Venezuela: Canciller Jorge Arreaza ante el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU 27/1/2019 – “la grosera intervención y los groseros mecanismos de injerencia de Estados Unidos”; UN Security Council speech transcript

…el Libertador Simón Bolívar dijo en 1829: “Los Estados Unidos parecen destinados por la providencia para plagar a la América de miseria a nombre de la libertad”

Del Gobierno Bolivariano de Venezuela
English dubbed video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mubL1aVaG8I

Tenemos que agradecerle al señor Mike Pompeo que ante el fracaso del pasado 24 jueves en la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA), no tuvieron la suficiente fuerza para imponer un resolución y apelaron a la convocatoria del Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas (ONU). Ya veníamos nosotros, e incluso el Presidente Maduro, pensando en llamar a esta instancia para debatir no tanto el caso de Venezuela sino la grosera intervención y los groseros mecanismos de injerencia de Estados Unidos (de América) en nuestro país. Tenemos que decir que en esta oportunidad Estados Unidos no está detrás del golpe de Estado, está delante del golpe de Estado, está a la vanguardia del golpe de Estado, ellos dan y dictan las órdenes no sólo a la oposición venezolana sino también a los gobiernos satélites de Estados Unidos en la región y pareciera que en Europa y otras partes del mundo.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Venezuela at the UN Security with proof of U.S. “blatant and gross intervention” directing the coup d’etat, reviews history of U.S. interventions; Iran Contra’s Ellliott Abrams speaks, Russia and Venezuela respond (VIDEO)

Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza asks: Which article of the Venezuela Constitution or which provision of the United Nations Charter provides the legal basis for the self-proclamation of an individual who wasn’t elected by anyone as president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela?

https://www.c-span.org/video/?457308-7/un-security-council-meeting-situation-venezuela
38:35

Venezuela Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza addressed the UN Security Council January 26, 2019.

U.S. Special Envoy to Venezuela Elliott Abrams, a prominent figure from IranContra, responded. This was followed by responses by Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia and Venezuela Foreign Minister Arreaza.

Excerpt of Venezuela Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza’s remarks: 

 

At last we have a chance to speak. We have a written text but before that, I wanted to share some thoughts with you. Indeed, we can even thank Mr. Mike Pompeo because in the face of failure at the OAS Organization of American States on the 24th of January, they didn’t have enough weight to impose a resolution. Well, they convened a meeting of the Security Council. In fact, we, President Maduro thought of appealing to this body not only to debate not only the case of Venezuela but rather the blatant and gross intervention and mechanisms of interference by the United States in our country. And we want to say at this opportunity, In this case, the United States is not behind the coup d’etat. It is in advance, it’s in the vanguard of the coup d’etat. It is dictating the orders, not only to the Venezuelan opposition but also to the satellite governments in the region, and it seems in Europe and the other parts of the world.

Continue reading

Syrian ambassador’s excellent speech to the UN Security Council, April 7 — transcript (VIDEO)

UN Security Council meeting
April 7, 2017

Video from C-SPAN

https://www.c-span.org/video/?426668-1/un-security-council-holds-emergency-meeting-us-airstrikes-syria

1:45:50 – 1:57:26

Syrian Ambassador to the UN Bashar al Ja’Afari

At the outset, my delegation wishes to thank both the Russian Federation and Bolivia that joined us in calling for the convening of this urgent meeting.

I have a question at the very outset to the under-Secretary General who stated that Syrian Arab Republic perpetrated an act of aggression without defining that act by the terms of the Charter of the United Nations.

The United States at 3:42 at dawn today, April 7, 2017, waged a barbaric, flagrant act of aggression against a base of the Syrian Arab Air Force in the central area of the country using a number of missiles which led to a number of martyrs, many injured, including women and children, and wide-ranging material damage.

This treacherous act of aggression is a grave violation of the Charter of the United Nations as well as all international norms and laws.

The United States attempted to justify it with empty pretexts, fabricated arguments, claiming that the Syrian Arab Army had used the chemical weapons in Khan Sheikhoun, without genuine knowledge of what happened, without identifying who was responsible, the very same pretexts shouted out by terrorist organizations as well as their handlers in Washington and in ___Riyadh, ____Tex Aviv, London, and Paris, as well as their media.

The Syrian Arab Republic has stressed that the Syrian Arab Army does not have chemical weapons in the first place, and that it would never use such weapons in any of its operations against armed terrorist groups, that it condemns the use of such weapons as being unjustified under any conditions.

Let me stress that it is well-known that those weapons had been used and stockpiled in many parts of Syria by terrorist armed organizations in cooperation, or rather with a wink and a nudge, by some ruling regimes in the region and outside, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and some European states.

They completely ignore all the facts and documented information on the use of chemical weapons by terrorists in many parts of the Syrian Arab Republic.

