Latest news with #SecurityCouncilReport
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
a day ago
- Politics
- First Post
Pakistan's dirty trick at UNSC, attempts back-door push for Kashmir issue as panel chair
As its month-long presidency of the UN Security Council comes to an end, Pakistan is set to hold an open debate on global disputes, with hopes of drawing attention to the Kashmir issue, though without naming it directly. read more As Pakistan's month-long presidency of the UN Security Council (UNSC) nears its end, Islamabad is preparing to hold an open debate on unresolved global disputes, indirectly aiming to highlight the Kashmir issue, according to a report from The Times of India. Pakistan plans to follow this with a resolution urging member states to use peaceful means to settle conflicts. Although Pakistan's main goal is to draw attention to Kashmir, it is unlikely to mention Jammu and Kashmir directly in the resolution, fearing a possible veto. For a UNSC resolution to pass, it requires at least nine votes and no veto from any of the five permanent members. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Pakistan's Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Ishaq Dar, will travel to New York to chair the debate on 22 July. UN Secretary-General António Guterres is also expected to brief the meeting. According to the Security Council Report, Pakistan hopes to pass a resolution encouraging the full use of all mechanisms under Chapter VI of the UN Charter. Article 33 of this chapter urges parties in a dispute that threatens international peace to seek solutions through mediation, arbitration, or other peaceful means of their choosing. 'This will likely be a broad, conceptual resolution focused on general principles rather than specific issues, to avoid objections,' says Syed Akbaruddin, former Indian Ambassador to the UN. Pakistan also knows that, apart from China, the other permanent UNSC members continue to view Kashmir as a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan. While member states recognise the UNSC's role in maintaining peace and security, many stress that any efforts must respect a country's sovereignty and cannot impose settlement terms without the consent of all involved parties. This open debate follows earlier closed-door discussions Pakistan initiated on 5 May to address India-Pakistan tensions after the Pahalgam terrorist attack. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Pakistan is also planning another significant event during its presidency to promote cooperation between the UN and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), a 57-member group that has often supported Pakistan's stance on Kashmir.
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
As UNSC president, Pakistan looks to up ante on Kashmir issue
File photo: Pakistani deputy PM and foreign minister Ishaq Dar (Picture credit: AP, ANI) NEW DELHI: As the month-long Pakistan presidency of the UNSC nears its business end, Islamabad is gearing up to organise an open debate on unresolved disputes around the world, looking to follow it up with a resolution urging member-states to use mechanisms available to them for pacific settlement of disputes. While the motive behind convening this signature event under the UN's maintenance of international peace and security agenda is to highlight the Kashmir issue, it's unlikely Pakistan will name J&K for fear of getting the resolution vetoed. UNSC resolutions need nine votes to pass, including concurrence of all five permanent members. Pakistani deputy PM & foreign minister Ishaq Dar will travel to New York to chair the event on July 22, which will likely be briefed by secretary general Antonio Guterres too. According to the Security Council Report, Pakistan aims to adopt the resolution urging full use of all Chapter VI mechanisms. Article 33 of the Chapter states that the parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall seek a solution by, among other things, mediation and arbitration. However, the same Article also says the parties can seek a solution through "other peaceful means of their own choice". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Monster Hunter Wilds – Exclusive Discounts! Shop Now Undo "Generic resolution which will most likely be conceptual in nature will focus on general principles not specific issues to avoid any objections," says Syed Akbaruddin, former Indian ambassador to the UN. Pakistan also knows that, except China, all other permanent members continue to maintain that Kashmir is a bilateral issue. While underlining the Council's role in maintaining peace and security, many member-states stress any such attempt can't undermine a State's sovereignty or invoke settlement agreements without the consent of both parties. The open debate follows closed consultations called by Pakistan on May 5 to discuss India-Pakistan tensions after Pahalgam terrorist attack. Pakistan will also convene another signature event under its presidency, hoping to strengthen cooperation between the UN and Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), a 57-member body that has repeatedly expressed support for Islamabad's Kashmir agenda.
