Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez stated that the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) must act to “put the brakes on imperialism” this Saturday, as ALBA countries announced that they would lobby the United Nations (UN) to undertake a series of measures, including the official recognition of the Palestinian state.
Amongst the agreements reached during the ALBA’s 6th Political Council meeting in Caracas, member countries confirmed that they would petition the UN to create a committee to “investigate and monitor” the use of Libya’s financial reserves, which were frozen at the beginning of the NATO intervention and are currently expected to be transferred to Libya’s National Transitional Council (TNC).
The U.S. government began the release of US$ 1.5 billion of the frozen reserves to Libya’s TNC last week, after the UN Security Council approved the transfer under “conditions of humanitarian exemption”.
According to a UN Security Council report, the U.S. request was presented to the Council in a move to bypass the Libyan Sanctions Committee, where it was initially vetoed by the African Union (AU) due to concerns over affording legitimacy to the TNC government. The governments of Great Britain and France have also been authorised to release US$ 1.6 billion and US$ 2.2 billion to the TNC respectively, reports the New York Times.
As such, ALBA confirmed that it will act as a bloc within the UN and “solicit the Secretary-General of the United Nations for the total transparency and strict financial accountability of member states with respect to Libya and Syria”, as well as promote a debate within the UN General Assembly regarding the “dangerous precedents” set by the intervention in Libya.
Several other agreements featured in the document also related to the current situation in Libya. As well as rejecting the possibility that Libya’s seat within the United Nations “should become occupied by a transitory and illegitimate authority, imposed by foreign intervention,” the organisation also called on the international community to investigate the “crimes committed by NATO against the people of Libya”, including civilian deaths and damages to the country’s infrastructure.
ALBA and International Support for Libya’s TNC
Although the TNC government has received considerable support from major sectors of the international community, ALBA has maintained its critical stance and has so far refused to recognise the TNC as the legitimate government of Libya. The organisation denounced the U.S. government and its allies for having consistently “ignored” calls from the African Union for a negotiated settlement to the Libyan conflict and thus preventing the possibility of a peaceful solution. The AU has also stated that it will not recognise the Libyan interim government, despite significant pressure from the UN to do so.
In a press conference on Saturday, Ecuadorean Vice-chancellor, Kintto Lucas, confirmed that the ALBA organisation had solicited UN member countries to oppose the TNC, given that a sustained conflict could still emerge from the current situation in Libya.
“Lies and Manipulation” from Corporate Media
During the meeting, ALBA countries also condemned mainstream media coverage of events in Libya and stated that they had been “complicit” in creating the argumentation and justification for intervention in the North African country.
As well as organising a “Summit for Alternative Communication Networks” to counteract the corporate media, ALBA stated that it would put together a collection of the “lies and manipulation” that the mainstream press employed throughout the Libyan conflict and publish it through regional press agencies such as TeleSur.
“The initiatives today will allow us to open up a clear space, because what we are proposing is a definite plan of action in defence of the truth,” said Venezuelan Foreign Relations Minister, Nicolas Maduro.
The teleSUR news agency was praised by Venezuelan president Chávez last week for being one of the only news sources to have consistently reported “the truth” on events on Libya.
ALBA Recognises Palestinian State
In a “special communication” published by the organisation, ALBA also officially recognised the Palestinian state according to its pre-1967 borders and with Eastern Jerusalem as its capital. The communication stated that ALBA ministers offered their “full support” for the Palestinian state and its right to a seat at the UN.
“Ministers also supported the right of the Palestinian state to act as a full member of the United Nations, at the same time as deploring the fact that such an aspiration might be hampered by the use of the anachronistic veto privilege by a member of the Security Council.”
Bruno Rodriguez, Cuban Foreign Relations Minister, commented that “Israel’s impunity with respect to the massacre of the Palestinian people, the blockade of Gaza, would not have been possible without the constant veto of the Security Council…(which is) hypocrisy and falsity when the Security Council talks of protection for civilians and innocents in its resolutions.”
