U.N. General Assembly isn't the right forum for dealing with Burma regime

U.N. resolutions and statements have not deterred the military from pursuing its agenda. U.N. special envoys come and go without achieving any substantive results. Effective U.N. intervention could only take place when a legally binding resolution can be passed by the Security Council.

Article 41 under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter states that: “The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures...”

For any Security Council binding resolution to happen, the support of all five permanent members is necessary. This is why the Burmese military leaders have been vigorously wooing China and Russia by strengthening economic and military ties, among others.

Without the Security Council's endorsement, resolutions and statements by the different U.N. agencies, including the General Assembly, would only remain as paper tigers. The good offices of the Secretary General also has limited roles, and the Secretary General himself is as frustrated as anyone.

If there is no change in the veto power system, unilateral action could be one other option to look into. If neither of the two options are exercised, the international community should explore other possible pragmatic strategies.

The U.N. General Assembly is not the right forum that can deliver change in Burma.

Nehginpao Kipgen is the General Secretary of U.S.-based Kuki International Forum (www.kukiforum.com) and a researcher on the rise of political conflicts in modern Burma (1947-2004).

1|2

SharePrintEmail

Write a Comment

Enter your comments - 3000 characters max

Type in image code

Submit

 Receive China Post promos Respond to this email