This aggression would surely send erroneous messages to these terrorist groups, emboldening them to use chemical weapons in the future and to continue perpetrating terrorist acts against the Syrian civilians. Jabhat al Nusra and ISIL, both terrorist organizations, and associated terrorist organizations, following this aggression, did wage many attacks on many parts of Syria. The Syrian Arab Army and its allies in the war against terrorism are confronting them, despite attempts to support them. The American aggression is under this umbrella.

This condemnable aggression is a grave extrapolation of the same erroneous American strategy that began six years ago: one of providing all forms of assistance to what the United States called moderate armed opposition groups. This strategy harms counterterrorism by the Syrian Arab Army and its partners. It makes the United States of America a partner of ISIL and Jabhat al Nusra and other terrorist groups that since day one of the unjust war against Syria have attacked army positions and military bases as well as the infrastructure.

Let me recall in this Council that the United States of America leads a purported alliance against ISIL. However, the real achievements of that coalition is to kill civilians and to strike at infrastructure in Syria. Its real objective is to weaken the Syrian Arab Army and its allies when confronting terrorist groups. In this regard, we see the air strike by the aircraft of this coalition illegally against the Syrian Arab Army in the Jabal Tharda in the city of Deir Ezzor on 17 September 2016 in an attempt to protect ISIL elements falling between Syrian and Iraqi territory and opening a corridor for them.

Today’s aggression aimed at saving the Jabhat al Nusra following the grave damage that was done to them by the Syrian Arab Army and its allies in the center of the country following their attack on cities and peaceful villages in the region.

Let me also stress that media reports tell us that the U.S. Congress some time ago approved a law allowing the U.S. administration to send manpads to armed terrorist groups in Syria.

We have warned only two days ago in this very Council that these colonialists, permanent member states in the Security Council, the three colonialists have a renewed appetite to renew their lies and their stories that have been spread by the United States and the United Kingdom 14 years ago in this very hall to justify the destruction and occupation of Iraq using a major lie – being WMDs. Perhaps history has come full circle now in a regrettable scenario when we saw Secretary of State Colin Powell at the time trying to delude the international community and the United Nations to justify the aggression of his country against Iraq by talking about highly credible information.

Today the United States of America in its policy, in an attempt to justify its aggression against Syria, is using fabricated information provided by the Jabhat al Nusra terrorists.

This aggression incontrovertibly proves that Syria has been correct: that successive American administrations will not change their sterile policies, which is to target states to make peoples kneel to their will and spread hegemony around the world.

International public opinion, the people of the free world, have no doubt that the successive United States, UK, and French administrations for decades have not cared for democracy or freedom or human rights, indeed, let alone the welfare of people or their security and stability. These are just pretexts to wage war, to occupy other states, to divide them, to control their wealth and energy resources.

What is truly disgusting today is that these governments that supported the Wahhabi thinking, the terrorist extremist ideology of the House of Saud since its creation, is today orchestrating terrorism and investing in it without any care for the lives of people, even their own peoples when terrorism reaches their own threshold because of these wrong and hypocritical policies.

The Syrian Arab Republic strongly condemns the active aggression by the United States of America which is counter to the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, indeed with the status of the United States as a permanent member of the Security Council which is responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security. Let alone that these aggressions really promise total chaos in many parts of the world and will make the law of the jungle the only way to deal with the regional and economic crises without any heed to the Charter of the United Nations.

When you kill millions of innocents starting in South Asia all the way through Latin America, what was your position? A member from France spoke on the issue and spoke about exceptions.

You should not be the exception.

You should be made accountable for the killings in July of 2017 [2016?] of hundreds by your war planes.

You in the international coalition must be held accountable for the killing of 800 civilians in Syria at the beginning of 2017.

You must be made accountable for your support of armed terrorist groups and their political cover there, too, as they continue their terrorist acts.

The government of the Syrian Arab Republic, proceeding from its belief that all efforts must be mobilized to counteract terrorism, as it respects the rules of international law, the Charter of the United Nations, calls on the Security Council to shoulder its responsibilities according to the Charter to condemn this act of aggression and to ensure that it shall not be repeated.

It is an act that threatens peace and security in the region and the world.”

U.S. blocks Moscow’s statement at UNSC on shelling of Russian Embassy in Syria

Global Research, October 05, 2016
Sputnik 5 October 2016

The United States blocked at the United Nations Security Council Russia’s statement on the shelling of its embassy in Damascus, Syria that took place on Monday, the representative of Russia’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations told RIA Novosti.

“[The statement] was actually blocked by the US delegation, which tried to add extraneous elements in a standard in such cases text,” the permanent mission statement said.