Other topics discussed at the ALBA meeting were climate change and the creation of a “Social Movements Committee” within the organisation. The organisation also rejected what it termed as the latest “U.S. attack on Venezuela”, in relation to the recent announcement by the U.S. Treasury Department that it would sanction four members of Venezuela’s political and military establishment.
Full text of the official declaration:
SPECIAL DECLARATION OF THE MINISTERS OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF ALBA-TCP ON THE SITUATION OF LIBYA AND SYRIA
The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America, gathered in Caracas, Venezuela on September 9, 2011, considering the Special Declaration of the Political Council of March 4, 2011, and the Special Declaration of Social Ministerial Council of March 19, 2011, condemned the NATO intervention in Libya, and the illegal military aggression carried out under a Security Council resolution by the UN; opportunistically taking advantage of the internal political conflict in that country.
They claim that NATO has conducted a military operation in Libya of regime change under the doctrine of preventive war, manipulating the UN according to its geopolitical and economic interests, violating Security Council resolution 1973.
They demand the immediate and unconditional cessation of bombing and military intervention of NATO in Libyan territory.
They deplore the fact that NATO has disregarded the insistent efforts of the African Union in seeking a solution for dialogue and peace to the internal conflict in Libya.
They also deplore the role of accomplice of several major international media outlets, which have joined the interests of aggression and have been provided to distort information about what is happening in Libya.
They express their most urgent warning on threats to repeat the same procedure against Syria, taking advantage of the political difficulties that Arab nation lives.
They reiterate their firm commitment to the right to self-determination of peoples of Libya and Syria.
They strongly reject any attempt by NATO or the Security Council of the UN to turn Libya into a protectorate.
In order to contribute to supporting the peace efforts that most of the world’s peoples claim, the Ministers agreed to direct the following actions:
• Promote the discussion at the UN General Assembly on the dangerous precedents that have been created around Libya and on the protection of the sovereign rights of the Arab nation in Africa and Libya, aimed at ensuring that Libya does not become a protectorate of NATO and Security Council of the UN.
• Promote the establishment of a Working Group of the General Assembly to investigate and monitor the use of the frozen funds of the financial reserves of Libya, so as it reports on its findings and conclusions to the Assembly.
• To call upon the international community to promote an investigation initiative conducted on crimes perpetrated by NATO in Libya, to the detriment of the Libyan people, the destruction of its infrastructure and deaths caused. To compile media manipulation and lies promoted by the Empire to justify the aggression against the Libyan people.
• Request the Secretary General of the United Nations full transparency and strict accountability to Member States with regard to their actions on the issue of Libya and Syria, and reaffirm that their role should respond to mandates agreed by the General Assembly, before taking further actions to intervene in Libya. Likewise, request the Secretary General a meeting with the ALBA-TCP to discuss the situation in Libya.
• Supporting a central role for the African Union’s efforts for peace in Libya
• Express their rejection to the fact that the seat corresponding to Libya in the UN be occupied by one faction or transitional authority illegitimately imposed by foreign intervention, and thus promote a substantive discussion on the United Nation’s General Assembly Credentials Committee aimed at preventing that the seat Libya be occupied until a government that is free and sovereign expression of the will of the Libyan people is constituted legitimately and without foreign intervention.
• Propose to the Syrian government in Damascus to send a mission of top representatives or foreign ministers of the ALBA-TCP and, if accepted, report on this situation to the Latin American and Caribbean countries through UNASUR, CARICOM, SICA and the Rio Group-CALC Unified Forum and invite those who wish to join this initiative.
• Promote a debate on the NAM Coordinating Bureau on the dangers looming over Syria.
• Support, together with the Non-Aligned members of the Security Council the draft resolution sponsored by Russia and China with regard to Syria.
• Sending the UN Secretary General this declaration and request that it be distributed among Member States of the United Nations as an official document of the General Assembly.
