UNITED NATIONS — Security Council ambassadors began working on Thursday on a revised Syria
resolution, with references to sanctions removed as bartering focused
in good part on the conditions under which President Bashar al-Assad
could be asked to cede power.
Russia has repeatedly threatened to veto any resolution that does not
meet its demands, including that the document not specifically call for
regime change in Syria, where Mr. Assad’s forces have been seeking to
crush an 11-month-old uprising that increasingly resembles a civil war.
But the commitment to do something, made in speeches on Tuesday by
numerous foreign ministers flying in from around the world, suggested
that there was room for compromise, ambassadors said.
“We have more work to do, but I think it was a constructive session
conducted in a good spirit,” said Susan E. Rice, the United States
ambassador, after emerging from a three-hour meeting late Wednesday.
“Everyone is trying to approach this in a constructive and rational way.
That in itself is progress.”
Other points of contention, beyond what happens to Mr. Assad, included
the issue of whether the resolution would support arms embargoes or
other sanctions by United Nations member countries and how to word the
resolution so it makes clear no outside military intervention is
authorized.
In the latest version crafted by Morocco, the paragraphs calling for a
halt to weapons sales and endorsing the sanctions imposed by the Arab
League were both dropped, according to a version shown to The New York
Times.
The Russians wanted to insert language in the resolution that would have
banned “illegal” sales, said a Security Council diplomat involved,
effectively giving them license to sell unlimited arms to the regime.
Such sales have continued unabated since the uprising began last March.
So the Western and Arab ambassadors tentatively agreed to drop the
subject.
The draft resolution mirrors one passed by the Arab League last month,
which calls on Mr. Assad to delegate responsibility to his vice
president in order to form a transitional government with the opposition
and pave the way toward a new constitution and new elections.
The working version circulated on Thursday says that the council “fully
supports” the Arab League decision, but all the explicit wording about
Mr. Assad stepping down has been taken out.
The new wording is tantamount to the same thing, Security Council
diplomats said, since the Arab League decision contains the demand that
Mr. Assad delegate responsibility to his vice president to pave the way
to a rapid democratic transition.
Diplomats stressed that the draft was still a work in progress, with
changes in the wording expected and with the possibility that elements
dropped previously could be re-introduced.
Diplomats present at the Wednesday session, speaking on condition of
anonymity, said that much of the meeting consisted of the Russian envoy,
Vitaly I. Churkin, repeating Moscow’s demands that it would not accept a
resolution that endorses regime change or contemplates other outside
interference. Russia wants to explicitly sideline the Libya model, in
which foreign military intervention led by NATO helped oust Col. Muammar
el-Qaddafi.
“These are tough issues, and there are issues of interest and principle
that still divide the Council,” said Ms. Rice, who described the
question of how to treat a political transition as “one of the more
difficult issues.”
As is frequently the case in such talks, the arguments often break down into semantics.
The Arab League plan calls on Mr. Assad to delegate his responsibilities
to his vice president, so the debate in the Council swirled around
whether using the word “delegate” actually represents a demand that Mr.
Assad step down, according to one diplomat.
The ambassadors also debated how strongly the resolution should endorse
the Arab League plan — with the choices being “fully support” or “take
note” or “welcome,” said Néstor Osorio, the Colombian ambassador.
Western ambassadors seeking to bolster the Arab League wanted the “fully
support” language. But there was some suggestion that Mr. Churkin was
trying to “cherry pick” language from the Arab League’s plan, as one
diplomat put it, rather than accept it as the blueprint.
Mr. Churkin declined to go into detail about the negotiations, saying only that it had been a “good session.”
Diplomats said that the efforts toward compromise meant it was still
possible to hold a vote by Friday, but the debate could easily stretch
into next week, given the issues involved and the need for ambassadors
to consult with their capitals.
Many ambassadors said that escalating violence in Syria was an important factor driving the desire to find a compromise.
The situation there remained remarkably fluid, with the uprising seeming more like an armed struggle daily.
On Wednesday, activists and residents reported new fighting across the
country between government forces and opposition fighters in which
dozens were killed. In the embattled city of Homs, soldiers shelled
several neighborhoods after rebels attacked an army checkpoint there and
commandeered a government tank, they said.
http://www.nytimes.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
You can comment here...