Chrétien Pushes U.N. Veto Plan

Toronto Star ^ | Jul. 14, 2003 | Sandro Contenta

[Terp]

BAGSHOT, England—Leaders of centre-left governments are considering a Canadian-proposal that would allow military intervention — without U.N. approval — in countries where large-scale loss of life or ethnic cleansing is imminent.

The proposal would let "coalitions of the willing" act on their own if only one permanent member of the U.N. Security Council vetoed a resolution authorizing military intervention for human protection, a senior Canadian official said yesterday.

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said the aim is to prevent "capricious vetoes" from tying the international community's hands in the face of outrageous abuses of human rights.

"If you have unanimity, and one of the members uses a veto, that becomes a bit of a capricious veto," Chretien said.

[PhiKapMom]

Give me a break! It is okay to have the "coalition of the willing" go into Africa but not Iraq? This from the man that was against the War in Iraq? What am I missing here?

[Support Free Republic]

50,000 people go to a baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund is then due. The team is about to mail refunds when the Congressional Democrats stopps them and decrees that they send out refund amounts based on the Democrat National Committee's interpretation of fairness. After all,if the refunds are made based on the price each person paid for the tickets, most of the money would go to the wealthiest ticket holders. That would be unconscionable!

Free Republic

Your donations keep us fighting liberals

[El Conservador]

So the logic is:

"Torpedo everything US does, but if there's a third-world country in civil war, and invading it is a good PC campaign, then screw the UN"

Wow, I thought they didn't have double standards. </sarcasm>

[max_rpf]

On the surface this seems to make sense, and would have been useful in Iraq, but NO WAY.

This would defy the whole purpose of having a veto. This would degenerate into majority rules in the security council. We created this beast, and kept the veto to keep it from getting out of control. If we go for this we deserve to go the way of the Romans.

[McGavin999]

I'd go along with that as long as the one giving the veto didn't have to contribute troops, logistics, or funds.

[max_rpf]

Very nice ;)