After Much Wrangling, General Assembly Seats National Transitional
Council of Libya as Country’s Representative for Sixty-Sixth Session
Adopts Work Programme and Agenda, Sets Start of General Debate For Wednesday, 21 September, Conclusion of Main Part of Session, 13 December
The United Nations General Assembly this morning adopted the agenda for its sixty-sixth session during a meeting which required two recorded votes to allow representatives of Libya’s National Transitional Council to stand for the strife-torn North African country in the world body’s work for the coming year.
A motion to defer action on a draft resolution contained in the report of the Credentials Committee on acceptance of the credentials of representatives of Member States was defeated by a recorded vote of 107 against to 22 in favour, with 12 abstentions. Earlier this week, the Credentials Committee recommended that the National Transitional Council, formed this past February in the wake of popular protests against Colonel Muammar al-Qadhafi’s Government, represent Libya in the General Assembly — speaking and voting on its behalf.
Putting forward the motion to defer the matter, the representative of Angola, on behalf of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), questioned the “process, legality and principle” of the Credentials Committee’s decision to recognize the transitional body. The United Nations should remain an Organization of principles governed by rule of law, he said, and as such, the General Assembly’s rules and procedures should not be disregarded merely because it was expedient.
To that end, Assembly rules advise that credentials should be presented to the Secretary-General by a Head of State, Head of Government, or Foreign Affairs Minister, he explained. In the case of Libya, it was necessary for delegations to ask: “Who presented and signed the credentials accepted by the Credentials Committee [and] was such signature in line with rules of the Assembly?”
Notwithstanding the fact that the National Transitional Council was in control, it was not the Government in Libya, interim or otherwise, he said, adding: “Let me be clear: a unity Government has not been formed.” The African Union Peace and Security Council planned to meet on the margins of the Assembly’s general debate to decide Libya’s representation in the African Union.
Several others, including the representatives of Venezuela and Cuba, backed the motion, voicing strong opposition to recognizing the transitional authorities. Those delegations denounced what they saw as attempts to transform Libya into a protectorate of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or the Security Council. Bolivia’s delegate said the National Transitional Council was not a unified body and there was “still a big question mark” concerning its make-up. Within Libya were deep divisions over those who supported the former regime and those who supported the opposition, he said.
Yet, the representative of Egypt called for the motion to be rejected, saying that, as Libya’s immediate neighbour, Egypt had been the best witness of the “most horrifying times” experienced by the Libyan people as a result of a repressive regime that had ruled that country for 40 years. The international community had been at the forefront of the efforts to support the aspirations of the Libyan people. Security Council resolutions had been adopted stating the expressed need to protect the Libyan people from Qadhafi and his cronies.
That was why the Credentials Committee had voted as it had, approving the Transitional National Council as the only representative of Libya, he said, urging the international community not to impede the legitimacy of the Libyan people. Now was “the moment of truth” for all those that had supported the National Transitional Council to do so without question. Arguing against the Transitional Council would only prolong the suffering and obstruct the will of the Libyan people.
The Assembly then went on to approve report of the Credentials Committee, adopting the draft resolution contained therein by a recorded vote of 114 in favour to 17 against, with 15 abstentions (Annex II).
In other business, the General Assembly, approved the work programme of its sixty-sixth session, also acting on the report of its General Committee. Among the topics to be considered during the session are a number of new agenda items, including “People’s empowerment and a peace-centric development model”, which would be taken up by the Second Committee (Economic and Financial). The 193-member body was also set to consider, among others, “The law of transboundary aquifers” and the “central role of the United Nations in the global governance system”.
With the adoption of its work programme and agenda (document A/66/250), the Assembly decided that its current session would recess on Tuesday, 13 December 2011, and close on Monday, 17 September 2012. It further decided that its general debate would be held from Wednesday, 21 September, and continue until Saturday, 24 September, and from Monday, 26 September to Tuesday, 27 September.
The Assembly also set the meeting schedule for its Main Committees. During the main part of the session, the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) would complete its work by Tuesday, 1 November; the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) by Wednesday, 23 November; Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) by Tuesday 22 November; the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) by Thursday, 10 November; the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) by Friday, 9 December; the Sixth Committee (Legal) by Thursday, 10 November.