“The British and Ukrainians clumsily played up to the Americans. It demonstrates their blatant disrespect for the Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations,” the statement added.

On October 4, the Russian Foreign Ministry reported the shelling of the Russian embassy in Damascus on Monday. One of the mines exploded near a residential complex on the territory of the embassy but none of its staff was hurt.

According to the ministry statement, the embassy was shelled from the Jobar municipality controlled by Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (formerly known as al-Nusra Front) and Faylaq al-Rahman militant groups.

On October 3, US State Department announced in a press release that Washington was cutting off participation in bilateral channels with Russia on sustaining a ceasefire agreement in Syria, which was reached by the two countries in September.

Two moves ahead: Russia refuses to slip into Ukrainian trap

August 11, 2016 –

By Eduard Popov for Fort Russ

Translated by J. Arnoldski

A few hours ago, a meeting of the UN Security Council, urgently convened in connection to Ukraine’s saboteur attacks on the territory of Russian Crimea, came to a close. The session was convened on Ukraine’s initiative, which is something of a strange incident. Usually, the injured side is the one to initiate such a meeting. In this case, the offended party is Russia, two of whose officers were killed at the hands of Ukrainian terrorists. Either Ukrainian diplomats turned out to be more agile than the Russians, or the convening of the UN Security Council session was merely a debriefing session. In my opinion, the second version appears to be more relevant. It is of even greater importance that the session was a closed one, which gives rise to even more anxiety.

As Russia’s permanent UN representative, Vitaly Churkin, stated, the meeting was useful for Russia insofar as it offered the opportunity to convey to other countries comprehensive information on the incident in Crimea. At the same time, the diplomat did not limit himself to merely informing his foreign colleagues about the Crimean incident, but also brought forth the Russian point of view on events in Donbass. Churkin advised the Ukrainian government to cease the conflict in Donbass and “stop shelling civilians.”

Currently known information on the UN Security Council meeting is quite limited. Nevertheless, some conclusions can be drawn and some previously made predications can be reinforced.

1. Today in an interview for a Russian publication, I expressed the opinion that there will be no war with Ukraine at this stage. I posited that the words of Churkin quite clearly confirm this view. Despite all the negative perceptions of the Ukrainian leadership as now even being “terrorist,” Russia is still ready (or compelled) to negotiate with it. Many hot heads in Russia will be disappointed with such restraint on the part of Russian diplomacy. But I believe that this is the only reasonable behavior to have in such an uncertain situation. The plans of the terrorist attacks’ organizers included a lavish display of the Ukrainian side’s intentions with shooting from Ukrainian territory and the shelling of Russian soldiers. There would have been no need for deliberate demonstrativeness, as the terrorist attack itself would have been arranged quietly and then, the organizers of the attack (obviously not Ukrainians, but useful tools in foreign hands) hoped for an emotional reaction from Russia.

Society has indeed expressed its frustration and replied with calls to punish Ukraine up to the point of sending in Russian troops. However, Russia’s political and military leadership has turned out to be more restrained and does not wish to act in a way predictable for the opponent, or play according to their rules. There is the danger of a direct military clash between Russia and Ukraine, but it is minimal. Otherwise, there would have already been such a war. That a war of this sort hasn’t been started yet is exclusively the merit of Russia, despite Ukraine’s efforts.

2. Vitaly Churkin’s words linked the incident in Crimea to the situation in Donbass while simultaneously appealing to Russia’s European partners’ opinions. Russia, as a victim of Ukrainian terrorism, is hoping for understanding on the part of its Western partners from the Normandy Quartet, who are supposed to put pressure on the Kiev regime. However, the recent statement by the French Foreign Ministry urging the conflicting parties to come to a peaceful agreement leaves little chance that the West will cooperate. The US State Department has supported all of Ukraine’s actions without “noticing” their terrorist character.

We can only guess what specific actions the Russian side will subsequently take against Ukraine if Kiev violates the ceasefire in Donbass. Judging by Vladimir Putin’s statements, Russia could abandon the Normandy Format. Without a doubt, the negotiation process over Donbass would continue in some kind of new form, either without Ukraine’s participation, or with strict control over its actions in Crimea. Admittedly, it is difficult to speak of an specifics on this question.

3. Despite the patience of President Putin and Russian diplomacy, a war with Ukraine seems to be only a matter of time away. Ukraine itself is deliberately provoking Russia to take this step. On August 11th, the holding of military exercises in Southern Ukraine and marine corps’ exercises were announced and Poroshenko gave the order to put troops in a state of high alert and move them up to the border of Russian Crimea. This is a game of muscle-flexing and a provocation against Russia. According to Chekhov’s famous play, if a gun hangs on the wall in the first act, then it will necessarily be shot in the last.

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/08/two-moves-ahead-russia-refuses-to-slip.html