New Delhi
19 November 2010
India broke from tradition and abstained on Iran, much to the satisfaction of the
US and its allies, but it voted with China against the resolution condemning human rights
violations in Burma and calling for the release of 2,100 political prisoners.
The six-page resolution by the UN social, humanitarian and cultural affairs committee
(also known as the third committee) was sponsored by the European Union, the US and
others. It was passed 96 to 28, with 60 countries abstaining.
While India and China voted against the resolution, Burma's ASEAN neighbours such as
Thailand and Indonesia abstained.
The draft resolution, which is certain to be adopted by the 192-member UN General
Assembly, criticised the Burmese military junta for the ongoing systematic violation of
human rights and fundamental freedoms of the people of Burma.
The resolution urged the junta not to restrict pro-democracy leader and Nobel Laureate
Aung San Suu Kyi's freedoms. It also called for lifting of the restrictions on citizens'
freedoms of assembly and expression.
India is understood to have maintained that the resolution is not compatible with the
process of the UN secretary-general's good offices in Burma. Iterating what external
affairs minister SM Krishna said here after Suu Kyi was released, the Indian statement in
the UN said the recent elections in Burma are an important step and it is hoped that it
will contribute to efforts for a more inclusive approach to political change.
A source tracking India's engagement of Burma described India's vote against the
resolution as sad. "India could have abstained. It cannot possibly disagree with a
resolution that calls for the release of political prisoners," the source noted.
India's vote against the resolution on human rights violations in Burma comes almost
two weeks after US president Barack Obama said in his address to the Indian Parliament
that he expected more from India on Burma. New Delhi though was quick to defend itself
saying Burma is not a unidimensional issue and that it is as much a national security
issue as anything else.
No comments:
Post a Comment