The Security Council vote on the establishment of an international criminal tribunal into the MH17 disaster marks the second occasion in under a month where Russia has exercised its veto, the first being draft resolution S/2015/508 on 8th July condemning both the genocide at Srebrenica and any denial of its having taken place. During the discussions over S/2015/508, Russia - rather disingenuously in light of the subsequent veto - motioned to observe a minute of contemplative silence (I am given to understand that a moment of silence was observed at the start of the meeting on 29th July (BTW, when did the Council start doing this?), but it is not yet clear if Russia made this motion as well as the verbatim records are not yet published) then pleaded with the Council not to force its hand by putting the draft resolution to a vote.Of course, the failure to adopt the draft resolution was inevitable and this attempted deflection of responsibility resulted in a Council that has refused to corroborate the findings of both the very same international criminal tribunal it created under UNSCR 827 (1993) at both Trial and Appeal stages, as well as the Council's sibling - and UN's principal judicial - organ the International Court of Justice, which in 2007 ruled that Serbia had "violated the obligation to prevent genocide, under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in respect of the genocide that occurred in Srebrenica in July 1995". For an 'if you don't laugh, you'll cry' juxtaposition see an interview conducted by Russian mouthpiece Russia Today almost exactly a year ago with Professor Francis Boyle, who prepared and filed the Bosnian Genocide case at the ICJ, on how the Ukraine is committing 'genocide' against Russian-speaking groups here. But, in the words of Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin, "Do we need to ask ourselves the question of who suffered the most?" Sure- why seek justice? I mean, no one wants a blame game, right? Syria, Ukraine, Serbia- let us turn a blind eye to atrocities in them all, given that both sides in each have suffered.
And so, with pit-stops at three unanimous resolutions extending the mandates of UNIFSA in the Sudan, authorising the maintenance of AMISOM in Somalia, and supporting the P5+1 brokered Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action for Iran, Churkin's once more signalled the collapse of another search for justice - the hopes of the families of 298 innocent passengers halted by a lonely hand in the air in an opulently decorated chamber in New York. Ironic, perhaps, is the discovery only hours later of a potential clue in the mystery of Malaysia Airlines' other tragic disaster of 2014- MH 370, which disappeared without a trace in March last year. As one set of bereaved families lament an obstacle to justice, another set no doubt renews hope of gaining at least emotional closure. Russia Today seems to imply that were a tribunal to be initiated at this stage it would somehow prejudice the official investigation into the incident which has yet to conclude (the full 'staged' interview can be found here). Of course, the trivial matter of simultaneous judicial and political intervention has not stopped the Council in issuing resolutions in the past (*cough* Lockerbie) but today the Russia apparently set the precedent that no more shall the Council intervene where there are ongoing investigations. Well, at least it's a step forward from not intervening at all (*cough* Ukraine *double cough* Syria). Let us see how long this lasts.
Russia is by no means the P5 Member that makes the greatest use of the veto (although the USSR has been historically since 1945); since 1990, when Russia took over the seat of the USSR, the US has made use of the veto no less than 16 times against Russia's 10. Nor is it the only State to use its seat on the Council for national or allied interests; whilst Russia and China's links to Syria, Georgia, Ukraine, or Myanmar are well-documented and widely acknowledged (and those to Zimbabwe perhaps slightly less so...), the US (surprise, surprise) has used the veto fourteen times since 1990 on the Israeli-Palestinian question. Yes, that's right, 14 out of 16 vetoes in 25 years, all in defence of Israel. So Russia still has some way to go, but with 6 vetoes since 2010 alone, the Bear does seem to be going for the high score.