Armenia’s representative took the floor to disassociate his delegation from the Assembly’s decision to include in its sixty-sixth session agenda item 39, on “the situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan”.
The General Assembly will reconvene at 9 a.m. on Monday, 19 September, to convene a high-level meeting on the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Disease
Consideration of Report of Credentials Committee
The representative of Venezuelasaid that in a 9 September special declaration, his Government had rejected the occupation of Libya’s United Nations seat by a faction or an illegitimate transitory authority imposed by foreign intervention. That declaration rejected in the strongest terms any attempt to transform Libya into a protectorate of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or the Security Council. It also denounced the military operation carried out to change Libya’s regime by manipulating the United Nations in line with its own geopolitical and economic interests, and in violation of Council resolution 1973 (2011).
The Assembly, he said, was now asked to recognize a group working under the guidance of the United States Government and NATO, which had no legal or moral authority to decide who should govern a nation. NATO’s belligerent conduct violated the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention in the internal affairs of a State. It also represented an act of aggression, which negated any humanitarian purpose. The perpetrators of those crimes must be brought to the International Criminal Court. The Assembly’s recognition of the National Transitional Council as Libya’s Government represented an “abominable precedent” that violated the most elementary principles of international law.
The representative of Cuba recalled that foreign intervention and military aggression carried out by NATO had actually worsened the conflict in Libya and had hampered the people of that nation from moving towards reconciliation and self-determination. Cuba and other nations had asked the Security Council to adopt measures that would allow for a negotiated political solution without foreign intervention. That had not been possible because NATO had proceeded with its intervention under the guise of a “preventive war” but which in reality had been driven by self-interest and the economic concerns of powerful countries.
Cuba did not recognize the groups that had been ushered to the fore by NATO forces and would only recognize representatives of a Government that had been set up, not by the assistance of foreign intervention, but by the will of the Libyan people. Everyone was aware that under the “clumsy guise” of protecting civilians, NATO had taken upon itself to effect a regime change that had actually killed and wounded thousands of innocent men, women and children. It had also obstructed the efforts of the African Union and other regional groups to bring the conflict to a negotiated conclusion. Cuba would reiterate its call for an immediate ceasefire and an end to NATO bombings. In addition, it would reiterate the need for the Libyan people to be allowed to freely secure self-determination and the sovereignty of their own country, without foreign intervention and thinly veiled attempts to gain control of the country’s natural resources.
The representative of Bolivia said the United Nations had been manipulated into a foreign, armed intervention in Libya. But the Libyan people, who continued to suffer, had not had the opportunity to express their opinions and set up their own legitimate Government representing their interests. Bolivia could not recognize the National Transitional Council, which had characteristics questioned by Bolivia. He expressed worries over the wave of racism and human rights violations against black civilian Libyans thought to be mercenaries. The fact that officials and sectors of the deposed Libyan Government were being incorporated into the new Government also called into question the possibility for real change in Libya.
He said the National Transitional Council was not a unified body and there was still a big question mark concerning its make-up. The decision to send NATO planes had set a dangerous precedent of a Government being overthrown by foreign military intervention. Within Libya there were deep divisions over those who supported the former regime and those who supported the opposition. Libya’s territorial integrity could be jeopardized as a result of foreign intervention. Oil also played an important role in that regard, as those intervening in Libya had very specific geopolitical and economic interests.
The representative of Nicaragua said free determination in Libya must be exercised by the Libyan people and not by NATO. Revolutions must be authentic, and not imposed by a proxy or seized by a group of States with clear hegemonic interests. She denounced and condemned those States that were violating the Charter and Council resolution 1973 (2011). She denounced the NATO bombings and demanded that the Alliance immediately end all military intervention in Libya. She strongly called for respecting the African Union’s role and for supporting its initiative to achieve an end to hostilities and begin a dialogue in Libya without foreign intervention. She rejected occupation of Libya’s seat during the Assembly’s sixty-sixth session by a faction imposed by NATO commanders.
