South African Voting Hall of Shame Continues

Once again we have been let down by South Africa. Let down by a democratic government without any spine that in the halls of the UN regularly bows to the voting orders of our mentors in China, Russia and the Arab world. Let down by the way we preach morality through the same forked tongues that provide diplomatic cover for the pariah’s of the world. Let down by the way we repeatedly fall victim to the noxious powers of our anti-Western stance.

On Jan 12, in our first vote since securing our non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council, South Africa voted against a U.N. Security Council resolution demanding an end to human rights abuses in Burma (Myanmar).

The vote in the Security Council on Jan. 12 was 9-3 in favor of the resolution, with three abstentions. However, China and Russia cast a rare double veto, which blocked the resolution's passage. South Africa does not have veto power.

The moral indifference is deafening. Burma is ruled by a military junta and their list of human rights violations is endless. The Telegraph recently reported on a Burmese plan to ‘wipe all of the Christians out.’

The military regime in Burma is intent on wiping out Christianity in the country, according to claims in a secret document believed to have been leaked from a government ministry. Entitled "Programme to destroy the Christian religion in Burma", the incendiary memo contains point by point instructions on how to drive Christians out of the state. The text, which opens with the line "There shall be no home where the Christian religion is practised", calls for anyone caught evangelising to be imprisoned. It advises: "The Christian religion is very gentle – identify and utilise its weakness." Its discovery follows widespread reports of religious persecution, with churches burnt to the ground, Christians forced to convert to the state religion, Buddhism, and their children barred from school.

So how could South Africa, champion of freedom and liberty, vote against this US led resolution? Once again, our minister of foreign affairs left it to her deputy to explain. And he gave a familiar sounding non-answer – “it was all technical” you see.

Deputy foreign affairs minister Aziz Pahad said in a statement that while South Africa was "deeply concerned at the situation in Myanmar," the country's vote against the resolution had been technical.

It reminds me of Pahad’s reply to the SA Jewish community when he was questioned about South Africa’s failure to condemn Iran’s calls to destroy Israel. Pahad at the time explained that our failure to comment was “an administrative oversight”.

So what was technical? Is it the fact that the resolution was proposed by the US and we are now slaves to our bullheaded anti-US stance? Or is it mechanical in nature, a product of us being merely a tiny coach in a locomotive powered by China?

Once again we hear the familiar “quiet diplomacy” excuses claiming that we are using our diplomatic relations with Burma to try and alleviate the situation.

The insincerity of our grotesque double standards stands out like an ugly wart on a beautiful princess when you contrast our quiet diplomacy regarding Zimbabwe, Iran and Burma, with our fog horn diplomacy regarding Israel. South Africa consistently supports every anti-Israel UN resolution proposed by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference. Yet we also claim that quiet diplomacy can wield more influence than votes in favour of UN condemnations!

Our views are not consistent and are in opposition depending on who is in the dock. It is time for our selective condemnations to end in favour of an enlightened one-standard-for-all approach.

Once again South Africa has shown that we are not neutral, not impartial, and most unfortunately, not independent.

Comments

[Gary]

South Africa's foreign policy is pure evil.
I don't think the ANC/SACP has yet met a dictator or terrorist they did not like.
Thank G-D SA does not have veto power.
I wish another African country had taken the seat.
Nigeria or Egypt contented against SA for the seat and both are more moderate.

[Anti-UN]

So much for the 'the UNSC seat will make South Africa much more responsible in the arena of diplomatic affairs' argument.

[Gary]

Would South Africa ever decline voting against Israel on a 'techinicality'?
Go figure!

[Derikboy]

I like the cartoon like picture summary. I hereby call for more of the same type of cutting summations!

[tc]

I have two questions:

1. Why would anyone believe that the UN is a moral arbiter?
2. Why believe that the UN has any other real objective than unfairly criticising Israel?

[Walter]

I am ashamed of the vile anti-Jewish diatribe of the South African ANC government.
Surely the world must see that the ANC is anti-simetic.
As a English speaking South African, I would be proud to take up arms and help you fight the filthy scum that continue to attack Israel on a daily basis.