6 Comments
Feb 20Liked by Elise Labott

Elise, you make the impassioned plea:

"Call me crazy, but if a country can’t condemn the heinous attack and murder of innocent civilians, the taking of hostages, including children, and the rape and torture of women from any country, they don’t deserve to be members of the United Nations, let alone vote on the Security Council."

I agree.

Here's the rub, both Russia and China are playing the game of dumping this on the US. If the US should agree to such a resolution, it would leave Russia exposed with Ukraine and China with Xinjiang. They are praying that the US keeps vetoing so they don't have to be next to face global approbium at the Security Council.

Expand full comment
author

That’s fair. My point though is work to get agreement before voting. In Congress, they whip votes to ensure the legislation passes. (That, I know is a whole other story!) At the UNSC they just put it to a vote regardless of whether the resolution will pass. Its a recipe for inaction.

Expand full comment
Feb 21Liked by Elise Labott

Hi Elise, your wishes are the ideal. In contrast the international system is fundamentally nihilistic. National legislatures have whips with a whole panoply of rewards and coercion to keep the troops in line. There's no analogous framework in the international sphere. Consequently horse trading occurs while the great powers screw around with one upmanship. Everyone else pays the price in blood and treasure.

Expand full comment
Feb 20Liked by Elise Labott

BRAVO!

Expand full comment
Feb 20Liked by Elise Labott

You make too much sense. I would forward this to The White House if it would make any difference. But, I think they have their own plan and it wouldn’t.

Expand full comment

“The nightclub where good intentions so to die.” So true, alas

Expand full comment