Russia vetoes UN resolution on MH17 tribunal

Russia vetoes UN resolution on MH17 tribunal

Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution Wednesday that sought to set up a special tribunal to try those responsible for shooting down flight MH17 over Ukraine.

Eleven of the 15 members of the Security Council voted in favor of the resolution, which had been drafted by Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine.

Russia exercised its veto. Angola, China and Venezuela abstained. The Council session began with a moment's silence in honor of the 298 people killed in the July 17, 2014 disaster.

The resolution was supported by Britain, France and the US, which accuse pro-Russian separatist rebels of shooting down the Boeing 777 with a Buk surface-to-air missile supplied by Russia.

Moscow denies involvement and blames the Ukrainian military. On Wednesday, its ambassador Vitaly Churkin launched into a lengthy defense of Russia's actions, dishing the blame onto others.

Churkin said Russian investigators had been denied equal access to the crash site and criticized what he said would have been criminal prosecution carried out "in a closed fashion."

Click link for remainder of article...

not a surprise considering Russia stated if the council gets 9 votes or more in favor Russia would veto. In this case Russia veto's, 3 countries abstained and the remainder voted in favor of the tribunal. One of the excuses Russia gave was their investigators don't have the same access as other countries investigations. What Russia ignored is the fact those countries who lost citizens are involved where as no Russian citizens were lost.

This does nothing but adds to the suspicion of possible Russian involvement.

Its interesting that Churkin will blame others yet refuses to accept a tribunal to hold those others accountable.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Russia vetoes UN resolution on MH17 tribunal

Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution Wednesday that sought to set up a special tribunal to try those responsible for shooting down flight MH17 over Ukraine.

Eleven of the 15 members of the Security Council voted in favor of the resolution, which had been drafted by Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine.

Russia exercised its veto. Angola, China and Venezuela abstained. The Council session began with a moment's silence in honor of the 298 people killed in the July 17, 2014 disaster.

The resolution was supported by Britain, France and the US, which accuse pro-Russian separatist rebels of shooting down the Boeing 777 with a Buk surface-to-air missile supplied by Russia.

Moscow denies involvement and blames the Ukrainian military. On Wednesday, its ambassador Vitaly Churkin launched into a lengthy defense of Russia's actions, dishing the blame onto others.

Churkin said Russian investigators had been denied equal access to the crash site and criticized what he said would have been criminal prosecution carried out "in a closed fashion."

Click link for remainder of article...

not a surprise considering Russia stated if the council gets 9 votes or more in favor Russia would veto. In this case Russia veto's, 3 countries abstained and the remainder voted in favor of the tribunal. One of the excuses Russia gave was their investigators don't have the same access as other countries investigations. What Russia ignored is the fact those countries who lost citizens are involved where as no Russian citizens were lost.

This does nothing but adds to the suspicion of possible Russian involvement.

Its interesting that Churkin will blame others yet refuses to accept a tribunal to hold those others accountable.

I admittedly don't know the law but, why are countries even allowed to veto an investigation into a suspected war crime? Just seems odd to me.

a reply to: In4ormant

Because Russia, China, the US, UK, and France are permanent members to the security council and as such, have the ability to VETO UNSC resolutions. When Russia annexed Crimea they veto'd a resolution condemning it. Instead they had to settle with a vote by the entire UN (non binding) to condemn Russian actions.

In this case I think Russia is trying to protect itself and in the process are just making it harder on themselves.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: In4ormant

Because Russia, China, the US, UK, and France are permanent members to the security council and as such, have the ability to VETO UNSC resolutions. When Russia annexed Crimea they veto'd a resolution condemning it. Instead they had to settle with a vote by the entire UN (non binding) to condemn Russian actions.

In this case I think Russia is trying to protect itself and in the process are just making it harder on themselves.

I would generally agree with the "why". I just don't see how it should even be a voting issue. That's like saying China and Russia could secretly commit acts of terrorism against Japan and all either would have to do is veto a vote to investigate. I would think once a war crime is suspected it wouldn't need a vote.

a reply to: In4ormant

In this instance the parties involved want an official UN tribunal established to prosecute those involved. A UN tribunal has the ability t force a nations compliance where a single countries own judicial system cannot. A tribunal also removes the bias charges charge from countries involved were it to be held at the national level instead of global.

IE a tribunal by the UN would be harder to undermine and discredit than if the court procedures were held in Ukraine, where Russia would most assuredly have issues.

a reply to: Xcathdra

not a surprise considering Russia stated if the council gets 9 votes or more in favor Russia would veto. In this case Russia veto's, 3 countries abstained and the remainder voted in favor of the tribunal. One of the excuses Russia gave was their investigators don't have the same access as other countries investigations.

Not sure where you get your sources from on the above but Russia will still help in the investigation:

Russian U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said it was premature to set up an international tribunal. He said the draft resolution was submitted for a vote by Malaysia and its co-sponsors with the knowledge that it would be vetoed.

Quote from Russian UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin:

"This in our view indicates the fact that political purposes were more important for them than practical objectives. This of course is regrettable," Churkin said. "Russia stands ready to cooperate in the conduct of a full, independent and objective investigation of the reasons and circumstances of the crash."

uk.reuters.com...

This does nothing but adds to the suspicion of possible Russian involvement.

Everything with you always does

originally posted by: In4ormant

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: In4ormant

Because Russia, China, the US, UK, and France are permanent members to the security council and as such, have the ability to VETO UNSC resolutions. When Russia annexed Crimea they veto'd a resolution condemning it. Instead they had to settle with a vote by the entire UN (non binding) to condemn Russian actions.

In this case I think Russia is trying to protect itself and in the process are just making it harder on themselves.

I would generally agree with the "why". I just don't see how it should even be a voting issue. That's like saying China and Russia could secretly commit acts of terrorism against Japan and all either would have to do is veto a vote to investigate. I would think once a war crime is suspected it wouldn't need a vote.

It's more like saying Israel can commit war crimes in Palestine and the U.S. will always veto any resolution or investigation...
Because then it's not a hypothetical example.

As for this investigation, if Russia are not receiving all the details then why shouldn't they veto it...
That stinks of scapegoating/a set up.

Good for Russia.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs



As for this investigation, if Russia are not receiving all the details then why shouldn't they veto it...

If the investigatin was set up then Russia would have the same access as anyone else.

Without it Malaysia, Ukraine, Netherlands and Australia have agreed to their own criminal investigation, not including Russia...and so Russia "now" will not have access to that.

So if that is the reasoning then it is arse-about-face.

That stinks of scapegoating/a set up.

an imaginary one.

Good for Russia.

Shame on you for making shirt up! :p

More evidence of the value of the UN... can we just disband this folly... it was nice in concept, but corrupted from day 1...


Give NY back their land, I am sure some savvy business men could turn a profit on that plot of land that has failed humanity...

a reply to: In4ormant

Because the UN is a joke.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
As for this investigation, if Russia are not receiving all the details then why shouldn't they veto it...
That stinks of scapegoating/a set up.

Good for Russia.

Why would they be receiving details as of now when their country is not involved? If they want the details they need to get involved ... which they just vetoed doing.

one remark:

if it would have come to an tribunal
wat are the odds that that it would be an FAIR trial ???????
couse the taking douwn of MH17 was only an small part of all politic interesstes concerning the ukraine

originally posted by: In4ormant
I admittedly don't know the law but, why are countries even allowed to veto an investigation into a suspected war crime? Just seems odd to me.

I agree, this seems to be a flaw in the UN process and one that was seemingly brushed away through naiveté.
The hope was probably that member nations would never act in such a way to begin with, seeing as it would cause significant suspicion and condemnation from other nations.

But of course Russia either doesn't give a damn about the dead and their families finding the truth, or they want to attempt to prevent the truth from becoming known.

That's really all there is to this - either Russia is so petty and so vindictive that it would deliberately act against the victims of this mass murder, or it was complicit and is scared that this would come to light through a UN tribunal. There is no other reason for Russia to veto this.

Clearly the UN needs to change procedure. It should not be possible for one member to hold the entire collective to ransom like this, especially not over issues such as these.

originally posted by: Rocker2013

I agree, this seems to be a flaw in the UN process and one that was seemingly brushed away through naiveté.
The hope was probably that member nations would never act in such a way to begin with, seeing as it would cause significant suspicion and condemnation from other nations.

But of course Russia either doesn't give a damn about the dead and their families finding the truth, or they want to attempt to prevent the truth from becoming known.

I would say it was actually more that none of the players who mattered would join unless they had the ability to protect themselves. This was not naivete, this is working as intended.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Russia vetoes UN resolution on MH17 tribunal.

And well they might.

Ever since this event occurred there has been nothing but allegation and smear of Russia.

Allegation is NOT Evidence!!!.

If the claim that the plane was shot down with a Russian BOK missile is true, and this constitutes the bulk of or the main evidence, that would be submitted, then this same method of establishing guilt, also means that every person who has been killed in the world by an American made gun or bullet in the last xyz years, was killed by the Americans.

Would those who would claim the Russians are guilty using the claim also claim the Americans are also guilty of killing possibility millions, and the Americans are therefore guilty of Genocide and should hauled before an international court????

originally posted by: Azureblue

Ever since this event occurred there has been nothing but allegation and smear of Russia.

Allegation is NOT Evidence!!!.

Then should they not welcome taking active part in an investigation about evidence?

a reply to: Azureblue

You have one big logic fail. If indeed Russia is in scent they would be the first screaming for their day on court. Notice the only other country it could possibly be namely Ukraine is pushing very hard. Odd don't you think Ukraine wants it to go to trial but Russia wants to block said trial. I'd say to me that fact alone says a lot don't you think?

Russia is not involved in the investigation since it did not occur in Russian territory, no Russian citizens were aboard the flight and the aircraft in question was not produced by a Russian company nor did it belong to a Russian airline.

Secondly Russia didn't exactly throw open the doors on their investigation when the President of Polands plane crashed in 2010 in Russia.

UNSC MH17 meeting - 2+ hours English

a reply to: Xcathdra

Russia is not involved in the investigation since it did not occur in Russian territory, no Russian citizens were aboard the flight and the aircraft in question was not produced by a Russian company nor did it belong to a Russian airline.

Well the only connection they would have is that one of their citizens was the one who brought it down...and I am not saying it was, but that would be their only connection to this crash.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Xcathdra

Russia is not involved in the investigation since it did not occur in Russian territory, no Russian citizens were aboard the flight and the aircraft in question was not produced by a Russian company nor did it belong to a Russian airline.

Well the only connection they would have is that one of their citizens was the one who brought it down...and I am not saying it was, but that would be their only connection to this crash.

You forget supplying said rocket that shot down the airliner. There is no doubt it was Russian made the only question is how they got it.