By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, September 26 -- After the US and Russia introduced their draft Syria resolution to the full UN Security Council on Thursday night, the ambassadors of Russia, the US and UK came out to take questions. Inner City Press asked each of them a different question.
To Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, Inner City Press asked about Operative Paragraph 21 of the draft resolution:
"Compliance 21. Decides, in the event of non-compliance with this resolution, including unauthorized transfer of chemical weapons, or any use of chemical weapons by anyone in the Syrian Arab Republic, to impose measures under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter"
Inner City Press asked, that would involve coming back to the Council, to determine non-compliance, right? Video here, from Minute 2:47.
Churkin said yes, I think this is clear. This is taken verbatim from the Geneva agreement, one has to read it carefully, every word and comma are very important.
To US Ambassador Samantha Power, Inner City Press asked about Operative Paragraph 15:
"Accountability 15. Expresses its strong conviction that those individuals responsible for the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic should be held accountable"
Inner City Press asked, what does this mean? Should be held accountable where? Video here, from Minute 8:44.
Power said, "it is essential to see that taking chemical weapons away that just used them is a very intense form of accountability, not a traditional form of accountability of the kind you are describing, of course... The ICC, you know as well as we do, the resistance we and others have faced in pushing forward criminal accountability, we have supported acct of all kind from the beginning... the day will come."
To UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant, Inner City Press asked about the earlier meeting of "Group of Friends of Syrian people in honour of the President of the National Coalition of Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces Mr. Ahmad Al-Assi Al-Jarba" -- since many of the armed groups in Syria have rejected Jarba, where does that leave him? (Inner City Press asked the same of Khaled Saleh, Jarba's spokesperson, video here.)
Lyall Grant admitted "that will be a challenge," but pointed at how many other countries recognize Jarba. He put the number at 117. But doesn't legitimacy have to come from people INSIDE Syria?
From the UK (fast) transcript (USUN transcript, and draft resolution, below)
Inner City Press: In the Group of Friends meeting that took place down the hall, your minister Alistair Burt spoke out, and it seems like the--the Syrian National Coun-- the opposition council that was there has been kind of denounced by some of the armed groups in the country. Some of them are Al Nusra and ISIS, but some of them are not, some of them are actually part of the Free Syrian Army, so what do you-- It seemed like all the governments in there were saying this is the legitimate representative of the Syrian people, but how are you gonna deal with the actual armed oppositions on the ground that's fighting the Assad government. What's the idea of sort of speaking with these guys who are not there, and who are actually now being kind of denounced from some of the armed groups? What's your thinking on that?
Amb. Lyall Grant: That will be challenge. I mean, clearly, it's important that when the Geneva Conference happens-- the second Geneva Conference happens, that there should be two delegations. There should be a delegation from the Syrian regime, and there should be a delegation representing the opposition. At the moment, of course there are many splits in the opposition, but the Syrian National Coalition who came here to the United Nations this afternoon, they are the legitimate representatives that 117 countries in the world have recognised as the legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. So they will certainly be the people who are representing the opposition at a Geneva conference. Now, they themselves recognise that there are some groups that are outside their umbrella. They have been reaching out to number of them, there are others that they reject because they say that they are terrorists and they don't support our aims for a pluralist, democratic future in Syria, and they will have to be marginalised. So, yes, it's a challenge, but clearly, as you saw from the huge numbers of people who came to see the Syrian National Coalition, they are recognised very widely by nearly 2/3 of the UN membership as the legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. Thank you very much indeed. Watch this site.
Watch this site. Here's the USUN transcript of Samantha Power:
Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about the accountability section where it says, you know, it seems to say, expresses its strong conviction that those responsible shall be held accountable. I just wonder, what does that mean -- should be held accountable where? What does it mean in terms of accountability as you have said it for this event, where does this paragraph lead?
Ambassador Power: Well I think it’s very, very important to note that this is a profound, this is a …let me put it a different way.
It is essential to see that taking chemical weapons away from a regime that just used chemical weapons, not just on August 21st, but in a whole series of occasions over the last year, is a very intense form of accountability. It is not a traditional form of accountability, the kind that you are describing, of course. But if there is any, I am not sure that there is any better acknowledgement of the world’s horror and outrage than the fact that the very instrument of terror that was employed is being taken away from that regime, so I think that’s a very, very important feature of accountability for the attack that they carried out on the 21st of August.
As regards, of course to the ICC and issues of that nature, you know, you know as well as we do the resistance that we and others have faced in pushing forward criminal accountability and again, let me say that we, the United States, have supported accountability of all kinds from the very beginning of this conflict. We supported the Commission of Inquiry, we’ve supported the Syrian Justice and Accountability Center, the evidence is being gathered. The day will come. This is a resolution narrowly focused on taking Syria’s chemical weapons program away, eliminating it so that it can do no further damage of the kind it did so recently.
