Source: Arab News:
Saudi Arabia was one of the founding members of the United Nations in 1945. Since its establishment, Saudi Arabia has been one of the most active members and the one that paid its dues to the world body on time. I got my college degree from a New York institution, so I had many touring visits to the UN building. Some tour guides called it a matchbox because of its shape.
Until a week ago, two things amazed me about the United Nations. The first one is that Switzerland despite not being a member of the United Nations has more influence in the world affairs than many powerful countries that are UN members (as observers). The second thing is that no resolution can pass without the American consent. But, now there is one more thing that caught me by surprise. It is Saudi Arabia’s decision to reject a two-year stint on the United Nations Security Council. But, was I really surprised? A few days before the decision, I had written an article in a Saudi daily (Al Yaum) titled, “Saudi Arabia’s message to the United Nations”. The article was published on Oct. 6 — two days after Saudi Arabia canceled its scheduled speech at the United Nations. Many analysts who know Saudi Arabia knew the Saudi government wouldn’t adopt this approach for the sake of diplomacy unless there is something in the air. In other words, the Saudi cancellation of the speech was the tip of the iceberg. But, many would ask if Riyadh had intended to reject the seat why didn’t the Saudis withdraw their nomination before the election. The answer is simple — had the Saudis done so, many analysts would have said that Saudis were not sure of their win and they pulled out at the outset to save face, others would have commented that there were some demands by the Saudis that weren’t met or that the Saudis saw many impending UN moves which would not have been in its interest and it did not want to be part of it. Also, Saudi Arabia would not have been able to veto any UN resolution. The veto power rests with the United States, Russia, France, the United Kingdom and China. Also, earlier there were several messages from Saudi Arabia to the UN which apparently many think tanks and observers missed. Last February, the Saudi leadership expressed its dissatisfaction over the United Nations approach to many of the issues in the region.
Categories: Americas
The analysis are good but biased. Never ever before KSA raised its voice so loudly about the injustices done by UN. To me, being student of international affairs, Syrian matter forced KSA to adopt this agressive posture and might be at hint from Uncle Saam. However I also suggest no country has any right to veto. It should be simple majority for deciding important issue. Membership of security council can be increased keeping in view the updated development on the planet. Another suggestion could be shifting of UN Headquarter away from USA.
Spiritual leaders of Ahmadiyya Community, since long and repeatedly, had been highlighting the injustices done by the UN. However no one paid attention. Now with KSA jumping in a stirrer seems to have been created.
Saudis are extremely worried they realize soon they can be forced to fight against all odds on all four fronts.
By the way Switzerland is now a member (I would have voted against it, if I had been ‘around’). Not that it makes any difference.
As Muslims (or any other religious person) we know that the intention is important for any decision or action. The intention to create the United Nations was not good right from the beginning, as the Founding Member’s intention was to ‘control the world as Permanent Members of the Security Council with veto rights’. The rest of the world ‘can talk over there in the General Assembly – it will not have any effect’. Therefore the correct action for any nation should be to leave the UN.