ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

A+| A| A-

From 50 Years Ago (21 October 2006)

Minister have emphasised

FROM 50 YEARS AGO veto, the second part of the Anglo-French Both Mr Dulles and the British Foreign

resolution could not have been enforced by Minister have emphasised “the strong moral

the Security Council or by a combination of force” behind the Anglo-French resolution.

the supporting Powers without resort to force. This is a biased interpretation of the voting

By using the veto, Russia has succeeded in in the Security Council. It is absurd to main

enhancing the prestige of the Security Coun-tain that the nine affirmative votes for the Vol VIII, No 42, October 20, 1956 cil as an organisation whose prime function Anglo-French proposal for international con

is to attain and to maintain peace. trol of the Canal mean a moral victory forSuez Deadlock Five years ago, the Security Council issued Britain and France. America has voted for this

a directive against the Egyptian blockade of proposal in return for the Anglo-French

(Editorial)

Israeli ships through the Suez Canal. That acceptance of Washington’s policy of restraint.

For the 78th time, Russia exercised her veto directive went unheeded, and was not Britain and France are the two main aggrieved in the Security Council against that part of the enforced. Through the Russian veto, the nations...Belgium’s vote for the Anglo-French Anglo-French resolution which endorsed the Security Council has been able, this time, to plan is more a reflection of her European 18-nation plan for international control of the maintain peace in West Asia, instead of origin and association than liberal inclina-Suez Canal. Foreign Ministers of Britain, exhibiting its ineffectiveness, as in the case tions of her Foreign Minister. Formosa and France and America have admonished the of the Egyptian blockade of Israeli ships. Peru and Cuba, along with other Latin Ameri-Soviet Union for using the veto. But informed Only on one occasion, when the Russian can countries, are tied to the apron strings of world opinion will approve M Shepilov’s boycott deprived the Security Council of the America. This detailed analysis of the voting action as a positive gesture of peace. This is safety-value of the veto, it took a decision, in the Security Council disproves the Western not the first time that Russia has succeeded which later information had proved unjust. Powers’ claim that the majority vote in favour in easing the tension, or averting war, by the Experience confirms the continued necessity of the Anglo-French resolution is a moral use of her veto. Even without the Russian of the veto. victory for Britain and France.

Economic and Political Weekly October 21, 2006

Dear Reader,

To continue reading, become a subscriber.

Explore our attractive subscription offers.

Click here

Back to Top