S. Sudan downplays “criticism” over Palestine observatory status vote at UN
December 2, 2012 (JUBA) – South Sudan on Sunday downplayed growing public criticism that the nation’s permanent representative to the United Nations voted to back Palestine’s bid to be granted an observer at the world body.
South Sudan, the newest member of the UN was one of the 138 member states including that backed the Palestine authorities bid. South Sudan but nine other countries including the United States of America and Israel among others opposed. 41 abstained.
Media reports show that United States immediately criticized the vote, describing it as “unfortunate and counterproductive resolution which it said places further obstacles in the path peace”.
In Juba, authorities made no comments despite repeated attempts by various media group including Sudan Tribune to reach out for reactions to “rapidly growing the public criticism against the vote”. But a senior official at the ministry of foreign Affairs and international Cooperation “cautiously” and “reluctantly” said in an interview with Sudan Tribune on Sunday that the new nation was not alone.
“Why you people in the media don’t always give us a break? Such decisions are always taken for reasons beneficial to the people of South Sudan. You may not see them right away but there are times when such decisions get rewards diplomatically”, an ambassador at foreign relations department said.
He cited challenges facing his country which requires support from different countries including friends and Palestine allies in the Arab world countries as some of the reasons which prompted helping vote.
“I must tell you that we were not alone. Some countries including permanent member state of the Security Council vote to upgrade status of the Palestine. France voted in support so why our vote has becomes an issue? Our people are quick to criticize instead of understanding cause of the decision”, the official adds, in seemingly comfortable with Sudan Tribune at Paradise Hotel in Juba town on Sunday.
Moses Achol Marial, a civil right activist from Lakes State wondered why his country did not use the UN charter clause which respects abstaining from controversial voting instead of approval.
“I wish our permanent representative to the United Nations should consulted public opinion before voting because such decisions would have negative diplomatic relation with Israel or her allies. The ramification from the backlash could really outweigh benefits”, Marial said on Sunday.
Steve Paterno, a south Sudanese living in the United States of America also supported abstaining from the vote. “A new nation, which is yet to be recognized by all independent nations on planet earth, must be shooting itself on the foot if it comes out to denounce the existence of Palestine. However, I believe the best vote in this catch 22 scenario would have been abstention than voting either way”, said Paterno in an e-mail statement on Saturday.
Paterno was commenting on the outraging comments most of which were critical of the decision of the government to allow its representative to the United Nations to vote in favor Palestine bid.
“No surprise to see this non-directional infant country voting in support of the Arabs against Israelis. This is saddening; it is unmistakable that the South Sudanese vote against Israel is solely meant to please the rest of the Arab and Islamic countries who were fully supporting Sudan during the liberation war for South Sudan, let alone acquiescing to Sudan’s needs”, said another commentator.
Mawien Deng Kuc, a native of Warrap State in Juba said on Sunday the decision was a “mistake” which must not be allowed to pass without “condemnation” because such decision would define future relations with Israel.
“This decision must be condemned because this is a serious diplomatic mistake which cannot be justified whatsoever. Such act will only take us years to correct but it will certainly provide Israel ally to deal with us as an ally country of their enemies”, Kuc told Sudan Tribune also Paradise Hotel in Juba on Sunday. He wondered how officials think about international politics. “One doesn’t have to vote for the sake of it without weighing the consequences of the diplomatic relations and the alliance”, he said.
He further stated the decision was a contradiction South stance in establishing its embassy in Jerusalem, Israel. “We are witnessing the erosion of South Sudan as a nation upon which not to rely on”.
(ST)