why russia & china used veto(objected) in burma freedom& HR affairs...?

kunmingren said:

I think there are two main reason the China vetoed the resolution

1: it would be highly hypocritical for China to censur another countries over Democracy. China itself isnt posterboy for liberal democracy, and it would go against it policy of non-interference.

Click to expand...

China didn't have to vote for the resolution. It could have abstained, or even use a regular vote to oppose it. It's isn't a case of having to support or veto a resolution. China used to abstain all the time.

2: it have to show itself to third world country as a credible power that doesnt easily cave into American pressure.

Click to expand...

Or maybe it's showing that China will ignore what anyone else thinks if it wants to do something. The majority votes on the UNSC were for the resolution. And it wasn't just the US or developed countries that voted for it - Slovakia, Ghana and Peru also backed the resolution. It's wrong to imply poorer countries don't care about human rights - they do.

Gollevainen said:

Why I smell politics in here....
In order to retain the thread, keep it clean...

Gollevainen, Super moderator

Click to expand...

military and politics can not be separated ....you know what is politics?
what is military....who handle the military affairs.
why military hard wares produce?
business base on what?
let me know ur opinion....
Military is not white ,politicians& CIA,KGB,MI6 teams ... colouring the military to the colour what they need....

COLzaw68 said:

military and politics can not be separated ....you know what is politics?
what is military....who handle the military affairs.
why military hard wares produce?
business base on what?
let me know ur opinion....
Military is not white ,politicians& CIA,KGB,MI6 teams ... colouring the military to the colour what they need....

Click to expand...

Many military affairs are indeed related to politics, however here we generally try to avoid talking about purely political matters because it tends to create flame wars that lower the overall decor of the forum. That does not mean that good political discussions cannot occur, exceptions are sometimes made if everyone stays logical and civil, but more often than not it turns into a flamewar.

military and politics can not be separated ....you know what is politics?
what is military....who handle the military affairs.
why military hard wares produce?
business base on what?
let me know ur opinion....
Military is not white ,politicians& CIA,KGB,MI6 teams ... colouring the military to the colour what they need....

Click to expand...

Well like Zerling mentioned, our rules forbids discussion which is only about political aspects, and exspecially if it contains subjects that rises strong emotional feelings which are like bensin in internet forums, flames up even from the smallest spark. It's not matter of obinion, it's a rule set by the administrators and executed and monitored by the mods...

Votes in favour of the draft resolution on Myanmar: Belgium, France, Ghana, Italy, Panama, Peru, Slovakia, the UK and the US

Votes against the draft resolution: South Africa
Vetoes: China and Russia
Abtentations: Indonesia, Qatar and the Republic of the Congo

Notes: The most recent Council veto was used in November, when the US blocked a draft resolution that would have called, among other measures, for the withdrawal of Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip. Sponsored by Qatar, that text followed an Israeli military operation in the town of Beit Hanoun that killed 18 civilians.

The last time multiple vetoes were used was in 1989, when the US, the UK and France blocked a resolution on the situation in Panama. The last time China and Russia both vetoed a resolution was in 1972, and that concerned the Middle East.

Source: UN News Services

Number of Vetoes used since 2000: USA 10, Russia 2, China 1

Answer is simple

The same reason why US would veto any UN acts against Israel


It is in their best interest.

wdl1976 said:

Answer is simple

The same reason why US would veto any UN acts against Israel


It is in their best interest.

Click to expand...

Maybe it isn't in the US' best interest to veto any UN resolutions against Israel. Maybe it makes it more difficult to resolve the situation there.