clear to the Council that their countries were not in favour of sanctions against Syria and warned that such a step could damage international efforts for peace in the Middle East.

“It (sanctions) does not help with the settlement of the issue, and will add new destabilising factors to the already complex situation in the Middle East,” Zhaoxing told the Council. “This is a legitimate concern of China, Islamic countries and many others.”

Opposing sanctions against Syria, Lavrov pointed out that Syria had set up a national judicial commission to investigate Hariri’s death, which would be working in close cooperation with the U.N. investigators.

“This is not something that should be over-dramatised,” he told reporters, while stressing that the resolution “does not mention any sanctions”. Rather, it refers to “peaceful methods of settlement”, he said.

The Commission led by Detlev Mehlis, a German national, is scheduled to issue its final report in December.