The representative of Angola, speaking on behalf of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), said his delegation had questions of process, legality and principle, which it would raise in connection with the report of the Credentials Committee. The delegation firmly believed that the United Nations should remain an Organization of principles governed by rule of law. As such, rules and procedures adopted by the General Assembly should not be disregarded merely because it was expedient.
He went on to say that the African Union Ad Hoc Committee on Libya had indicated the steps it felt were necessary to be fulfilled in respect of Libya and its representation. In none of its decisions had the African Union indicated that it opposed the National Transitional Council. Yet, the Union had been insistent on the need for an all-inclusive Government that would ensure that Libya moved towards a brighter future. The Ad Hoc Committee had indicated its willingness to assist Libya in any way towards that goal. The African Union Peace and Security Council would meet on the margins of the Assembly’s general debate to decide on Libya’s representation in the African Union.
“Let me be clear: a unity Government has not been formed, and the National Transitional Council had committed itself to doing so and crafting a new constitution and a free Libya,” he continued. Notwithstanding the fact that it was in control, the National Transitional Council was not the Government in Libya, interim or otherwise. Moreover, General Assembly rules indicated that credentials should be presented by a Head of State, Head of Government or foreign minister. In the case of Libya, it was necessary for the Assembly to ask: “Who presented and signed the credentials accepted by the Credentials Committee [and] was such signature in line with rules of the Assembly?”. With that, he moved that the matter be deferred pending further consideration.
Speaking against that motion, the representative of Egypt said that as Libya’s immediate neighbour, his country had been the best witness of the “most horrifying times” the Libyan people had suffered as a result of a repressive regime that had ruled that country for 40 years. The international community had been at the forefront of the efforts to support the aspirations of the Libyan people. Security Council resolutions had been adopted stating the expressed need to protect the Libyan people from Qadhafi and his cronies. That was why the Credentials Committee had voted as it had, approving the National Transitional Council as the only representative of Libya.
He said that the international community should not impede the legitimacy of the Libyan people. Now was “the moment of truth” for all those that had supported the National Transitional Council to do so without question. Arguing against the National Transitional Council would only prolong the suffering of the Libyan people. In addition, some 19 States had supported the National Transitional Council as representing the Libyan people. Those representatives could represent Libya in the African Union, the League of Arab States, the General Assembly and other international forums. Moreover, Egypt was not convinced that at present there was any other legitimate option, and it opposed the attempt to defer the matter of Libya’s representation. He urged delegations to adopt the report.
Following that statement, the representative of Zambia asked for the item to be postponed. As noted by the representative of Angola, the African Union Heads of State had begun a process aimed at resolving the issue on 19 September. He voiced his support for the Angolan representative’s request to delay consideration of the item.
The representative of Gabon noted the social upheavals that had occurred since the beginning of the Arab Spring and the unanimous condemnation of Libya. The National Transitional Council was supporting the Libyan people and it had been recognized as a legitimate authority representing Libya’s national interests. It was necessary to act quickly and in a coordinated way, and to avoid confusion at the United Nations, through the establishment of a Libyan delegation here. The divisions in the Assembly Hall were unnecessary. For those reasons, and as an African State, Gabon did not support the motion to defer action. He called on all those “wishing to take care of the Libyan people” to oppose the motion.
Next, the representative of Senegal said the General Assembly would be “very correct” in adopting credentials for the National Transitional Council. The international community must consider the current humanitarian situation in Libya. The role of the United Nations was to ensure that people of all countries were spared harsh conditions and allowed to live in freedom. The National Transitional Council had taken enormous efforts to improve the situation in that country and those efforts must be recognized. He voiced his support for the statement made by Egypt’s delegate.
Taking the floor a second time, the representative of Venezuela expressed his delegation’s support for the recommendation made by Angola on behalf of the SADC.
The motion to defer action on the draft resolution of the Credentials Committee on acceptance of the credentials of representatives of Member States was defeated by a recorded vote of 107 against to 22 in favour, with 12 abstentions. (See Annex I.)
