Double-standards interventionism as seen from

Transcript:Double-standards interventionism as seen from:
Double-standards interventionism as seen from India, Brazil, Germany, Russia and China Initiative for Humanitarian intervention in Libya came from the Gulf led by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, and NATO The rest of the world's reaction to NATO's decision to use the UN on behalf of anti-Gaddafi rebels ranged from quiet disgust - India and Brazil; Germany - to vocal opposition from China, Russia, South Africa, and the African Union (AU) The Middle East's ultimate autocracies, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE, used this opportunity to turn the Arab regime's freedom-and-democracy anxiety to account against Libya The 10-0 UNSC vote included five abstentions, from two permanent members - China and Russia, and three non-permanent members - Brazil, Germany and India. The other three permanent members backing the vote were Britain, France and the United States India’s position The resolution that the Council has adopted today authorizes far reaching measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter with relatively little credible information on the situation on the ground in Libya (No reports from UN special envoy or AU High Level Panel) No clarity about details of enforcement measures, including who and with what assets will participate and how these measures will be exactly carried out. It is, of course, very important that there is full respect for sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Libya Out of India’s consistently advocated policy of noninterference in other countries’ internal affairs and its own interest, India accused the Western coalition forces of deviating from the original intent of the resolution. India is also making efforts to try to settle this problem. "What is happening in a country, within their internal affairs, no external powers should interfere in it," Pranab Mukherjee, India's finance minister and leader of the lower house of parliament announced. "Nobody, not a couple of countries, can take that decision to change a particular regime," Mukherjee said. "Whether a regime will change or not will depend on the people of that particular country, not by any external forces” Brazil’s position Brazil stands in solidarity with all movements in the Middle Eats and Magreb expressing their legitimate demands for better governance…. Brazil believed that the resolution contemplated measures that went beyond that call. “We are not convinced that the use of force as provided for in operative paragraph 4 of the present resolution will lead to the realization of our common objective