Yahoo
04-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The data that reveal growing strains in the special relationship
Britain, the US and Russia have participated in 2,681 votes together at the United Nations Security Council since 1946. In that time, the US has sided with Russia over the UK on just 22 occasions. The most recent instance came last Monday, when the UK and Europe abstained from a US-drafted resolution calling for an end to the Ukraine conflict that omitted any criticism of Russia's actions. The short resolution was adopted, much to the dismay of Ukraine and its European allies. Before the vote that was held, on the third anniversary of Vladimir Putin's invasion, other than a disagreement over humanitarian relief to Gaza in 2023, you would have to go back to 1980 to find another example. The Security Council is one of the six principal organs of the UN, with a mandate to promote international peace through negotiation, the imposition of sanctions or, if necessary, the authorisation of force. A revolving roster of 10 nations joins the table for two-year terms, but five members have been permanent since its creation in the wake of the Second World War – the US, UK, France, China and Russia (formerly the USSR). According to UN Digital Library records of all resolutions voted upon over the past 70 years, the UK and France are the closest permanent members, voting the same way 98.2 per cent of the time. The US, for its part, was most aligned with the UK (97.1 per cent) and understandably, given their history, found least common cause with Russia (87.8 per cent). But the current turmoil is bucking these long-term trends and suggests the two nations are drifting apart in their special relationship'. The US and UK have only split votes 77 times, meaning entire years have often gone by with the pair 100 per cent like-minded. Over the past 12 months, however, this rate fell to 94.4 – its lowest level since 1997. In December, the US abstained in a vote on the establishment of an African Union Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia, citing dissatisfaction with its funding model. Last March, it did the same during a call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza during Ramadan. More broadly, the breakdown of the transatlantic alliance echoes growing disunity within the wider Security Council and the UN as a whole. The majority of resolutions put forward, despite being put to a vote, are to give assent to agreements already made. The most common form of dissent, therefore, is to abstain. The share of abstentions among all votes cast has risen steeply over the past decade, from 0.06 per cent in 2010 to beyond eight per cent last year. Only the five permanent members have recourse to a more drastic measure – their negative vote counting as a veto. According to Security Council Report, vetos empower them to 'defend their national interests, to uphold a tenet of their foreign policy or, in some cases, to promote a single issue of particular importance to a state'. There were eight vetos last year, the highest annual total since 1989 and the eighth-highest in 79 years overall. Three distinct phases emerge when looking at which country did the vetoing: the USSR was primarily responsible over the opening decades of the Cold War, the US then took the lead until 2008, from which point on Moscow began throwing up the most barriers once more. The USSR and Russia have been behind almost half (47.1 per cent) of all no-votes cast, a share that creeps up to 57.9 per cent over the past three years, coinciding with the three-year long Ukraine war. Speaking at an event after last Monday's event, Yevheniia Filipenko, Ukraine's ambassador, asked countries to continue their support for rebuilding Ukraine and seeking accountability for crimes committed since Russia's invasion. 'The road ahead is very challenging but when we are united we can prevail,' she said. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
04-03-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
The data that reveal growing strains in the special relationship
Britain, the US and Russia have participated in 2,681 votes together at the United Nations Security Council since 1946. In that time, the US has sided with Russia over the UK on just 22 occasions. The most recent instance came last Monday, when the UK and Europe abstained from a US-drafted resolution calling for an end to the Ukraine conflict that omitted any criticism of Russia's actions. The short resolution was adopted, much to the dismay of Ukraine and its European allies. Before the vote that was held, on the third anniversary of Vladimir Putin's invasion, other than a disagreement over humanitarian relief to Gaza in 2023, you would have to go back to 1980 to find another example. The Security Council is one of the six principal organs of the UN, with a mandate to promote international peace through negotiation, the imposition of sanctions or, if necessary, the authorisation of force. A revolving roster of 10 nations joins the table for two-year terms, but five members have been permanent since its creation in the wake of the Second World War – the US, UK, France, China and Russia (formerly the USSR). According to UN Digital Library records of all resolutions voted upon over the past 70 years, the UK and France are the closest permanent members, voting the same way 98.2 per cent of the time. The US, for its part, was most aligned with the UK (97.1 per cent) and understandably, given their history, found least common cause with Russia (87.8 per cent). But the current turmoil is bucking these long-term trends and suggests the two nations are drifting apart in their special relationship'. The US and UK have only split votes 77 times, meaning entire years have often gone by with the pair 100 per cent like-minded. Over the past 12 months, however, this rate fell to 94.4 – its lowest level since 1997. In December, the US abstained in a vote on the establishment of an African Union Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia, citing dissatisfaction with its funding model. Last March, it did the same during a call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza during Ramadan. More broadly, the breakdown of the transatlantic alliance echoes growing disunity within the wider Security Council and the UN as a whole. The majority of resolutions put forward, despite being put to a vote, are to give assent to agreements already made. The most common form of dissent, therefore, is to abstain. The share of abstentions among all votes cast has risen steeply over the past decade, from 0.06 per cent in 2010 to beyond eight per cent last year. Only the five permanent members have recourse to a more drastic measure – their negative vote counting as a veto. According to Security Council Report, vetos empower them to 'defend their national interests, to uphold a tenet of their foreign policy or, in some cases, to promote a single issue of particular importance to a state'. There were eight vetos last year, the highest annual total since 1989 and the eighth-highest in 79 years overall. Three distinct phases emerge when looking at which country did the vetoing: the USSR was primarily responsible over the opening decades of the Cold War, the US then took the lead until 2008, from which point on Moscow began throwing up the most barriers once more. The USSR and Russia have been behind almost half (47.1 per cent) of all no-votes cast, a share that creeps up to 57.9 per cent over the past three years, coinciding with the three-year long Ukraine war. Speaking at an event after last Monday's event, Yevheniia Filipenko, Ukraine's ambassador, asked countries to continue their support for rebuilding Ukraine and seeking accountability for crimes committed since Russia's invasion. 'The road ahead is very challenging but when we are united we can prevail,' she said.
