Zimbabwe joins resistance against UN’s state invasion resolution

by | May 20, 2021 | International, Local News, Opinions, Politics | 0 comments

Brian Rungano Temba

Zimbabwe and 14 other member states of the United Nations have voted against the UN General Assembly Resolution chiefly because of the part to do with the responsibility to protect (R2P).

The R2P is the same tool used in 2011 to invade Libya by NATO forces.

The resolution practically sanctions armed forces to invade and topple governments and commit murder, shoot and bomb women and children as casualties of a regime change in progress. Well at least that is what history teaches us.

On paper the resolution is said to be the responsibility to protect and to prevent genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.

Which if you really look at it is practically passing judgment prior to an offense being made, the classical Minority Report – Tom Cruise situation.

The technicality flaw of acting as an omniscient body that can predict with clinical precision how internal conflicts will end is not the frightening part. The trail of destruction that NATO forces left in Libya which once a booming metropolis in the desert still shocks Africa states to the core.

Egypt as one of the Arab nations to fall victim to the American devised Arab Springs of 2010 is one of the brave 15 to vote NO to R2P. They lost an estimated 61 000 people to the struggles that transpired within their country.

This clause has triggered many debates on social media with nationalists cheering the likes of North Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Nicaragua, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Indonesia, Burundi, Belarus, Eritrea, Bolivia Russia, China, Egypt, Cuba and Syria for making a bold stand against the imperialist devise.

On the other hand, are those suffering from Stockholm’s Syndrome and crave to remain in servitude of a ‘greater’ colonial power by all means.
These characters have been deluded by a concoction of consent manufacturing content from Hollywood and simple ignorance to the contents of the R2P document.

On May 18, 2021 the UN General Assembly took action on a draft resolution on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), tabled by a cross-regional group of 13 countries, and co-sponsored by a total of 83 United Nations Member States from all regions. Canada was the initial co-sponsor and took a vote in favour.

The document sought to reaffirm the principles and purposes of the Charter of the UN by,
“Recalling the 2005 World Summit Outcome, especially paragraphs 138 and 139, thereof recalling also its resolutions 63/308 of 14 September 2009 on the responsibility to protect,
Taking note of the annual reports of the Secretary-General on the responsibility to protect and the recommendations contained therein, including steps that can be taken by Member States, intergovernmental bodies and the UN system to strengthen the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.”

The resolution was adopted by a vote of 115 in favour, 15 against, 28 abstentions.

The resolution loosely erases the very existence of sovereignty and regardless of which political ideology holds office in Government, whenever the top tier wish to, they can manipulate events in your country to depict complete pandemonium when yet the reality is absolutely opposite.

Testament to this method of misrepresentation on the international scene is Zimbabwe late 2020 when opposition political activists, civic organisations and certain media outfits coerced to fake abductions in which they accuse the state.

Surely enough foreign embassies took to social media to express their concerns.

Convenient enough each abduction report would always happen weeks towards a geo-political event so as to catch the attention of the UN.

Now if you go through the full text of the R2P clause you will realize that these strategically timed fake abductions were staged in time for them to be the topic at any geo-political meeting Zimbabwe would attend.

And if the topic was raised frequently enough, the Secretary General would have the issue on his annual report thereby triggering a second Libya.
It would not be the first time Zimbabwe was on their radar, in the 2000s R2P military invasions on Zimbabwe were proposed.

Our neighbor Namibia was among the 28 that abstained from taking the vote. Deputy prime Minister and International Relations Minister for Namibia, Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah said Namibia is more concerned with the ‘responsibility to protect’ aspect of the resolution.

She said ‘responsibility to protect’ would mean powerful countries can abuse their power by intervening militarily when there’s conflict in a specific country, as was the case in Libya. She added that Namibia does not condone genocide & ethnic cleansing, but was against the right to protect aspect.

“That is a very dangerous resolution. Powerful countries can always invade countries where there is unrest under guise of the right to protect,” she elaborated.
“We cannot give carte blanche to certain countries to enter with their military when there is a dispute. Namibia does not support such things and if it does happen, we will not feel guilty because we abstained,” Nandi-Ndaitwah explained.

Although Zimbabwe lost the vote, it stands at the right side of history through its decision to uphold the idea of sovereignty and adding its voice to resisting an open call to invasions, it smells like colonialism all over again.