Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Voltian
Ik zal de relevante passage hier dan maar even kopieren:
"
While we agree that the presidency of the Security Council should have the space to propose briefers, they must be relevant to and knowledgeable of the topic under discussion. Unfortunately, that is not the case for one of today’s briefers. Mr. Bustani is a distinguished diplomat, but given his departure from the OPCW many years before it considered the Syria chemical weapons file, he is not in a position to provide relevant knowledge or information on the implementation of resolution 2118 (2013), unlike, for example, the current Director General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
"
"
I am honoured to have been invited to present a statement for this meeting of the Security Council to discuss the Syrian chemical dossier and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). As the OPCW’s first Director General, a position I held from 1997 to 2002, I naturally retain a keen interest in the evolution and fortunes of the
organization.
"
Met andere woorden. Rusland voert een voormalig hoofd van OCPW op, die daar al meer dan 15 jaar weg is (!), als zou hij relevante info kunnen aanreiken. Bovendien lijkt de man een beetje rancuneus, zo blijkt uit zijn statement:
"
or those who are not aware, I was removed from office, following a United States-orchestrated campaign in 2002, for — ironically — trying to uphold the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)
"
Connect the dots Bach...
|
Dat laat ik even aan China over:
Mr. Geng Shuang (China) (spoke in Chinese): With
regard to the explanations offered by the representative
of the United Kingdom and others, I must say that I still
fail to understand. As we said earlier, in accordance
with rule 39, we have invited other civil society
representatives, non-governmental organizations and
experts to brief Security Council members whose
professionalism and representativeness were absolutely
no match for Mr. Bustani. However, in those instances
no objections have been raised so that the work of the
Council might proceed.
I fail to understand why the representatives
of the United Kingdom and other members have
such difficulty in accepting the invitation issued to
Mr. Bustani as a briefer. I wish to point out that this
simply exposes a double standard. Why should it be
possible that some people can be invited as briefers but
not Mr. Bustani? His expertise and representativeness
are totally beyond dispute.
I would hope that our colleague from the United
Kingdom and others can, with regard to the issues
on the Council’s agenda, listen to different views and
keep an open mind on the issues under discussion.
What I think is that they simply do not want to listen
to differing views.
They say that they are objective and
fair, but that is simply not the case.