Security Council: Failure to Act on Urgent Crisis in the Middle East
A Syrian soldier wearing nuclear–biological–chemical warfare mask. Photo Credit: http://tinyurl.com/mgzvd3v
On December 13, 2014, Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) spokesman Abu Mohammed al Adnani claimed to possess Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in a public statement, requesting for the withdrawal of the Western military from the Middle East in two days, especially US-led coalition. Concern over the incident was soon aroused among delegates with Nigeria doubting the accountability of Adnani’s statement.
During a high-level debate on whether to withdraw the troops, divisions were seen between two blocs led respectively by Russian Federation and USA. China and Russian Federation, sponsors of DR 2/2, urged USA and all the other Western powers to consent to the request proposed by ISIS, thus, ensuring the safety of all civilians and earning more time for information gathering and combating mission.
However, questioned by USA, one of the sponsors of DR 2/1, “How can we be sure that ISIS won’t attack us after the Western military withdraws from the Middle East? The obligation of the US government is to ensure the safety of our civilians. Any potential threats to the international security would not be tolerated.”
There continued to be significant gaps in the viewpoints adopted by two blocs, which foreshadowed the failure of reaching consensus on the crisis in the Middle East. The voting on DR 2/1 and DR 2/2 both showed seven member states in favor and seven against and both with vetoing from the permanent member states. As a result, SC passed no resolutions in today’s session.
Apart from the failure in responding to the urgent crisis, one DR has been forwarded to the Dias this afternoon, striking to solve the problems in Syria with short-term and long-term solutions.