Explaining his position, the representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines said the situation in Libya had been fast-moving, fluid and yet to stabilize. Military action in Libya continued today. Given the uncertainty on the ground and the lack of a report on recent developments, there was insufficient factual data to extend recognition to the National Transitional Council. No State in his subregion had had time to elaborate policy on the matter. The current recommendation by the Credentials Committee was premature. The existence of a functioning national Government in Libya was an open question. The United Nations should not attempt to subject the struggles of the Libyan people to the strictures of the Organization’s calendar. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines would abstain from the vote.
Turning next to the report of the Credentials Committee, the Assembly adopted the draft resolution contained therein by a recorded vote of 114 in favour to 17 against, with 15 abstentions (Annex II).
Speaking after the vote, the representative of Equatorial Guinea said his country, as current President of the African Union, had spared no effort in seeking coordination and harmonization of the Union’s work and activities with the General Assembly. Unfortunately, “some initiatives escaped our control”. He made clear that the African Union had always supported the Libyan people and had emphasized that it would assist the transitional authorities.
He said that the African Union had never said that it would not recognize those authorities. The Union had continually stressed that it would work with all Libyans to form an inclusive Government. However, it would have preferred, at the level of its Peace and Security Council, to discuss the matter of Libya’s representation and take a decision on it as soon as possible. As it had been not possible to do so ahead of today’s meeting, it had voted against the resolution today.
Kenya’s representative condemned the use of violence against innocent civilians and favoured inclusion of a political process towards free and fair elections. Kenya was willing to work with the Libyans to achieve a political solution, which could only be realized through mutually reinforcing political objectives. Given that the situation was still evolving in Libya, Kenya would maintain its position until an effective, democratic Government was formed, and law and order was restored.
The representative of Chad said that since his country was a neighbour of Libya, the Chadian Government was available to work with the National Transitional Council, “which, let’s be clear, has the fate of Libya in its hands”. For those who wished to see an end to the Libya of the past, it was necessary to support the Libya of tomorrow. Also necessary was to accept the idea of reconciliation around the National Transitional Council, which had pledged to establish an all-inclusive Government. Chad supported the efforts of that Council to ensure the rule of law and democracy. Yet, the representative hoped the Libya of tomorrow would be peaceful, stable and free of mercenaries. His delegation had voted in favour of the resolution.
The representative of Iran said his delegation also had supported the resolution. As a nation that had ousted a dictator some 30 years ago, Iran had always supported just struggles against dictatorship, and it would always support the just struggle of peoples to form national Governments of their own and oppose foreign interference in such matters. Such intervention was “counterproductive” as it only made matters more confusing and complex. He hoped that with the end of the NATO intervention, which had already killed and injured countless people and destroyed essential Libyan infrastructure, the Libyan people would be able to pursue a Government of their own choosing.
Vote on Deferring Action on Credentials Committee Draft Resolution
The motion to defer action on the draft resolution of the Credentials Committee on acceptance of the credentials of representatives of Member States was rejected by a recorded vote of 107 against to 22 in favour, with 12 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Angola, Bolivia, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Jamaica, Kenya, Lesotho, Mali, Namibia, Nicaragua, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, South Africa, Swaziland, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Afghanistan, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Yemen.
Abstain: Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Botswana, Dominican Republic, Indonesia, Mauritania, Mexico, Myanmar, Nepal, Saudi Arabia, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago.
Absent: Albania, Algeria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Bhutan, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Comoros, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Dominica, Eritrea, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Micronesia (Federated States of), Mozambique, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Syria, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam.
Vote on Acceptance of Credentials of Representatives of Member States
The draft resolution contained in the report of the Credentials Committee on acceptance of the credentials of representatives of Member States was adopted by a recorded vote of 114 in favour to 17 against, with 15 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Afghanistan, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Switzerland, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen.
Against: Angola, Bolivia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, Nicaragua, South Africa, Swaziland, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Abstain: Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Cameroon, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Indonesia, Mali, Mauritania, Nepal, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Uruguay.
Absent: Albania, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Bhutan, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Dominica, Eritrea, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Liberia, Libya, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Mozambique, Myanmar, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan.