[{"veto_id":1,"un_id":1,"date":"1946-02-16","year":1946,"month":2,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"United States draft resolution (no S/ symbol; text read into S/PV.23)","meeting_record":"S/PV.23","meeting_number":23,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter from the Heads of the Lebanese and Syrian delegations--Report by the Committee of Experts on alterations in the provisional rules of procedure","short_agenda":"1946 Letter from Lebanon and Syria (Lebanon)","topic":"Syria and Lebanon: withdrawal of British and French troops","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":2,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"SYR; LBN; FRA; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict: the dispute concerned the stationing of foreign troops without armed fighting in 1946.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have taken note of the statements of the four parties, expressed confidence that foreign troops in Syria and Lebanon would be withdrawn as soon as practicable and that the parties would open negotiations to that end without delay, and asked the parties to report the results.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it could not support the draft because its amendments, which would have recommended that the United Kingdom and France withdraw their troops immediately and limited the talks to technical negotiations, had been rejected.","aftermath":"France and the United Kingdom said they would act on the majority view in spite of the veto. Their troops left Syria by April 1946 and Lebanon by the end of 1946.","context":"The draft would have expressed confidence that British and French troops would leave Syria and Lebanon as soon as practicable through negotiations between the parties. The Soviet Union cast the Council's first veto, saying its amendments calling for immediate withdrawal had been rejected. The vote was 7 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Poland); France and the United Kingdom did not take part as parties to the dispute. France and the United Kingdom said they would still carry out the majority decision.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.23; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/02/pdf/nl460002.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/64","notes":"The vote was by show of hands and the record gives only totals (seven in favour). Vyshinsky stated that he voted against, Poland that it abstained, and France and the United Kingdom that they did not take part. The list of members voting in favour (AUS, BRA, CHN, EGY, MEX, NLD, USA) is inferred from these statements. The draft has no S/ document symbol in the record; the UN list cites the Official Records page (S/PV.23, p. 355). Troop withdrawal dates are from S/51 (UK, 1 May 1946: British withdrawal from Syria completed 15 April), S/64 (Syria, 19 May 1946: evacuation accomplished in the first two weeks of April 1946) and S/52 (France, 30 April 1946: agreed timetable for Lebanon, last French elements to leave not later than 31 December 1946); actual completion in Lebanon is not documented in these letters. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":2,"un_id":2,"date":"1946-06-18","year":1946,"month":6,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Sub-Committee draft resolution on the Spanish question, paragraph (a) (no S/ symbol; text in S/PV.45; based on S/75)","meeting_record":"S/PV.47","meeting_number":47,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"The Spanish question","short_agenda":"Spanish question","topic":"Spain: Sub-Committee recommendations on the Franco regime (paragraph (a))","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; BRA; CHN; FRA; POL","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict in Spain in 1946; the draft concerned the nature of the Franco regime.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The paragraph would have had the Council endorse the principles of the declaration of 4 March 1946 by the United Kingdom, the United States and France on Franco Spain.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft was too weak and that the Council, which acted on behalf of all Members, should itself act against the Franco regime, for example by breaking off diplomatic relations under Article 41, with no need to refer the matter to the General Assembly.","aftermath":"On 4 November 1946 the Council removed the Spanish question from its list of matters so that the General Assembly could act, and in resolution 39 (I) of 12 December 1946 the Assembly recommended that Franco Spain be barred from UN agencies and that ambassadors be recalled from Madrid. Spain was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 (General Assembly resolution 995 (X)).","context":"On 18 June 1946 the Council voted on the Sub-Committee's recommendations on Franco Spain paragraph by paragraph and then as a whole. The Soviet Union vetoed paragraph (a), saying the Council should itself take measures such as breaking diplomatic relations and should not refer the matter to the General Assembly. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The Council dropped the question in November 1946, and in December the Assembly recommended diplomatic measures against Spain.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.47; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/12/pdf/nl460012.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.45; https://undocs.org/en/S/75","notes":"The UN list gives the same reference (S/PV.45, p. 326) for vetoes 2 to 5; the assignment of this veto to paragraph (a) follows the order of voting at the 47th meeting (paragraphs (a), (b), (c), then the whole) and the UN list order. On paragraph (a) the vote was 10 to 1 with no abstention, so the Netherlands voted in favour of this paragraph. The draft had no separate S/ symbol; it was moved by Australia on behalf of the Sub-Committee at the 45th meeting (13 June 1946) and its recommendations come from the Sub-Committee report (S/75). Votes were by show of hands and the record gives only totals. The Netherlands said before the vote that it would abstain on the Sub-Committee draft; the Soviet Union is the only member stated to have voted against. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":3,"un_id":3,"date":"1946-06-18","year":1946,"month":6,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Sub-Committee draft resolution on the Spanish question, paragraph (b) (no S/ symbol; text in S/PV.45; based on S/75)","meeting_record":"S/PV.47","meeting_number":47,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"The Spanish question","short_agenda":"Spanish question","topic":"Spain: Sub-Committee recommendations on the Franco regime (paragraph (b))","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; BRA; CHN; FRA; POL","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict in Spain in 1946; the draft concerned the nature of the Franco regime.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The paragraph would have sent the Sub-Committee's evidence and reports to the General Assembly with a recommendation that, unless the Franco regime was withdrawn and political freedoms restored, the Assembly recommend that each Member break off diplomatic relations with the regime or take other action it deemed appropriate.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft was too weak and that the Council, which acted on behalf of all Members, should itself act against the Franco regime, for example by breaking off diplomatic relations under Article 41, with no need to refer the matter to the General Assembly.","aftermath":"On 4 November 1946 the Council removed the Spanish question from its list of matters so that the General Assembly could act, and in resolution 39 (I) of 12 December 1946 the Assembly recommended that Franco Spain be barred from UN agencies and that ambassadors be recalled from Madrid. Spain was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 (General Assembly resolution 995 (X)).","context":"On 18 June 1946 the Council voted on the Sub-Committee's recommendations on Franco Spain paragraph by paragraph and then as a whole. The Soviet Union vetoed paragraph (b), saying the Council should itself take measures such as breaking diplomatic relations and should not refer the matter to the General Assembly. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the Netherlands). The Council dropped the question in November 1946, and in December the Assembly recommended diplomatic measures against Spain.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.47; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/12/pdf/nl460012.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.45; https://undocs.org/en/S/75","notes":"The UN list gives the same reference (S/PV.45, p. 326) for vetoes 2 to 5; the assignment of this veto to paragraph (b) follows the order of voting at the 47th meeting (paragraphs (a), (b), (c), then the whole) and the UN list order. The draft had no separate S/ symbol; it was moved by Australia on behalf of the Sub-Committee at the 45th meeting (13 June 1946) and its recommendations come from the Sub-Committee report (S/75). Votes were by show of hands and the record gives only totals. The Netherlands said before the vote that it would abstain on the Sub-Committee draft, which is the basis for listing NLD as the abstainer; the Soviet Union is the only member stated to have voted against. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":4,"un_id":4,"date":"1946-06-18","year":1946,"month":6,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Sub-Committee draft resolution on the Spanish question, paragraph (c) (no S/ symbol; text in S/PV.45; based on S/75)","meeting_record":"S/PV.47","meeting_number":47,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"The Spanish question","short_agenda":"Spanish question","topic":"Spain: Sub-Committee recommendations on the Franco regime (paragraph (c))","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; BRA; CHN; FRA; POL","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict in Spain in 1946; the draft concerned the nature of the Franco regime.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The paragraph would have asked the Secretary-General to communicate the recommendations to all Members and others concerned.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft was too weak and that the Council, which acted on behalf of all Members, should itself act against the Franco regime, for example by breaking off diplomatic relations under Article 41, with no need to refer the matter to the General Assembly.","aftermath":"On 4 November 1946 the Council removed the Spanish question from its list of matters so that the General Assembly could act, and in resolution 39 (I) of 12 December 1946 the Assembly recommended that Franco Spain be barred from UN agencies and that ambassadors be recalled from Madrid. Spain was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 (General Assembly resolution 995 (X)).","context":"On 18 June 1946 the Council voted on the Sub-Committee's recommendations on Franco Spain paragraph by paragraph and then as a whole. The Soviet Union vetoed paragraph (c), saying the Council should itself take measures such as breaking diplomatic relations and should not refer the matter to the General Assembly. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the Netherlands). The Council dropped the question in November 1946, and in December the Assembly recommended diplomatic measures against Spain.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.47; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/12/pdf/nl460012.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.45; https://undocs.org/en/S/75","notes":"The UN list gives the same reference (S/PV.45, p. 326) for vetoes 2 to 5; the assignment of this veto to paragraph (c) follows the order of voting at the 47th meeting (paragraphs (a), (b), (c), then the whole) and the UN list order. The draft had no separate S/ symbol; it was moved by Australia on behalf of the Sub-Committee at the 45th meeting (13 June 1946) and its recommendations come from the Sub-Committee report (S/75). Votes were by show of hands and the record gives only totals. The Netherlands said before the vote that it would abstain on the Sub-Committee draft, which is the basis for listing NLD as the abstainer; the Soviet Union is the only member stated to have voted against. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":5,"un_id":5,"date":"1946-06-18","year":1946,"month":6,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Sub-Committee draft resolution on the Spanish question, draft as a whole (no S/ symbol; text in S/PV.45; based on S/75)","meeting_record":"S/PV.47","meeting_number":47,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Spanish question","short_agenda":"Spanish question","topic":"Spain: Sub-Committee recommendations on the Franco regime (draft as a whole)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; BRA; CHN; FRA; POL","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict in Spain in 1946; the draft concerned the nature of the Franco regime.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft as a whole would have adopted the Sub-Committee's three recommendations: endorsing the three-power declaration of 4 March 1946 on Franco Spain, sending the evidence to the General Assembly with a recommendation that Members break off diplomatic relations with the regime unless it was withdrawn, and asking the Secretary-General to transmit the recommendations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft was too weak and that the Council, which acted on behalf of all Members, should itself act against the Franco regime, for example by breaking off diplomatic relations under Article 41, with no need to refer the matter to the General Assembly.","aftermath":"On 4 November 1946 the Council removed the Spanish question from its list of matters so that the General Assembly could act, and in resolution 39 (I) of 12 December 1946 the Assembly recommended that Franco Spain be barred from UN agencies and that ambassadors be recalled from Madrid. Spain was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 (General Assembly resolution 995 (X)).","context":"On 18 June 1946 the Council voted on the Sub-Committee's recommendations on Franco Spain paragraph by paragraph and then as a whole. The Soviet Union vetoed the draft as a whole, saying the Council should itself take measures such as breaking diplomatic relations and should not refer the matter to the General Assembly. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the Netherlands). The Council dropped the question in November 1946, and in December the Assembly recommended diplomatic measures against Spain.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.47; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/12/pdf/nl460012.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.45; https://undocs.org/en/S/75","notes":"The UN list gives the same reference (S/PV.45, p. 326) for vetoes 2 to 5; the assignment of this veto to draft as a whole follows the order of voting at the 47th meeting (paragraphs (a), (b), (c), then the whole) and the UN list order. The draft had no separate S/ symbol; it was moved by Australia on behalf of the Sub-Committee at the 45th meeting (13 June 1946) and its recommendations come from the Sub-Committee report (S/75). Votes were by show of hands and the record gives only totals. The Netherlands said before the vote that it would abstain on the Sub-Committee draft, which is the basis for listing NLD as the abstainer; the Soviet Union is the only member stated to have voted against. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":6,"un_id":6,"date":"1946-06-26","year":1946,"month":6,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Preliminary question: whether the drafting committee's draft resolution (later adopted in parts as resolution 7 (1946)) was procedural (no S/ symbol)","meeting_record":"S/PV.49","meeting_number":49,"vetoed_item":"procedural question","agenda":"The Spanish question","short_agenda":"Spanish question","topic":"Spain: keeping the situation under observation (procedural vote)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia; France","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict in Spain in 1946; the vote concerned Council procedure on the Franco regime.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The vote was on the President's ruling that the drafting committee's draft on keeping the Spanish situation under observation was procedural, which would have meant the draft was adopted despite the Soviet negative vote.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft dealt with questions of substance already voted on, so it could not be treated as procedural. France gave no reason for its negative vote in the passage of the record consulted.","aftermath":"The President ruled that the question of whether a matter was procedural required the concurring votes of the permanent members, so the draft stood as rejected. The Council then voted on the text paragraph by paragraph and adopted the parts that kept the situation in Spain under continuous observation and on its list of matters, which became resolution 7 (1946).","context":"After the Soviet Union voted against a draft on keeping the Spanish situation under observation, the President asked the Council to confirm his ruling that the draft was procedural. France and the Soviet Union vetoed the ruling, the Soviet Union saying the draft dealt with matters of substance, in the first double veto. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention (Poland). The Council then adopted the operative parts of the text separately as resolution 7 (1946).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.49; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/06/pdf/nl460006.pdf","notes":"The UN list gives '7 (1946)' as the draft for this veto and names Russia and France. The only vote at the 49th meeting with both France and the Soviet Union against is the vote on the President's ruling that the drafting committee's draft was procedural (S/PV.49, p. 424): in favour AUS, BRA, CHN, EGY, MEX, NLD, GBR, USA; against FRA, RUS; abstaining POL, as recorded by name. This veto is coded as that vote. Resolution 7 (1946) itself was adopted later in the meeting. France's negative vote on a procedural ruling is listed as a veto because the UN list counts it; whether it was a veto in the Article 27 sense was disputed at the time. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":7,"un_id":7,"date":"1946-06-26","year":1946,"month":6,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Draft resolution of the majority of the drafting committee (Australia, United Kingdom), moved by Australia as an amendment to the Polish draft (no S/ symbol; text in S/PV.49, p. 401)","meeting_record":"S/PV.49","meeting_number":49,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"The Spanish question","short_agenda":"Spanish question","topic":"Spain: keeping the situation under observation (amendment)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; GBR","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict in Spain in 1946; the draft concerned the Franco regime.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The amendment would have recalled the Sub-Committee's finding that the situation in Spain was likely to endanger international peace and security and decided, without prejudice to the rights of the General Assembly, to keep the situation under continuous observation and on the list of matters of which the Council is seized, with any member able to raise it at any time.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft repeated questions of substance already voted on at the 47th meeting and objected to its preambular findings and to the reference to the rights of the General Assembly.","aftermath":"After a dispute over whether the vote was procedural, the Council voted on the text sentence by sentence and adopted the operative parts on keeping the situation under observation as resolution 7 (1946). On 4 November 1946 the Council removed the question from its list, and on 12 December 1946 the General Assembly adopted resolution 39 (I).","context":"The amendment, moved by Australia for the drafting committee majority of Australia and the United Kingdom, would have kept the Spanish situation under continuous observation and on the Council's agenda, without prejudice to the rights of the General Assembly. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it dealt with matters of substance already decided. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). The Council then adopted the operative parts separately as resolution 7 (1946).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.49; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/06/pdf/nl460006.pdf","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.49, p. 413: in favour AUS, BRA, CHN, EGY, FRA, MEX, NLD, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. The President first declared the draft carried, then treated it as rejected after the Soviet objection and the vote on the procedural question (veto 6). The Soviet reason is summarized from Gromyko's statements after the vote. The draft has no S/ symbol. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":8,"un_id":8,"date":"1946-06-26","year":1946,"month":6,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Australian draft resolution on the rights of the General Assembly (no S/ symbol; text in S/PV.49, p. 444)","meeting_record":"S/PV.49","meeting_number":49,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Spanish question","short_agenda":"Spanish question","topic":"Spain: General Assembly rights not prejudiced by keeping Spain on the agenda","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No UCDP conflict in Spain in 1946.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have stated that the Council's resolution of 26 June 1946 on the Spanish question did not in any way prejudice the rights of the General Assembly under the Charter.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said no further resolution was needed because the Charter already defined the rights of the General Assembly, that it had voted against the same statement once before, and that the aim was to bring the Spanish question before the Assembly without a Council decision.","aftermath":"Resolution 7 (1946), adopted earlier at the same meeting, stood without the reference to the General Assembly. On 4 November 1946 the Council removed the Spanish question from its list so that the Assembly could deal with it, and the Assembly adopted resolution 39 (I) on 12 December 1946.","context":"Australia proposed a separate text stating that resolution 7 (1946), adopted the same day, did not prejudice the rights of the General Assembly. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the Charter already set out the Assembly's rights and that it had already rejected the same wording. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). The Council removed the Spanish question from its list in November 1946.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.49; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/06/pdf/nl460006.pdf","notes":"Roll call recorded by name at the end of S/PV.49 (p. 445): in favour AUS, BRA, CHN, EGY, FRA, MEX, NLD, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. The draft was read out orally and has no S/ symbol. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":9,"un_id":9,"date":"1946-08-29","year":1946,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Ireland (Committee report S/133)","meeting_record":"S/PV.57","meeting_number":57,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Report of the Committee on the Admission of New Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ireland","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ireland","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IRL","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Ireland be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it could not support Ireland for the same reasons it gave on Transjordan: the applicant did not have normal diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, which it held a state should have after the war to meet the requirements for membership.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked the application again in 1947 and later years. Ireland was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"The Council voted on whether to recommend Ireland for membership on 29 August 1946. The Soviet Union vetoed the application, saying Ireland lacked normal diplomatic relations with it. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Australia). Ireland was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.57; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/08/pdf/nl460008.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.56; https://undocs.org/en/S/133","notes":"The UN list gives 'Report of the Committee on the Admission of New Members' as the agenda for veto 9 and page references 138-139 for vetoes 9 to 11. The three Soviet vetoes at the 57th meeting were on Transjordan, Ireland and Portugal; veto 9 is coded as Ireland, veto 10 Portugal (named in the UN list) and veto 11 Transjordan (named in the UN list). Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.57 (pp. 139-140). There was no written draft resolution: the President put to the vote whether to recommend each applicant, on the basis of the Committee on the Admission of New Members report (S/133). At the same meeting Mongolia's application failed with the United Kingdom and the United States voting against, but it had only six votes in favour and is not counted as a veto. RUS used for the USSR. The Soviet reasons were given at the 56th meeting (S/PV.56) and referred to at the 57th.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":10,"un_id":10,"date":"1946-08-29","year":1946,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Portugal (Committee report S/133)","meeting_record":"S/PV.57","meeting_number":57,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Application for Membership (Portugal)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Portugal","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Portugal","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Portugal be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it could not support Portugal for the same reasons it gave on Transjordan and Ireland: the applicant did not have normal diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, which it held a state should have after the war to meet the requirements for membership.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked the application again in 1947 and later years. Portugal was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"The Council voted on whether to recommend Portugal for membership on 29 August 1946. The Soviet Union vetoed the application, saying Portugal lacked normal diplomatic relations with it. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Australia). Portugal was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.57; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/08/pdf/nl460008.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.56; https://undocs.org/en/S/133","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.57 (pp. 139-140). There was no written draft resolution: the President put to the vote whether to recommend each applicant, on the basis of the Committee on the Admission of New Members report (S/133). At the same meeting Mongolia's application failed with the United Kingdom and the United States voting against, but it had only six votes in favour and is not counted as a veto. RUS used for the USSR. The Soviet reasons were given at the 56th meeting (S/PV.56) and referred to at the 57th.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":11,"un_id":11,"date":"1946-08-29","year":1946,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Transjordan (Committee report S/133)","meeting_record":"S/PV.57","meeting_number":57,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Application for Membership (Transjordan)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Transjordan","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Jordan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Transjordan be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Transjordan did not have normal diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, and that after the war a state without such relations did not meet the requirements for membership. Poland, which also voted against, cited legal doubts about the end of the mandate.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked the application again in 1947 and later years. Jordan was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"The Council voted on whether to recommend Transjordan for membership on 29 August 1946. The Soviet Union vetoed the application, saying Transjordan lacked normal diplomatic relations with it. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Australia). Transjordan, as Jordan, was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.57; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/08/pdf/nl460008.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.56; https://undocs.org/en/S/133","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.57 (pp. 139-140). There was no written draft resolution: the President put to the vote whether to recommend each applicant, on the basis of the Committee on the Admission of New Members report (S/133). At the same meeting Mongolia's application failed with the United Kingdom and the United States voting against, but it had only six votes in favour and is not counted as a veto. RUS used for the USSR. The Soviet reasons were given at the 56th meeting (S/PV.56) and referred to at the 57th.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":12,"un_id":12,"date":"1946-09-20","year":1946,"month":9,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"United States draft resolution establishing a commission of investigation (no S/ symbol found; text in S/PV.70)","meeting_record":"S/PV.70","meeting_number":70,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Telegram from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic to the Secretary-General, dated 24 August 1946 (document S/137)","short_agenda":"1946 Telegram from Ukrainian SSR (Greece)","topic":"Greece: commission of investigation into frontier incidents","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Greece","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GRC; ALB; BGR; YUG; UKR","ucdp_conflict_id":203,"ucdp_dyad_id":404,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 203 (Government of Greece vs DSE, 1946-1949); the frontier incidents to be investigated were linked to the Greek civil war.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, acting under Article 34, would have set up a commission of three individuals nominated by the Secretary-General to investigate border incidents between Greece on one side and Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia on the other, examine the statements made to the Council and report, with authority to work in the area.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Council had not examined the situation on the Greek-Yugoslav and Greek-Bulgarian frontiers or heard Yugoslavia and Bulgaria, and that setting up an investigating commission would imply that the accusations against those countries were justified.","aftermath":"On 19 December 1946, on a Greek complaint, the Council unanimously set up a Commission of Investigation concerning Greek frontier incidents in resolution 15 (1946).","context":"On a Ukrainian SSR complaint that Greek policy endangered peace in the Balkans, the US draft would have set up a three-person commission to investigate incidents along Greece's northern frontiers with Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying a commission would cast blame on Yugoslavia and Bulgaria, which the Council had not heard. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Australia). In December 1946 the Council set up such a commission unanimously in resolution 15 (1946).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.70; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/600/10/pdf/nl460010.pdf","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.70: in favour BRA, CHN, EGY, FRA, MEX, NLD, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS; abstaining AUS. The draft was read into the record and no S/ symbol was found; the UN list cites the Official Records page (70th meeting, p. 396). Gromyko spoke as President and as Soviet representative. The UCDP match is a judgement: the draft concerned frontier incidents that were part of the Greek civil war context. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR (complainant, not a Council member).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":13,"un_id":13,"date":"1947-03-25","year":1947,"month":3,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"United Kingdom draft resolution as amended by the United States and France (no S/ symbol found; original text in S/PV.120)","meeting_record":"S/PV.122","meeting_number":122,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Corfu Channel Question","short_agenda":"Corfu Channel","topic":"Corfu Channel: Albanian responsibility for mines that damaged British warships","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Albania","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"GBR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ALB; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":215,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 215 (Albania vs United Kingdom, Korfu Channel, 1946) covers the incident the draft concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have found that an unnotified minefield near the Albanian coast, which damaged two British warships with loss of life, could not have been laid without the knowledge of the Albanian authorities, called mine-laying in peacetime without notice an offence against humanity, and recommended that the two governments settle the dispute on that basis.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the United Kingdom had brought no proof of Albanian responsibility, that the Sub-Committee had been unable to reach conclusions, and that the US amendments made the text worse by alluding to an unnamed third country.","aftermath":"On 9 April 1947 the Council recommended in resolution 22 (1947) that the United Kingdom and Albania refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice. The Court held Albania responsible in its judgment of 9 April 1949.","context":"The British draft, as amended by France and the United States, would have found that the minefield that damaged two British destroyers in the Corfu Channel in October 1946 could not have been laid without the knowledge of the Albanian authorities. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying there was no proof of Albanian guilt. The vote was 7 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Syria); the United Kingdom did not take part as a party to the dispute. Two weeks later the Council recommended that the parties take the dispute to the International Court of Justice.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.122; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/01/pdf/nl470001.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.121; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.120; https://www.icj-cij.org/case/1","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.122: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, USA; against POL, RUS; abstaining SYR; the United Kingdom stated it was not voting (party to the dispute). No S/ symbol for the draft was found; the UN list cites the Official Records pages (120th meeting, p. 567, as amended, S/PV.122, pp. 608-609). RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":14,"un_id":14,"date":"1947-07-29","year":1947,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/391","draft_note":"S/391 (as amended)","meeting_record":"S/PV.170","meeting_number":170,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Greek frontier incidents question","short_agenda":"Greek frontier incidents","topic":"Greece: recommendations of the Commission of Investigation","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Greece","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GRC; ALB; BGR; YUG","ucdp_conflict_id":203,"ucdp_dyad_id":404,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 203 (Government of Greece vs DSE, 1946-1949); the draft addressed outside support for the Greek guerrillas.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, based on the proposals of the majority of the Commission of Investigation, would have found that a dispute likely to endanger peace existed, recommended that Greece and Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia establish good-neighbourly relations and stop supporting armed bands across their borders, and set up a commission to help the parties and observe compliance.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no explanation of its vote at the 170th meeting, but in the debate it had said that amendments did not change the substance of the draft and disputed the US view that Council decisions under Chapter VI, including on investigations, were binding.","aftermath":"On 15 September 1947 the Council removed the Greek question from its agenda (resolution 34 (1947)), and the General Assembly set up the UN Special Committee on the Balkans in resolution 109 (II) of 21 October 1947.","context":"The US draft would have acted on the findings of the majority of the Commission of Investigation on the Greek frontier incidents, recommending that Greece's northern neighbours stop supporting guerrillas and setting up a commission in the area. The Council adopted each part separately with the Soviet Union abstaining, but the Soviet Union vetoed the text as a whole without giving a reason at the meeting. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). The matter passed to the General Assembly in the autumn of 1947.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.170; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/03/pdf/nl470003.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/391; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.167","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.170: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. On the separate paragraphs the Soviet Union abstained and Poland voted against. The stated reason is drawn from Soviet statements at the 166th and 167th meetings, since none was given at the 170th; the draft's content is summarized from the parts read at the 170th meeting. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":15,"un_id":15,"date":"1947-08-18","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Transjordan","meeting_record":"S/PV.186","meeting_number":186,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Transjordan","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Jordan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Transjordan be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Transjordan's change from mandate to independence was the result of unilateral British action taken without anyone's sanction, that it was unclear what kind of independence Transjordan had received, and that it could not support admission that year.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked the application again in 1948 and later. Jordan was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"On 18 August 1947 the Council voted again on Transjordan's application, which the Soviet Union had first blocked in 1946. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it was unclear whether Transjordan was independent of the United Kingdom. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Poland). Jordan was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.186; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/05/pdf/nl470005.pdf","notes":"The UN list gives page references 2041, 2042 and 2041 for vetoes 15 to 17 without naming the applicants. The three Soviet vetoes at the 186th meeting were, in order, Transjordan (vote on p. 2041), Ireland (pp. 2041-2042) and Portugal (p. 2045); the vetoes are assigned in that order, so the mapping of vetoes 15 to 17 to applicants is an inference. Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.186. There was no written draft; the President put each application to the vote. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":16,"un_id":16,"date":"1947-08-18","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Ireland","meeting_record":"S/PV.186","meeting_number":186,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ireland","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ireland","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IRL","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Ireland be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Ireland had been on very good terms with the Axis powers, had given no help to the Allies during the war and had never had normal relations with the Soviet Union.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked the application again in 1948 and later. Ireland was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"On 18 August 1947 the Council voted again on Ireland's application, which the Soviet Union had first blocked in 1946. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying Ireland had given no help to the Allies during the war and had never had normal relations with the Soviet Union. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Poland). Ireland was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.186; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/05/pdf/nl470005.pdf","notes":"The UN list gives page references 2041, 2042 and 2041 for vetoes 15 to 17 without naming the applicants. The three Soviet vetoes at the 186th meeting were, in order, Transjordan (vote on p. 2041), Ireland (pp. 2041-2042) and Portugal (p. 2045); the vetoes are assigned in that order, so the mapping of vetoes 15 to 17 to applicants is an inference. Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.186. There was no written draft; the President put each application to the vote. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":17,"un_id":17,"date":"1947-08-18","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Portugal","meeting_record":"S/PV.186","meeting_number":186,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Portugal","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Portugal","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Portugal be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Portugal had kept close ties with the Franco regime during and after the war and had not entered into normal relations with the Soviet Union, so that, like Ireland, it did not meet the requirements for membership. Poland cited Portugal's association with Franco Spain.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked the application again in 1948 and later. Portugal was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"On 18 August 1947 the Council voted again on Portugal's application, which the Soviet Union had first blocked in 1946. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying Portugal had kept close ties with the Franco regime and had no normal relations with the Soviet Union. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). Portugal was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.186; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/05/pdf/nl470005.pdf","notes":"The UN list gives page references 2041, 2042 and 2041 for vetoes 15 to 17 without naming the applicants. The three Soviet vetoes at the 186th meeting were, in order, Transjordan (vote on p. 2041), Ireland (pp. 2041-2042) and Portugal (p. 2045); the vetoes are assigned in that order, so the mapping of vetoes 15 to 17 to applicants is an inference. Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.186. There was no written draft; the President put each application to the vote. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":18,"un_id":18,"date":"1947-08-19","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/486","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.188","meeting_number":188,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Greek Frontier Incidents Question","short_agenda":"Greek frontier incidents","topic":"Greece: finding that aid to Greek guerrillas threatens the peace","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Greece","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GRC; ALB; BGR; YUG","ucdp_conflict_id":203,"ucdp_dyad_id":404,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 203 (Government of Greece vs DSE, 1946-1949); the draft addressed outside support for the Greek guerrillas.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have found that Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia had given assistance and support to the guerrillas fighting the Greek government, determined under Chapter VII that this was a threat to the peace, called on them to stop, and directed the Commission's Subsidiary Group to report on compliance.","stated_reason":"After the votes the Soviet Union said the proposals put forward by the United States, Australia and others were a political game with nothing in common with a desire to improve relations between Greece and its neighbours, and that it could not take part.","aftermath":"On 15 September 1947 the Council removed the Greek question from its agenda (resolution 34 (1947)), and the General Assembly set up the UN Special Committee on the Balkans in resolution 109 (II) of 21 October 1947.","context":"The US draft would have found under Chapter VII that support by Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia for the Greek guerrillas was a threat to the peace and called on them to stop. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the Western proposals a political game. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). Less than a month later the Council dropped the item and the General Assembly took up the Greek question.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.188; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/707/31/pdf/nl470731.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/486","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.188: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. The Soviet statement was made after both votes at the meeting and applies to vetoes 18 and 19. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":19,"un_id":19,"date":"1947-08-19","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/471","draft_note":"S/471 and S/471/Add.1 (Australian draft as amended by the United States)","meeting_record":"S/PV.188","meeting_number":188,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Greek Frontier Incidents Question","short_agenda":"Greek frontier incidents","topic":"Greece: threat to the peace and direct negotiations","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Greece","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GRC; ALB; BGR; YUG","ucdp_conflict_id":203,"ucdp_dyad_id":404,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 203 (Government of Greece vs DSE, 1946-1949); the draft addressed frontier violations tied to the Greek civil war.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have determined that the situation on Greece's northern borders was a threat to the peace under Article 39, called on Greece, Albania, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria to stop provocations and frontier violations, directed them under Article 40 to negotiate directly, and provided for observers reporting to the Council.","stated_reason":"After the votes the Soviet Union said the proposals put forward by the United States, Australia and others were a political game with nothing in common with a desire to improve relations between Greece and its neighbours, and that it could not take part.","aftermath":"On 15 September 1947 the Council removed the Greek question from its agenda (resolution 34 (1947)), and the General Assembly set up the UN Special Committee on the Balkans in resolution 109 (II) of 21 October 1947.","context":"The Australian draft, amended by the United States, would have found a threat to the peace on Greece's northern borders, called on all four states to stop frontier violations and directed them to negotiate. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the Western proposals a political game. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). The Council dropped the item in September 1947, and the General Assembly set up a Balkan committee.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.188; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/707/31/pdf/nl470731.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/471; https://undocs.org/en/S/471/Add.1","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.188: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. The UN list also cites the 177th meeting, where the draft was introduced. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":20,"un_id":20,"date":"1947-08-21","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Australian draft resolution on the application of Austria (no S/ symbol found; text in S/PV.190)","meeting_record":"S/PV.190","meeting_number":190,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Austria","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Austria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"AUT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have noted that Austria was still under military occupation, found that it was a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out Charter obligations, and recommended its admission at such time and under such conditions as the General Assembly deemed appropriate.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said applications from states whose peace treaties were not yet concluded should wait until the treaties came into force, and noted that the treaty with Austria had not even been drawn up.","aftermath":"Austria was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"The Australian draft would have found Austria qualified for membership and left the timing of admission to the General Assembly, since Austria was still under four-power occupation. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying applications from states awaiting peace treaties should wait until the treaties were in force. The vote was 8 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (France and Poland). Austria was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.190; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/07/pdf/nl470007.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.186","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.190: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, SYR, GBR, USA; against RUS; abstaining FRA, POL. The UN list names this veto only 'Admission of new Members'; it is coded as Austria because the Austrian vote is on pp. 2130-2131 of the record, matching the UN list reference. No S/ symbol for the draft was found. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":21,"un_id":21,"date":"1947-08-21","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Australian draft resolution on the application of Italy (no S/ symbol found; text in S/PV.190)","meeting_record":"S/PV.190","meeting_number":190,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Applications for Membership (Italy)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Italy","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Italy","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ITA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have noted that Italy had ratified the peace treaty, found that Italy was a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out Charter obligations, and recommended its admission at such time and under such conditions as the General Assembly deemed appropriate.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft bypassed the Council by leaving the timing and conditions of Italy's admission to the General Assembly, and that applications from former enemy states should wait until their peace treaties came into force.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked Italy again in October 1947 and April 1948. Italy was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"The Australian draft would have found Italy qualified for membership and left the timing of its admission to the General Assembly, since the peace treaty was not yet in force. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the text bypassed the Council and that former enemy applicants should wait for their treaties to take effect. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Poland). Italy was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.190; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/07/pdf/nl470007.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.186","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.190: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against RUS; abstaining POL. No S/ symbol for the draft was found. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":22,"un_id":22,"date":"1947-08-25","year":1947,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Soviet amendments to S/513 (amendment)","meeting_record":"S/PV.194","meeting_number":194,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"The Indonesian question","short_agenda":"Indonesian question","topic":"Indonesia: Council commission to supervise the ceasefire (amendment)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Netherlands","vetoed_by":"France","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"RUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NLD; IDN","ucdp_conflict_id":204,"ucdp_dyad_id":405,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 204 (Netherlands vs Indonesian People's Army, Indonesia, 1946-1949) is the conflict the ceasefire concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Soviet amendments to the Australian-Chinese draft (S/513) would have replaced its provisions on reports by the career consuls in Batavia with a commission of all Council members to supervise the Council's ceasefire call of 1 August 1947, and kept the question on the agenda.","stated_reason":"France gave no explanation of its vote at the meeting, but it had disputed, with Belgium, the Council's competence in the Indonesian question under Article 2, paragraph 7, and supported a Belgian proposal to ask the International Court of Justice about it.","aftermath":"The Council then adopted the joint Australian-Chinese draft S/513 as resolution 30 (1947), asking the career consuls in Batavia to report on the ceasefire, and the US draft S/514 as resolution 31 (1947), offering its good offices through a three-member committee.","context":"The Soviet amendments would have replaced the consular reporting body in the Australian-Chinese draft with a commission of all Council members to supervise the August 1947 ceasefire between the Netherlands and the Indonesian Republic. France vetoed them without giving a reason at the meeting, having earlier contested the Council's competence. The vote was 7 in favour, 2 against (Belgium and France) and 2 abstentions (China and the United Kingdom). The Council then adopted the consular arrangement and a good offices committee in resolutions 30 and 31 (1947).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.194; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/707/37/pdf/nl470737.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/513; https://undocs.org/en/S/514; https://undocs.org/en/S/517","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.194: in favour AUS, BRA, COL, POL, SYR, RUS, USA; against BEL, FRA; abstaining CHN, GBR. The UN list gives '29 (1947); 30 (1947); 31 (1947)' as the draft, which are resolutions; 30 and 31 were adopted at this meeting, while 29 (1947) appears unrelated. The French reason is inferred from the competence debate; no French explanation of vote is in the record of this meeting. The resolution numbers for S/513 and S/514 come from the UN resolution series and have not been confirmed against the record. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":23,"un_id":23,"date":"1947-09-15","year":1947,"month":9,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Preliminary question: whether US draft S/552 was procedural (no S/ symbol)","meeting_record":"S/PV.202","meeting_number":202,"vetoed_item":"procedural question","agenda":"The Greek Frontier Incidents Question","short_agenda":"Greek frontier incidents","topic":"Greece: request to the General Assembly (procedural vote)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Greece","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GRC; ALB; BGR; YUG","ucdp_conflict_id":203,"ucdp_dyad_id":404,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 203 (Government of Greece vs DSE, 1946-1949); the underlying dispute concerned support for the Greek guerrillas.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The vote was on a proposal that US draft S/552, asking the General Assembly to consider the Greek dispute, was procedural, which would have meant the draft was adopted despite the Soviet negative vote.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union, whose representative was President, said the US draft dealt with the substance of the Greek question, especially given its implications, and that under the San Francisco statement of the permanent members the preliminary question was itself subject to the veto.","aftermath":"Later at the same meeting the Council adopted a US proposal to remove the Greek question from its agenda (resolution 34 (1947)) (9 in favour and 2 against), which freed the General Assembly to act. The Assembly set up the UN Special Committee on the Balkans in resolution 109 (II) of 21 October 1947.","context":"After the Soviet Union vetoed a US draft asking the General Assembly to consider the Greek dispute, the Council voted on whether that draft was procedural. The Soviet Union vetoed that proposal too, in a double veto, saying the draft dealt with substance, and its representative, as President, ruled the proposal defeated. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Syria). The Council then removed the Greek question from its agenda, leaving the Assembly free to act.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.202; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/09/pdf/nl470009.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/552","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.202, p. 2400: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS; abstaining SYR. Whether a negative vote on such a preliminary question is a veto was disputed at the time; the UN list counts it. Resolution 34 (1947) is listed as the follow-up resolution because it achieved the aim of S/552 by removing the item, though its text differs. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":24,"un_id":24,"date":"1947-09-15","year":1947,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/552","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.202","meeting_number":202,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Greek Frontier Incidents Question","short_agenda":"Greek frontier incidents","topic":"Greece: request to the General Assembly to consider the dispute","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Greece","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GRC; ALB; BGR; YUG","ucdp_conflict_id":203,"ucdp_dyad_id":404,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 203 (Government of Greece vs DSE, 1946-1949); the dispute concerned support for the Greek guerrillas.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, citing Article 12 of the Charter, would have asked the General Assembly to consider the dispute between Greece and Albania, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria and make any recommendations it deemed appropriate, and instructed the Secretary-General to give the Assembly all records of the case.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft dealt with the substance of the Greek question and that it opposed both removing the question from the Council's agenda in effect and asking the General Assembly to make recommendations on it.","aftermath":"The Council then voted on whether the draft was procedural, and the Soviet Union blocked that vote too. It went on to adopt a US proposal removing the Greek question from its agenda (resolution 34 (1947)), and the General Assembly set up the UN Special Committee on the Balkans in resolution 109 (II).","context":"The US draft would have asked the General Assembly to consider the Greek frontier dispute and make recommendations, after earlier Western drafts on the question had been vetoed. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the request concerned substance and that it opposed handing the question to the Assembly. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). The Council then removed the item from its agenda, which allowed the Assembly to take it up.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.202; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/09/pdf/nl470009.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/552","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.202, p. 2399-2400: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. The United States held that the draft was procedural and the President ruled it rejected; see veto 23. Resolution 34 (1947) removed the item from the agenda and is not the same text. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":25,"un_id":25,"date":"1947-10-01","year":1947,"month":10,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Italy","meeting_record":"S/PV.206","meeting_number":206,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Reconsideration of the applications for admission to the United Nations of Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy and Romania--Application [for admission to the United Nations] of Finland","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Italy","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Italy","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ITA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour, on reconsideration requested by the United States and Poland, would have recommended that Italy be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it supported the admission of Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Italy and Romania under the Potsdam Agreement and the peace treaties, but only together, and that it would not take part in a 'shabby political game' of admitting any of them separately.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked Italy again in April 1948. Italy was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"On 1 October 1947, at the request of the United States (S/562) and Poland (S/563), the Council voted separately on the applications of five former enemy states after setting aside a Polish proposal to vote on them together. The Soviet Union vetoed Italy, saying it would support the five only as a group. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). Italy was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.206; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/11/pdf/nl470011.pdf","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.206: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. The UN list gives the same reference (p. 2476) for vetoes 25 and 26; they are assigned to Italy and Finland in the order the votes were taken (Italy first). There was no written draft for each applicant. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":26,"un_id":26,"date":"1947-10-01","year":1947,"month":10,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Finland","meeting_record":"S/PV.206","meeting_number":206,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Reconsideration of the applications for admission to the United Nations of Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy and Romania--Application [for admission to the United Nations] of Finland","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Finland","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Finland","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"FIN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour, on Finland's request (S/559) taken up with the US and Polish requests for reconsideration of the former enemy states, would have recommended that Finland be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it supported the admission of Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Italy and Romania under the Potsdam Agreement and the peace treaties, but only together, and that it would not take part in a 'shabby political game' of admitting any of them separately.","aftermath":"Finland was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"On 1 October 1947, at the request of the United States (S/562) and Poland (S/563) and following Finland's cablegram (S/559), the Council voted separately on the applications of five former enemy states after setting aside a Polish proposal to vote on them together. The Soviet Union vetoed Finland, saying it would support the five only as a group. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). Finland was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.206; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/11/pdf/nl470011.pdf","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.206: in favour AUS, BEL, BRA, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against POL, RUS. The UN list gives the same reference (p. 2476) for vetoes 25 and 26; they are assigned to Italy and Finland in the order the votes were taken (Italy first). There was no written draft for each applicant. RUS used for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":27,"un_id":27,"date":"1948-04-10","year":1948,"month":4,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on recommending the application of Italy (reconsideration requested in S/709)","meeting_record":"S/PV.279","meeting_number":279,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Applications of the Union of Burma for membership in the United Nations--Reconsideration of the applications for membership in the United Nations of Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, the Mongolian People's Republic, Portugal, Romania and Transjordan","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Italy","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Italy","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ITA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Italy be admitted to membership in the United Nations, following a request for reconsideration by France, the United Kingdom and the United States (S/709).","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the United States had raised Italy's application to provoke a Soviet veto before the Italian elections of 18 April 1948, and that Italy should be admitted together with all the other countries with which peace treaties had been signed.","aftermath":"Italy was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"France, the United Kingdom and the United States asked the Council to reconsider Italy's application shortly before the Italian elections of April 1948. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it would accept Italy only together with the other former enemy applicants. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). At the same meeting the Council recommended Burma in resolution 45 (1948), and Italy was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.279; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/700/13/pdf/nl470013.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/709","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.279: in favour ARG, BEL, CAN, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS. The UN list gives '45 (1948)' as the draft; resolution 45 (1948) recommended Burma at the same meeting and is not the vetoed item. There was no written draft; the President put the recommendation to the vote. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":28,"un_id":28,"date":"1948-05-24","year":1948,"month":5,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Preliminary question: whether the vote on the Chilean-Argentine draft resolution was procedural (no S/ symbol)","meeting_record":"S/PV.303","meeting_number":303,"vetoed_item":"procedural question","agenda":"Letter from the permanent representative of Chile relative to the events in Czechoslovakia--The Palestine question","short_agenda":"Czechoslovak question","topic":"Czechoslovakia: sub-committee to hear evidence (procedural vote)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Czechoslovakia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"CSK","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No armed conflict: the February 1948 change of government in Czechoslovakia does not appear in UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The vote was on whether the vote on the Chilean-Argentine draft to set up a sub-committee to hear evidence on the February 1948 events in Czechoslovakia was procedural, which would have let the draft pass without the concurrence of all permanent members.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it would abide by the 1945 San Francisco statement of the permanent members, under which a decision to set up a body to investigate could start a chain of events and was therefore not procedural.","aftermath":"The President (France) ruled that the Soviet negative vote meant the question was not procedural, and a motion to overturn his ruling failed (6 in favour). The Soviet Union then vetoed the draft itself, and the Czechoslovak question stayed on the Council's list of matters with no further action.","context":"Chile had asked the Council to examine the communist takeover in Czechoslovakia in February 1948. The Soviet Union vetoed the proposal that the vote on a draft setting up a fact-finding sub-committee was procedural, citing the San Francisco statement of the permanent members, and the French President ruled that the Soviet vote decided the matter. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR) and 1 abstention (France). The draft was then vetoed and the Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.303; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/800/01/pdf/nl480001.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/694; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.281","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.303: in favour ARG, BEL, CAN, CHN, COL, SYR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS; abstaining FRA. The UN list gives 'See PV' for this veto; it is coded as the preliminary vote, and veto 29 as the draft itself, because the UN list reference for veto 29 points to the draft text at the 281st meeting. Whether a negative vote on the preliminary question is a veto was disputed; the President ruled that it was. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR; CSK for Czechoslovakia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":29,"un_id":29,"date":"1948-05-24","year":1948,"month":5,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Chilean-Argentine draft resolution (no S/ symbol found; introduced at the 281st meeting, text read in S/PV.303)","meeting_record":"S/PV.303","meeting_number":303,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Czechoslovak Question","short_agenda":"Czechoslovak question","topic":"Czechoslovakia: sub-committee to hear evidence on the February 1948 events","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Czechoslovakia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CHL; ARG","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"CSK","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No armed conflict: the February 1948 change of government in Czechoslovakia does not appear in UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have set up a sub-committee of three members to receive or hear evidence, statements and testimony on the situation in Czechoslovakia and report to the Council, without prejudice to decisions under Article 34.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said a decision to set up such a body was a matter of substance under the San Francisco statement of the permanent members. It had argued at earlier meetings that the Chilean complaint concerned the internal affairs of Czechoslovakia.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the Czechoslovak question, which stayed on its list of matters.","context":"The draft, submitted by Chile and co-sponsored by Argentina, would have set up a three-member sub-committee to hear evidence about the communist takeover in Czechoslovakia in February 1948. After the Council failed to classify the vote as procedural, the Soviet Union vetoed the draft, saying the creation of an investigating body was a matter of substance. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.303; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/800/01/pdf/nl480001.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/694; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.281; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.268","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.303: in favour ARG, BEL, CAN, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS. Chile was not a Council member and its sponsorship is from the record's description of the text as the draft 'submitted by the delegations of Chile and Argentina'. The Soviet position that the Chilean complaint concerned the internal affairs of Czechoslovakia (Article 2, paragraph 7) is stated in the debate at the 268th meeting (S/PV.268), where France also referred to the 'objection made by the representative of the USSR and raised again by the representative of the Ukrainian SSR' that the matter concerned internal affairs. No S/ symbol for the draft was found; S/694 is the Chilean letter. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR; CSK for Czechoslovakia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":30,"un_id":30,"date":"1948-06-22","year":1948,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/836","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.325","meeting_number":325,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Atomic Energy: International Control","short_agenda":"International control of atomic energy","topic":"Atomic energy: approval of Atomic Energy Commission reports","region":"Global","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Thematic draft on atomic energy control; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have accepted the first three reports of the UN Atomic Energy Commission, approved their general findings and recommendations as the basis for effective international control of atomic energy, approved the Commission's third report, and sent the reports to the General Assembly with a record of the Council's approval.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the United States and other states were blocking real international control and the prohibition of atomic weapons, which it called the main task set by the General Assembly, and it rejected the majority proposals in the reports.","aftermath":"The same day the Council adopted a Canadian draft sending the reports to the General Assembly as a procedural matter (resolution 52 (1948)), with the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR abstaining. The General Assembly approved the Commission's general findings and recommendations in resolution 191 (III) of 4 November 1948.","context":"The US draft would have approved the majority plan of the UN Atomic Energy Commission for international control of atomic energy. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the United States opposed real control and a ban on atomic weapons. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). The Council then sent the reports to the General Assembly without approving them, in resolution 52 (1948).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.325; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/817/58/pdf/nl481758.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/836; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/191(III)","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.325: in favour ARG, BEL, CAN, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS. The Soviet reason is taken from Gromyko's statement on the Canadian draft, in which he said he opposed it 'for the same reasons' as the US draft. Resolution 52 (1948) transmitted the reports without approving them, so it is a different text. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":31,"un_id":31,"date":"1948-08-18","year":1948,"month":8,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Oral Chinese proposal to recommend Ceylon's admission (no S/ symbol; Committee report S/859)","meeting_record":"S/PV.351","meeting_number":351,"vetoed_item":"oral proposal","agenda":"Admission of Ceylon to the United Nations","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ceylon","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ceylon","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CHN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LKA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The proposal would have recommended to the General Assembly that Ceylon be admitted to membership in the United Nations, following the report of the Committee on the Admission of New Members (S/859), in which a majority supported the application.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it doubted that Ceylon was a sovereign and independent state after the British grant of dominion status, asked for more information and proposed postponement in its own draft (S/974), which received 2 votes.","aftermath":"The Soviet Union blocked Ceylon again on 15 December 1948. Ceylon was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"China proposed orally that the Council recommend Ceylon, which had become a British dominion in February 1948. The Soviet Union vetoed the proposal, saying it doubted Ceylon's independence, and proposed postponement. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Ceylon was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.351; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/800/03/pdf/nl480003.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/859; https://undocs.org/en/S/974","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.351: in favour ARG, BEL, CAN, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS. The UN list gives S/859, which is the Committee report; the vetoed item was an oral Chinese proposal put to the vote by the President. The Soviet argument about independence is summarized from the debate and from the existence of the Soviet postponement draft S/974. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR; LKA for Ceylon.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":32,"un_id":32,"date":"1948-10-25","year":1948,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/1048","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.372","meeting_number":372,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"\"Continuation of the discussion on the identic notifications, dated 29 September 1948, from 'the Governments of the French Republic, the United States of America and the United Kmgdom to the Secretary-General (S/102O and S/1fJ20/ Add.1)\"","short_agenda":"1948 Notifications from France, US and UK (Berlin question)","topic":"Berlin blockade: lifting of restrictions and currency reform","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Germany (occupied)","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG; BEL; CAN; CHN; COL; SYR","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"DEU; FRA; GBR; USA; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No armed conflict: the Berlin blockade involved no fighting and is not in UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by the six non-permanent members, would have called on the four occupying powers to lift at once all restrictions on communications, transport and commerce between Berlin and the western zones and to the Soviet zone, to have the military governors introduce the Soviet-zone mark as the sole currency for Berlin within a set period, and then to hold a meeting of foreign ministers on the whole German problem.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Berlin question was outside the Council's competence and that the draft did not provide for lifting the restrictions and introducing the Soviet-zone mark at the same time, as the four-power directive of 30 August 1948 had agreed.","aftermath":"The Council took no further decision. The blockade ended on 12 May 1949 under a four-power agreement of 4 May 1949 reached in talks between the US and Soviet representatives at the United Nations.","context":"France, the United Kingdom and the United States brought the Soviet blockade of Berlin to the Council in September 1948. The six elected members proposed that the restrictions be lifted at once and that the Soviet-zone mark become Berlin's currency, followed by four-power talks on Germany. The Soviet Union vetoed the draft, saying the Council was not competent and the text did not provide for simultaneous steps. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.372; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/817/99/pdf/nl481799.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/1048; https://undocs.org/en/S/1020; https://undocs.org/en/S/1316","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.372: in favour ARG, BEL, CAN, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS. The draft's operative points are summarized from Vyshinsky's quotation and the President's summary in the record, not from S/1048 itself. The four-power agreement and the 12 May 1949 date for lifting the restrictions are confirmed by the communiqué transmitted to the Council in S/1316 (letter of 4 May 1949 from France, the United Kingdom and the United States). The issue area is a judgement; no category closely fits a blockade among occupying powers. DEU stands for Germany (occupied; no state in October 1948). RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":33,"un_id":33,"date":"1948-12-15","year":1948,"month":12,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No draft resolution; vote on Ceylon's application for membership","meeting_record":"S/PV.384","meeting_number":384,"vetoed_item":"application","agenda":"Application of Israel for membership in the United Nations--Application of Ceylon for membership in the United Nations--The Hyderabad question","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ceylon","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ceylon","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LKA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"A vote in favour would have recommended to the General Assembly that Ceylon be admitted to membership in the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Ceylon's application should wait until the Council reconsidered all 12 pending applications together, as General Assembly resolution 197 B (III) asked, and that there was no urgency because the Assembly would not meet again before April 1949.","aftermath":"Ceylon was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"On 15 December 1948 the Council voted again on Ceylon's application after rejecting a Soviet motion to postpone it until all pending applications were reviewed together. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying no exception should be made for Ceylon. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Ceylon was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.384; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/800/05/pdf/nl480005.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/197(III)","notes":"Roll call recorded by name in S/PV.384: in favour ARG, BEL, CAN, CHN, COL, FRA, SYR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS. The Soviet postponement motion failed 2-7-2 (ARG and SYR abstaining). The record refers only to 'resolution B'; this is GA resolution 197 B (III) of 8 December 1948, which asks the Council to reconsider the applications in the special reports A/617 and A/618. Israel's application was also discussed at this meeting but was not vetoed. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR; LKA for Ceylon.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":34,"un_id":34,"date":"1949-04-08","year":1949,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/1305","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.423","meeting_number":423,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Report of the Committee on the Admission of New Members to the Security Council concerning the application of the Republic of Nepal for membership in the United Nations--Application of the Principality of Liechtenstein to become a party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: South Korea","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CHN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; UCDP 235 (North Korea vs South Korea) begins in 1949, but the draft concerned admission, not the conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have found that South Korea was a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out Charter obligations and recommended to the General Assembly that it be admitted to membership.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union called the South Korean government a puppet regime and said a government that could not survive without foreign troops on its soil could not be considered sovereign or independent.","aftermath":"South Korea was admitted to the United Nations on 17 September 1991, together with North Korea, by General Assembly resolution 46/1 on the Council's recommendation in resolution 702 (1991).","context":"China tabled the draft, which would have recommended South Korea for membership after the 1948 elections held under UN observation in the south. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the Seoul government a puppet regime that depended on US troops. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). South Korea joined the United Nations in 1991.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.423; https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/900/01/pdf/nl490001.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/1305; https://undocs.org/en/S/1281","notes":"Discrepancy with the UN list: its agenda for this veto names Nepal's application and Liechtenstein's request on the ICJ Statute, which were later items at the same meeting. Nepal's application was only referred to the Committee on 8 April 1949, without a vote; the only veto at S/PV.423 was on the Republic of Korea (S/1305, the symbol the UN list gives). Roll call recorded by name: in favour ARG, CAN, CHN, CUB, EGY, FRA, NOR, GBR, USA; against UKR, RUS. Malik's reason is from his statement during the debate. RUS used for the USSR; UKR for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":35,"un_id":35,"date":"1949-09-07","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1385","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.439","meeting_number":439,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Nepal","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Nepal","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CHN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NPL","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by China, would have found Nepal a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter and recommended that the General Assembly admit it to membership.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union did not explain its vote at the meeting, while the Ukrainian SSR, which also voted against, said it would vote for Nepal and all 12 pending applicants only if the Western powers ended what it called discrimination against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Mongolia and Romania.","aftermath":"Nepal was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"China proposed that the Council recommend Nepal for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed it without explanation at the meeting, and the Ukrainian SSR, which also voted against, linked Nepal's admission to that of the Soviet-backed applicants. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Nepal was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.439; https://undocs.org/en/S/1385","notes":"The Soviet representative (Tsarapkin) spoke only on the order of the agenda at this meeting; the stated reason is taken from the Ukrainian SSR statement (Manuilsky), which matches the Soviet position stated at earlier meetings. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR, CHN for the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":36,"un_id":36,"date":"1949-09-13","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1337","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.443","meeting_number":443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ceylon","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ceylon","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LKA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Argentina, would have noted General Assembly resolution 197 (III) I of 8 December 1948 on Ceylon's application, found Ceylon a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the applications should be voted on in the order they were submitted, pressed its own draft (S/1340/Rev.2) to admit all 12 pending applicants and Nepal together, and accused the United States and the United Kingdom of discriminating against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Mongolia and Romania.","aftermath":"Ceylon was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"Argentina tabled seven drafts based on General Assembly recommendations of December 1948, one of them recommending Ceylon for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed all seven, saying all pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Ceylon was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.443; https://undocs.org/en/S/1337","notes":"Seven Argentine drafts (S/1331 to S/1337) were vetoed in sequence at the 443rd meeting, all by 9 votes to 2; the record (p. 29 to 34) gives the text of each and the roll call. The Soviet explanation was given in general terms for the whole series rather than for each applicant. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR. LKA used for Ceylon.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":37,"un_id":37,"date":"1949-09-13","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1336","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.443","meeting_number":443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Austria","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Austria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"AUT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Argentina, would have noted General Assembly resolution 197 (III) H of 8 December 1948 on Austria's application, found Austria a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the applications should be voted on in the order they were submitted, pressed its own draft (S/1340/Rev.2) to admit all 12 pending applicants and Nepal together, and accused the United States and the United Kingdom of discriminating against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Mongolia and Romania.","aftermath":"Austria was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"Argentina tabled seven drafts based on General Assembly recommendations of December 1948, one of them recommending Austria for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed all seven, saying all pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Austria was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.443; https://undocs.org/en/S/1336","notes":"Seven Argentine drafts (S/1331 to S/1337) were vetoed in sequence at the 443rd meeting, all by 9 votes to 2; the record (p. 29 to 34) gives the text of each and the roll call. The Soviet explanation was given in general terms for the whole series rather than for each applicant. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":38,"un_id":38,"date":"1949-09-13","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1335","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.443","meeting_number":443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ireland","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ireland","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IRL","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Argentina, would have noted General Assembly resolution 197 (III) G of 8 December 1948 on Ireland's application, found Ireland a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the applications should be voted on in the order they were submitted, pressed its own draft (S/1340/Rev.2) to admit all 12 pending applicants and Nepal together, and accused the United States and the United Kingdom of discriminating against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Mongolia and Romania.","aftermath":"Ireland was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"Argentina tabled seven drafts based on General Assembly recommendations of December 1948, one of them recommending Ireland for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed all seven, saying all pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Ireland was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.443; https://undocs.org/en/S/1335","notes":"Seven Argentine drafts (S/1331 to S/1337) were vetoed in sequence at the 443rd meeting, all by 9 votes to 2; the record (p. 29 to 34) gives the text of each and the roll call. The Soviet explanation was given in general terms for the whole series rather than for each applicant. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":39,"un_id":39,"date":"1949-09-13","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1334","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.443","meeting_number":443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Finland","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Finland","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"FIN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Argentina, would have noted General Assembly resolution 197 (III) F of 8 December 1948 on Finland's application, found Finland a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the applications should be voted on in the order they were submitted, pressed its own draft (S/1340/Rev.2) to admit all 12 pending applicants and Nepal together, and accused the United States and the United Kingdom of discriminating against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Mongolia and Romania.","aftermath":"Finland was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"Argentina tabled seven drafts based on General Assembly recommendations of December 1948, one of them recommending Finland for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed all seven, saying all pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Finland was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.443; https://undocs.org/en/S/1334","notes":"Seven Argentine drafts (S/1331 to S/1337) were vetoed in sequence at the 443rd meeting, all by 9 votes to 2; the record (p. 29 to 34) gives the text of each and the roll call. The Soviet explanation was given in general terms for the whole series rather than for each applicant. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":40,"un_id":40,"date":"1949-09-13","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1333","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.443","meeting_number":443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Italy","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Italy","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ITA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Argentina, would have noted General Assembly resolution 197 (III) E of 8 December 1948 on Italy's application, found Italy a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the applications should be voted on in the order they were submitted, pressed its own draft (S/1340/Rev.2) to admit all 12 pending applicants and Nepal together, and accused the United States and the United Kingdom of discriminating against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Mongolia and Romania.","aftermath":"Italy was admitted to the United Nations on 14 December 1955 by General Assembly resolution 995 (X), after the Council recommended 16 states in resolution 109 (1955).","context":"Argentina tabled seven drafts based on General Assembly recommendations of December 1948, one of them recommending Italy for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed all seven, saying all pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Italy was admitted to the United Nations in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.443; https://undocs.org/en/S/1333","notes":"Seven Argentine drafts (S/1331 to S/1337) were vetoed in sequence at the 443rd meeting, all by 9 votes to 2; the record (p. 29 to 34) gives the text of each and the roll call. The Soviet explanation was given in general terms for the whole series rather than for each applicant. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":41,"un_id":41,"date":"1949-09-13","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1332","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.443","meeting_number":443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Jordan","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Jordan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Argentina, would have noted General Assembly resolution 197 (III) D of 8 December 1948 on Jordan's application, found Jordan a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the applications should be voted on in the order submitted and that all 12 pending applicants, plus Nepal, should be admitted together under its own draft (S/1340/Rev.2), and it accused the United States and the United Kingdom of discriminating against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Mongolia.","aftermath":"Jordan was admitted on 14 December 1955 as part of the package of 16 States recommended by Security Council resolution 109 (1955) and admitted by General Assembly resolution 995 (X).","context":"Argentina tabled seven drafts based on General Assembly recommendations of December 1948, one of them recommending Jordan for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed all seven, saying all pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Jordan was admitted in the package of December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.443; https://undocs.org/en/S/1332","notes":"Seven Argentine drafts (S/1331 to S/1337) were vetoed in sequence at the 443rd meeting, all by 9 votes to 2; the record (p. 29 to 34) gives the text of each and the roll call. The Soviet explanation was given in general terms for the whole series rather than for each applicant. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":42,"un_id":42,"date":"1949-09-13","year":1949,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1331","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.443","meeting_number":443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Portugal","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Portugal","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Argentina, would have noted General Assembly resolution 197 (III) C of 8 December 1948 on Portugal's application, found Portugal a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the applications should be voted on in the order submitted and that all 12 pending applicants, plus Nepal, should be admitted together under its own draft (S/1340/Rev.2), and it accused the United States and the United Kingdom of discriminating against Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Mongolia. The Ukrainian SSR said it had reservations about Portugal because of its conduct during the Second World War.","aftermath":"Portugal was admitted on 14 December 1955 as part of the package of 16 States recommended by Security Council resolution 109 (1955) and admitted by General Assembly resolution 995 (X).","context":"Argentina tabled seven drafts based on General Assembly recommendations of December 1948, one of them recommending Portugal for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed all seven, saying all pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Portugal was admitted in the package of December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.443; https://undocs.org/en/S/1331","notes":"Seven Argentine drafts (S/1331 to S/1337) were vetoed in sequence at the 443rd meeting, all by 9 votes to 2; the record (p. 29 to 34) gives the text of each and the roll call. The Soviet explanation was given in general terms for the whole series rather than for each applicant. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":43,"un_id":43,"date":"1949-10-11","year":1949,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/1398","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.450","meeting_number":450,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces (a) Letter dated 4 August 1949 from the Chairman of the Commission for Conventional Armaments addressed to the President of the Security Council transmitting the second progress report of the Commission (S/1372)( b) Letter dated 4 August 1949 from the Chairman of the Commission for Conventional Armaments addressed to the President of the Security Council transmitting a working paper and other documents (S/1372)","short_agenda":"Regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces","topic":"Conventional armaments: second progress report of the Commission for Conventional Armaments","region":"Global","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Arms regulation; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by the United States, would have taken note of the second progress report of the Commission for Conventional Armaments, approved the resolutions on items 1 and 2 of the Commission's plan of work adopted on 12 August 1948, and sent the report to the General Assembly.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the report showed two opposed approaches, its own for an immediate reduction of armaments together with a ban on atomic weapons under strict control, and that of the United States and the United Kingdom, which it accused of delaying and blocking both. The Ukrainian SSR said the draft would undercut the Soviet draft on the reduction of armaments.","aftermath":"The Council then took up a French draft on the census of armaments, which the Soviet Union also vetoed on 18 October 1949. The question went to the General Assembly.","context":"The United States asked the Council to endorse the 1948 work of the Commission for Conventional Armaments. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the Western powers were blocking arms reduction and keeping atomic weapons out of the talks. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). The question passed to the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.450; https://undocs.org/en/S/1398","notes":"The 12 August 1948 Commission resolutions referred to are not reproduced in the draft; their content is described only in general terms. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":44,"un_id":44,"date":"1949-10-18","year":1949,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/1408/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.452","meeting_number":452,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces (a) Letter dated 4 August 1949 from the Chairman of the Commission for Conventional Armaments addressed to the President of the Security Council transmitting a working paper and other documents (S/1372)","short_agenda":"Regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces","topic":"Conventional armaments: information on armed forces and atomic material","region":"Global","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Arms regulation; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by France, would have recognized the submission by states of full information on conventional armaments and armed forces, with adequate verification, as an essential part of any disarmament system, and recalled that full information on atomic material and facilities, including atomic weapons, was part of the United Nations plan for atomic control approved by the General Assembly.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft did not differ in substance from the French draft vetoed minutes earlier because it again left out atomic weapons, and that the sponsors wanted extra vetoes for the record.","aftermath":"No further draft was put to a vote in the Council. The General Assembly approved the census and verification proposals in resolution 300 (IV) of 5 December 1949.","context":"France tabled a second draft stating that information on conventional forces, with verification, was an essential part of disarmament and recalling the existing plan for atomic control. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it again excluded atomic weapons and repeated the draft it had just vetoed. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR) and 1 abstention (Argentina). The matter passed to the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.452; https://undocs.org/en/S/1408/Rev.1; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/300(IV)","notes":"This draft was voted after S/1399/Rev.1 at the same meeting, although the UN list numbers it first. The record calls it S/1408/Rev.1 in English and S/1408/Rev.2 in the French column. The General Assembly approved the Commission's proposals for the submission and verification of full information on conventional armaments and armed forces in resolution 300 (IV) of 5 December 1949. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":45,"un_id":45,"date":"1949-10-18","year":1949,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/1399/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.452","meeting_number":452,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces (a) Letter dated 4 August 1949 from the Chairman of the Commission for Conventional Armaments addressed to the President of the Security Council transmitting a working paper and other documents (S/1372)","short_agenda":"Regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces","topic":"Conventional armaments: census and verification proposals","region":"Global","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Arms regulation; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by France, would have approved the proposals in the working paper adopted by the Commission for Conventional Armaments on 1 August 1949 (S/1372) for the receipt, checking and publication of information on armed forces and conventional armaments as the basis for carrying out paragraph 6 of General Assembly resolution 192 (III), and sent them to the General Assembly.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the proposals dealt only with information on conventional armaments and armed forces and left out atomic weapons, and it backed its own draft, which called for information on both and which the Council rejected at the same meeting by 3 votes to 1, with 7 abstentions.","aftermath":"France tabled a second draft (S/1408/Rev.1), which the Soviet Union vetoed at the same meeting. The question went to the General Assembly.","context":"France asked the Council to approve the Commission for Conventional Armaments' plan for a census and verification of conventional forces. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying any exchange of information must also cover atomic weapons. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). A Soviet draft on information covering both kinds of weapons failed for lack of votes, and the issue went to the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.452; https://undocs.org/en/S/1399/Rev.1","notes":"The Soviet explanation was given by Malik after this vote, before the vote on S/1408/Rev.1; his fuller arguments appear across the 450th to 452nd meetings. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":46,"un_id":46,"date":"1949-12-13","year":1949,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/1431","draft_note":"S/1431 (all but final paragraph, separate vote)","meeting_record":"S/PV.456","meeting_number":456,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"The Indonesian question","short_agenda":"Indonesian question","topic":"Indonesia: Round Table Conference agreements","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Indonesia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CAN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IDN; NLD","ucdp_conflict_id":204,"ucdp_dyad_id":405,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 204 (Netherlands vs Indonesian People's Army) ended on 15 August 1949; the draft welcomed the settlement that followed.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"This part of the Canadian draft, voted separately at Argentina's request, would have noted with satisfaction the special report of the UN Commission for Indonesia on the conclusion of the Round Table Conference at The Hague, congratulated the parties, welcomed the coming establishment of the Republic of the United States of Indonesia as an independent sovereign State and commended the Commission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Hague agreements returned the Indonesian people to colonial rule in a new form in the interests of the Netherlands and other colonial powers, and that the Commission had served those powers and should be wound up.","aftermath":"The Ukrainian SSR draft (S/1433) failed at the same meeting (2 in favour and 9 against). Sovereignty passed to the Republic of the United States of Indonesia on 27 December 1949, and Indonesia joined the United Nations on 28 September 1950 (Security Council resolution 86 (1950), General Assembly resolution 491 (V)).","context":"Canada proposed that the Council welcome the Hague agreements on Indonesian independence and praise the UN Commission for Indonesia. The Soviet Union vetoed this part of the draft, saying the agreements kept Indonesia under Dutch control and the Commission had served the colonial powers. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). Indonesia became independent on 27 December 1949.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.456; https://undocs.org/en/S/1431","notes":"The UN list gives S/1431 for both veto 46 and veto 47. The record shows two separate votes on S/1431: the whole text except the final paragraph (9-2) and the final paragraph (8-2-1). This veto is assigned to the first vote on the assumption that the UN list follows meeting order. Argentina asked for the split; the President ruled the first part a matter of substance over Argentina's objection. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":47,"un_id":47,"date":"1949-12-13","year":1949,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/1431","draft_note":"S/1431 (final paragraph, separate vote)","meeting_record":"S/PV.456","meeting_number":456,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"The Indonesian question","short_agenda":"Indonesian question","topic":"Indonesia: continuation of the UN Commission for Indonesia","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Indonesia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CAN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IDN; NLD","ucdp_conflict_id":204,"ucdp_dyad_id":405,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 204 (Netherlands vs Indonesian People's Army) ended on 15 August 1949; the paragraph concerned UN monitoring of the settlement.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The final paragraph of the Canadian draft, voted separately, would have asked the UN Commission for Indonesia to continue its work, in particular to observe and assist in carrying out the Round Table Conference agreements, and to report to the Council.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it could not vote for a text that extended the work of the Commission, which it called an instrument of United States foreign policy and of the colonial powers that had secured Dutch interests at The Hague.","aftermath":"The President ruled that the earlier Council resolutions on Indonesia stayed in force, so the Commission continued to work under its existing mandate. Sovereignty was transferred on 27 December 1949, and Indonesia was admitted to the United Nations on 28 September 1950 (Security Council resolution 86 (1950)).","context":"The final paragraph of the Canadian draft would have asked the UN Commission for Indonesia to keep observing the implementation of the Hague agreements. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the Commission a tool of the colonial powers. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR) and 1 abstention (Argentina). The Commission continued under its existing mandate.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.456; https://undocs.org/en/S/1431","notes":"See veto 46: the assignment of the two votes on S/1431 to vetoes 46 and 47 assumes meeting order. Argentina abstained on this paragraph because it saw it as procedural. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":48,"un_id":48,"date":"1950-09-05","year":1950,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1653","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.496","meeting_number":496,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea","short_agenda":"Complaint of aggression on Republic of Korea","topic":"Korea: North Korean defiance of the United Nations","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"North Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRK; KOR","ucdp_conflict_id":235,"ucdp_dyad_id":482,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 235 (North Korea vs South Korea, 1949-1953) is the Korean War itself.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by the United States on 31 July 1950, would have condemned the North Korean authorities for their continued defiance of the United Nations, called on all States to use their influence to make them stop, and called on all States to refrain from helping them and from action that might spread the conflict.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no explanation of vote at the 496th meeting; in the debate it called the war the result of US aggression and pressed its own draft (S/1668) for a peaceful settlement, which failed at the same meeting (1 in favour and 8 against).","aftermath":"The Korean question moved to the General Assembly, which adopted resolution 376 (V) on 7 October 1950 and the Uniting for Peace resolution 377 (V) on 3 November 1950. The Council removed the Korean item from its agenda on 31 January 1951 (resolution 90 (1951)).","context":"After the Soviet Union returned to the Council in August 1950, the United States put forward a draft that would have condemned North Korea's defiance of the United Nations and asked states not to help it. The Soviet Union vetoed it without explanation and offered its own draft for a negotiated settlement, which failed. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Yugoslavia). Action on Korea shifted to the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.496; https://undocs.org/en/S/1653","notes":"The stated reason is drawn from the Soviet position in the debate; Malik gave no explanation of vote at this meeting. The content of the Soviet draft S/1668 is summarized from its title as read in the record. India voted in favour.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":49,"un_id":49,"date":"1950-09-12","year":1950,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/1752","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.501","meeting_number":501,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Complaint of bombing by air forces of the territory of China","short_agenda":"Complaint of bombing of China","topic":"Korea: alleged bombing of Chinese territory by US aircraft","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"China","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"CHN; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":235,"ucdp_dyad_id":482,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The complaint concerned US air operations in the Korean War (UCDP 235) along the Korean-Chinese border.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by the United States, would have set up a commission of two members, appointed by India and Sweden, to investigate on the spot the Chinese allegations (S/1722, S/1743) that US aircraft had bombed and strafed Chinese territory near the Korean border, and asked all governments and the Unified Command to give it access and information.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said no investigation was needed because the United States had admitted that a US aircraft violated Chinese territory, and that the commission was meant to keep the People's Republic of China from being heard, to drag the matter out and to send US agents to spy on China.","aftermath":"The Soviet draft condemning the bombing (S/1745/Rev.1) failed at the same meeting (1 in favour and 8 against). No investigation took place.","context":"The United States proposed an Indian-Swedish commission to investigate Chinese complaints that US aircraft had attacked Chinese territory near the Yalu. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the United States had already admitted the violation and the inquiry was a delaying tactic. The vote was 7 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (India and Yugoslavia); the Republic of China did not take part. No inquiry was set up.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.501; https://undocs.org/en/S/1752","notes":"The UN list cites '501st mtg., pp. 4-5'; the draft symbol is S/1752. The Republic of China delegation did not take part in the vote (coded not participating). Among the countries concerned, CHN denotes the People's Republic of China as complainant, which departs from the convention that CHN denotes the Republic of China in 1950.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":50,"un_id":50,"date":"1950-11-30","year":1950,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/1894","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.530","meeting_number":530,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Complaint of armed invasion of Taiwan (Formosa)--Complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea","short_agenda":"Complaint of aggression on Republic of Korea","topic":"Korea: Chinese intervention","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"North Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"CUB; ECU; FRA; NOR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRK; KOR; CHN","ucdp_conflict_id":235,"ucdp_dyad_id":482,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerned Chinese intervention in the Korean War (UCDP 235).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The six-power draft would have called on all States, in particular those responsible for the Chinese communist units in Korea, to stop helping the North Korean authorities and withdraw their nationals and units, affirmed that it was UN policy to hold the Chinese frontier with Korea inviolate and protect legitimate Chinese and Korean interests there, and asked the UN Commission for the Unification and Rehabilitation of Korea to help settle frontier problems.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union called the United States the aggressor in Korea and Taiwan, said its representatives ignored the facts presented by the People's Republic of China and objected to a vote on the whole text after both of its parts had been rejected.","aftermath":"The Council rejected two Soviet drafts on the same day. The General Assembly found on 1 February 1951 that the People's Republic of China had engaged in aggression in Korea (resolution 498 (V)), after the Council had removed the item from its agenda on 31 January 1951 (resolution 90 (1951)).","context":"Six states proposed that the Council call on China to withdraw its forces from Korea while affirming that the Chinese border would be respected. The Soviet Union vetoed the text as a whole, saying the United States was the aggressor in Korea and Taiwan. The vote was 9 in favour and 1 against; India did not take part. The General Assembly took the matter up in early 1951.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.530; https://undocs.org/en/S/1894","notes":"The meeting voted first on the first three preambular paragraphs (veto 52), then on the rest of the text (veto 51), then on the whole (this veto). India said it would not take part in the vote. A representative of the People's Republic of China (Wu Hsiu-chuan) attended under the Taiwan item. The Soviet reason is taken from Malik's statements in the debate; he gave no separate explanation of vote.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":51,"un_id":51,"date":"1950-11-30","year":1950,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/1894","draft_note":"S/1894 (operative part, separate vote)","meeting_record":"S/PV.530","meeting_number":530,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Complaint of armed invasion of Taiwan (Formosa)--Complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea","short_agenda":"Complaint of aggression on Republic of Korea","topic":"Korea: Chinese intervention (second part of draft)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"North Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"CUB; ECU; FRA; NOR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRK; KOR; CHN","ucdp_conflict_id":235,"ucdp_dyad_id":482,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerned Chinese intervention in the Korean War (UCDP 235).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The second part of the six-power draft, voted separately at Yugoslavia's request, would have called for the withdrawal of foreign units helping North Korea, affirmed the inviolability of the Chinese frontier and asked UN bodies on Korea to help settle frontier problems.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union described the United States as the aggressor in Korea and Taiwan and said the Council ignored the facts presented by the People's Republic of China.","aftermath":"The whole text was then put to the vote and also vetoed. The General Assembly found on 1 February 1951 that the People's Republic of China had engaged in aggression in Korea (resolution 498 (V)).","context":"Yugoslavia asked for a split vote on the six-power draft on Chinese intervention in Korea. The Soviet Union vetoed the second part, which held the call for withdrawal and the frontier guarantee, saying the United States was the aggressor in Korea and Taiwan. The vote was 9 in favour and 1 against; India did not take part. The whole text was vetoed minutes later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.530; https://undocs.org/en/S/1894","notes":"The split was requested by Yugoslavia. The second part began with the fourth preambular paragraph ('Affirming that United Nations forces...'), so it included two preambular paragraphs as well as the operative text.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":52,"un_id":52,"date":"1950-11-30","year":1950,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/1894","draft_note":"S/1894 (first three preambular paragraphs, separate vote)","meeting_record":"S/PV.530","meeting_number":530,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Complaint of armed invasion of Taiwan (Formosa)--Complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea","short_agenda":"Complaint of aggression on Republic of Korea","topic":"Korea: Chinese intervention (first three preambular paragraphs)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"North Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"CUB; ECU; FRA; NOR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRK; KOR; CHN","ucdp_conflict_id":235,"ucdp_dyad_id":482,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerned Chinese intervention in the Korean War (UCDP 235).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The first three preambular paragraphs of the six-power draft, voted separately, would have recalled the Council resolution of 25 June 1950 on the North Korean breach of the peace and General Assembly resolution 376 (V) of 7 October 1950, and noted the UN Command report that Chinese communist units were deployed against UN forces in Korea.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union described the United States as the aggressor in Korea and Taiwan and said the Council ignored the facts presented by the People's Republic of China.","aftermath":"The second part and the whole text were then vetoed. The General Assembly found on 1 February 1951 that the People's Republic of China had engaged in aggression in Korea (resolution 498 (V)).","context":"The first vote on the six-power draft on Chinese intervention covered its first three preambular paragraphs, which would have noted Chinese units fighting UN forces. The Soviet Union vetoed them, saying the United States was the aggressor in Korea and Taiwan. The vote was 8 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Yugoslavia); India did not take part. The rest of the draft was vetoed in the next two votes.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.530; https://undocs.org/en/S/1894","notes":"This was the first of the three votes on S/1894 at the meeting. The first preambular paragraph cites the Council resolution of 25 June 1950 (resolution 82 (1950)).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":53,"un_id":53,"date":"1952-02-06","year":1952,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2443","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.573","meeting_number":573,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (Italy)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Italy","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Italy","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ITA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by France, would have taken into account the General Assembly resolution of 7 December 1951 on Italy's application, noted that Italy was a peace-loving state meeting the conditions of Article 4 and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said all 14 pending applicants (Albania, Mongolia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Finland, Italy, Portugal, Ireland, Jordan, Austria, Ceylon, Nepal and Libya) should be admitted together without discrimination, and asked for a vote on its draft to that effect (S/2449/Rev.1).","aftermath":"The Soviet package draft was rejected at the same meeting by 6 votes to 2, with 3 abstentions. Italy was admitted on 14 December 1955 under Security Council resolution 109 (1955) and General Assembly resolution 995 (X).","context":"France proposed that the Council recommend Italy for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the 14 pending applicants, including those it backed, should be admitted together. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Italy was admitted in the package of December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.573; https://undocs.org/en/S/2443; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/550(VI)","notes":"The draft was submitted on 18 December 1951 and voted on 6 February 1952. The General Assembly resolution of 7 December 1951 it cites is resolution 550 (VI), which recommended that the Council give urgent consideration to recommending Italy's immediate admission.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":54,"un_id":54,"date":"1952-07-03","year":1952,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2671","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.587","meeting_number":587,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question of Request for Investigation of Alleged Bacterial Warfare","short_agenda":"Request for investigation of alleged bacterial warfare by UN in Korea","topic":"Korea: investigation of alleged bacteriological warfare","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"United States","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"USA; PRK; CHN","ucdp_conflict_id":235,"ucdp_dyad_id":482,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The charges concerned weapons use in the Korean War (UCDP 235).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by the United States, would have asked the International Committee of the Red Cross, with scientists and experts of its choice, to investigate charges that UN forces had used bacteriological weapons in Korea and China, called on all governments and authorities concerned to give it full cooperation and access, and asked the Secretary-General to assist.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Council could not discuss the use of bacterial weapons by US forces without official representatives of the People's Republic of China and North Korea, under Article 32 of the Charter, and called the US drafts illegal, one-sided and slanderous.","aftermath":"The United States then tabled a second draft (S/2688) declaring the charges false, which the Soviet Union vetoed on 9 July 1952. The question went to the General Assembly, which in April 1953 proposed an impartial investigation.","context":"The United States proposed that the Red Cross investigate Soviet and Chinese charges that UN forces were using germ weapons in Korea. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the matter could not be discussed without the People's Republic of China and North Korea present. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. A second US draft calling the charges false was vetoed six days later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.587; https://undocs.org/en/S/2671; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/706(VII)","notes":"The General Assembly follow-up is resolution 706 (VII) of 23 April 1953, which set up a commission to investigate the charges if the accusing governments accepted. Among the countries concerned, CHN refers to the People's Republic of China, which made the charges, departing from the Republic of China convention for this period.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":55,"un_id":55,"date":"1952-07-09","year":1952,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2688","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.590","meeting_number":590,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question of Request for Investigation of Alleged Bacterial Warfare","short_agenda":"Request for investigation of alleged bacterial warfare by UN in Korea","topic":"Korea: false charges of bacteriological warfare","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"United States","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"USA; PRK; CHN","ucdp_conflict_id":235,"ucdp_dyad_id":482,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The charges concerned weapons use in the Korean War (UCDP 235).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by the United States, would have concluded from the refusal of those making the charges to allow an impartial investigation that the charges of bacteriological warfare by UN forces must be presumed false, and condemned the practice of fabricating and spreading such charges.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union repeated that the Council could not consider the question without representatives of the People's Republic of China and North Korea, and called the US drafts illegal, one-sided and provocative.","aftermath":"The question went to the General Assembly, which in April 1953 proposed an impartial investigation of the charges. No investigation took place.","context":"After its Red Cross proposal was vetoed, the United States asked the Council to declare the germ warfare charges false and condemn their spread. The Soviet Union vetoed it, repeating that China and North Korea had to be heard first. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Pakistan). The issue moved to the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.590; https://undocs.org/en/S/2688; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/706(VII)","notes":"The Soviet reason is drawn from Malik's statements at the 587th and 590th meetings. The General Assembly follow-up is resolution 706 (VII) of 23 April 1953. Among the countries concerned, CHN refers to the People's Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":56,"un_id":56,"date":"1952-09-16","year":1952,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2483","draft_note":"S/2483 (draft annexed to letter)","meeting_record":"S/PV.600","meeting_number":600,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (Libya)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Libya","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Libya","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"PAK","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBY","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Pakistan, would have noted that the United Kingdom of Libya had become an independent sovereign state on 24 December 1951 under General Assembly resolutions 289 (IV) and 387 (V), found that it met the conditions of Article 4 and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the peace treaties obliged the three great powers to support the admission of Italy, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Finland and Libya alike, that the United States backed only the states it liked, and that its own draft (S/2664) to admit all 14 pending applicants together should be adopted.","aftermath":"Libya was admitted on 14 December 1955 under Security Council resolution 109 (1955) and General Assembly resolution 995 (X).","context":"Pakistan proposed that the Council recommend the newly independent Libya for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the great powers had promised to support all the peace treaty states together and that its package of 14 applicants should be adopted. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Libya was admitted in December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.600; https://undocs.org/en/S/2483","notes":"S/2483 is a letter from Pakistan dated 17 January 1952 with the draft resolution annexed; the record refers to the draft as document S/2483. The meeting began on 16 September 1952 (the record header) and the vote was taken that day. Libya is coded as Africa.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":57,"un_id":57,"date":"1952-09-18","year":1952,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2754","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.602","meeting_number":602,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (Japan)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Japan","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Japan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JPN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by the United States, would have found Japan a peace-loving State able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter and recommended its admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Japan was not yet an independent state, remained under foreign occupation and could not decide any question of policy without instructions from Washington, so its admission was premature; it also linked the issue to the 14 applicants it said the United States was blocking.","aftermath":"Japan was admitted on 18 December 1956 after the Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration of October 1956 (Security Council resolution 121 (1956), General Assembly resolution 1113 (XI)).","context":"The United States proposed that the Council recommend Japan for membership after the San Francisco peace treaty took effect. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying Japan remained under US occupation and was not independent. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Japan was admitted in December 1956 after it restored relations with the Soviet Union.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.602; https://undocs.org/en/S/2754","notes":"The roll call is incomplete in the available text of the record; the recorded total of 10 in favour and 1 against implies that all members other than the USSR voted in favour.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":58,"un_id":58,"date":"1952-09-19","year":1952,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2760","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.603","meeting_number":603,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (Cambodia)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Cambodia","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Cambodia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KHM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application. The Indochina war (UCDP 216) was the background, but the draft did not concern the conflict itself.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by France, would have stated that Cambodia was a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter and recommended that the General Assembly admit it.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union called Cambodia, Laos and the Bao Dai State of Vietnam puppet regimes set up by France during its colonial war in Indochina, and proposed instead the admission of North Vietnam.","aftermath":"A Soviet draft to admit North Vietnam (S/2773) failed at the same meeting (1 in favour and 10 against). Cambodia was admitted on 14 December 1955 under Security Council resolution 109 (1955) and General Assembly resolution 995 (X).","context":"France proposed that the Council recommend Cambodia, one of the three Associated States of Indochina, for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the three states French puppets and backing North Vietnam. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Cambodia was admitted in the package of December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.603; https://undocs.org/en/S/2760","notes":"The three French drafts were voted in the order Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia; this was the third vote, and the UN list numbers them in reverse order.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":59,"un_id":59,"date":"1952-09-19","year":1952,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2759","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.603","meeting_number":603,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (Laos)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Laos","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Laos","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LAO","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application. The Indochina war (UCDP 216) was the background, but the draft did not concern the conflict itself.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by France, would have stated that Laos was a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter and recommended that the General Assembly admit it.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union called Cambodia, Laos and the Bao Dai State of Vietnam puppet regimes set up by France during its colonial war in Indochina, and proposed instead the admission of North Vietnam.","aftermath":"A Soviet draft to admit North Vietnam (S/2773) failed at the same meeting (1 in favour and 10 against). Laos was admitted on 14 December 1955 under Security Council resolution 109 (1955) and General Assembly resolution 995 (X).","context":"France proposed that the Council recommend Laos, one of the three Associated States of Indochina, for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the three states French puppets and backing North Vietnam. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Laos was admitted in the package of December 1955.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.603; https://undocs.org/en/S/2759","notes":"The three French drafts were voted in the order Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia; this was the second vote, and the UN list numbers them in reverse order.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":60,"un_id":60,"date":"1952-09-19","year":1952,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2758","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.603","meeting_number":603,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (Vietnam)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Vietnam","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application. The Indochina war (UCDP 216) was the background, but the draft did not concern the conflict itself.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by France, would have stated that Vietnam was a peace-loving state able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter and recommended that the General Assembly admit it.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union called Cambodia, Laos and the Bao Dai State of Vietnam puppet regimes set up by France during its colonial war in Indochina, and proposed instead the admission of North Vietnam.","aftermath":"A Soviet draft to admit North Vietnam (S/2773) failed at the same meeting (1 in favour and 10 against). The State of Vietnam was never admitted, and unified Vietnam was admitted on 20 September 1977 (Security Council resolution 413 (1977), General Assembly resolution 32/2).","context":"France proposed that the Council recommend Vietnam, one of the three Associated States of Indochina, for membership. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the three states French puppets and backing North Vietnam. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Vietnam was admitted only in 1977, after unification.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.603; https://undocs.org/en/S/2758","notes":"The three French drafts were voted in the order Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia; this was the first vote. The UN list numbers them in reverse. VNM used for the State of Vietnam.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":61,"un_id":61,"date":"1953-03-13","year":1953,"month":3,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"No document symbol (Danish proposal, private meeting)","meeting_record":"S/PV.613","meeting_number":613,"vetoed_item":"oral proposal","agenda":"Appointment of Secretary-General","short_agenda":"Appointment of Secretary-General","topic":"UN Secretary-General: appointment of Lester B. Pearson","region":"Global","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DNK","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Appointment of the Secretary-General; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Danish proposal would have had the Council recommend Lester B. Pearson of Canada to the General Assembly for appointment as Secretary-General, following the resignation of Trygve Lie.","stated_reason":null,"aftermath":"At the same meeting a US proposal for Carlos P. Romulo (5 in favour, 2 against and 4 abstentions) and a Soviet proposal for Stanislaw Skrzeszewski (1 in favour, 3 against and 7 abstentions) also failed. After the permanent members consulted, the Council recommended Dag Hammarskjöld on 31 March 1953, and the General Assembly appointed him on 7 April 1953.","context":"At a private meeting Denmark proposed that the Council recommend Lester Pearson as Secretary-General to succeed Trygve Lie. The vote, by secret ballot, was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention; the proposal failed because a permanent member cast the negative vote. The communiqué gave no reason. Dag Hammarskjöld was chosen later in March 1953.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.613; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/709(VII)","notes":"Private meeting with a secret ballot; S/PV.613 is only an official communiqué. It gives totals (9-1-1) and says the negative vote was cast by a permanent member, without naming it; the attribution to the USSR comes from the UN veto list and is not stated in the record. The individual votes of members are therefore not known, and no stated reason is available. There is no draft document symbol. The Council's recommendation of Hammarskjöld on 31 March 1953 is confirmed by S/PV.617 (communiqué) and S/2975; the General Assembly appointed him at its 423rd plenary meeting on 7 April 1953. Resolution 709 (VII) of that date sets only the terms of appointment, not the appointment itself.","detail":true,"votes":null},{"veto_id":62,"un_id":62,"date":"1954-01-22","year":1954,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/3151/Rev.2","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.656","meeting_number":656,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Palestine Question","short_agenda":"Palestine question","topic":"Israel/Syria: Jordan waters diversion at Banat Yaqub","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"The dispute over water works in the Israeli-Syrian demilitarized zone involved no armed conflict coded by UCDP in 1954; UCDP 234 (Israel vs Palestinian insurgents) does not match.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The three-power draft would have endorsed the request of the UNTSO Chief of Staff that Israel stop work it had begun in the Israeli-Syrian demilitarized zone in September 1953, called on the parties to observe the armistice and comply with his decisions, and asked him to explore ways to reconcile Israeli and Syrian interests in the diversion of the Jordan waters at Banat Yaqub, with experts provided by the Secretary-General.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft satisfied neither party, bypassed the dispute that had brought them to the Council and could not work without the agreement of both Syria and Israel to any measure in the demilitarized zone.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no resolution on the question.","context":"France, the United Kingdom and the United States proposed that the UNTSO Chief of Staff seek to reconcile Israeli and Syrian claims over Israel's diversion of the Jordan in the demilitarized zone while the work stayed halted. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it lacked the consent of both parties. The vote was 7 in favour, 2 against (Lebanon and the Soviet Union) and 2 abstentions (Brazil and China). The Council took no further decision.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.656; https://undocs.org/en/S/3151/Rev.2","notes":"Lebanon (a non-permanent member) also voted against. The UK statement after the vote describes this as the first Soviet veto on a Palestine question.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lebanon","member_iso3c":"LBN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":63,"un_id":63,"date":"1954-03-29","year":1954,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/3188/Corr.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.664","meeting_number":664,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Palestine question","short_agenda":"Palestine question","topic":"Egypt/Israel: shipping restrictions in the Suez Canal and Gulf of Aqaba","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Egypt","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NZL","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"EGY; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Dispute over belligerent restrictions on shipping under the 1949 armistice; no UCDP armed conflict between Egypt and Israel in 1954.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by New Zealand, would have noted with grave concern that Egypt had not complied with the Council resolution of 1 September 1951 on restrictions on shipping through the Suez Canal, called on Egypt to comply with it, and referred Israel's complaint about interference with shipping bound for Elath in the Gulf of Aqaba first to the Egyptian-Israeli Mixed Armistice Commission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft only repeated the 1951 resolution, did nothing to settle the wider Palestine question and tried to impose a decision on one party, and that the Council should instead urge both parties to negotiate directly.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The 1951 resolution (resolution 95 (1951)) remained the Council's last decision on the matter.","context":"New Zealand proposed that the Council call on Egypt to comply with its 1951 resolution on Suez Canal shipping and send Israel's Gulf of Aqaba complaint to the armistice commission. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the Council should urge direct talks instead of imposing a decision on Egypt. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Lebanon and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (China). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.664; https://undocs.org/en/S/3188/Corr.1; https://undocs.org/en/S/3188","notes":"The vote is taken from the French column of the record (Brazil, Colombia, Denmark, France, New Zealand, Turkey, UK, US for; Lebanon, USSR against; China abstaining; 8-2-1). The record refers to the draft as S/3188/Corr.1 and 2. The issue area is a judgement: the draft concerned armistice obligations and shipping.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lebanon","member_iso3c":"LBN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":64,"un_id":64,"date":"1954-06-18","year":1954,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/3229","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.674","meeting_number":674,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 29 May 1954 from the acting permanent representative of Thailand to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/3220)","short_agenda":"1954 Letter from Thailand (Thailand)","topic":"Thailand: request for UN observation","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Thailand","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"THA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"THA","ucdp_conflict_id":216,"ucdp_dyad_id":420,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Thailand's request arose from the Indochina war (UCDP 216, France vs Viet Minh, ended 20 July 1954); the draft concerned its spillover risk.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, tabled by Thailand, would have asked the Peace Observation Commission set up under the Uniting for Peace resolution to form a sub-commission of three to five members to send observers to Thailand at its invitation, visit Thailand and report, with a provision to seek instructions if it needed to observe in neighbouring States.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said nobody was threatening Thailand and called the request a disguised US attempt to widen the conflict in Indochina and block a settlement at the Geneva conference.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The Geneva agreements on Indochina were concluded on 20-21 July 1954.","context":"Thailand, citing tension from the war in neighbouring Indochina, asked for a UN observation sub-commission on its territory. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the request was a US move to spread the war and undermine the Geneva talks. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Lebanon). The Geneva agreements followed a month later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.674; https://undocs.org/en/S/3229; https://undocs.org/en/A/2665","notes":"Thailand was not a Council member; it submitted the draft under rule 38 of the provisional rules of procedure. The match to UCDP conflict 216 is indirect (spillover into a neighbouring State). On 7 July 1954 Thailand asked for the item 'Request of Thailand for observation under the Peace Observation Commission' to be added to the agenda of the eighth session of the General Assembly (A/2665), but said it would communicate further in the light of the Indochina negotiations; the Assembly did not act on it.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lebanon","member_iso3c":"LBN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":65,"un_id":65,"date":"1954-06-20","year":1954,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/3236/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.675","meeting_number":675,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Cablegram dated 19 June 1954 from the Minister for External Relations of Guatemala addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/3232)","short_agenda":"1954 Cablegram from Guatemala (Guatemala)","topic":"Guatemala: complaint of aggression","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Guatemala","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; COL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GTM; HND; NIC","ucdp_conflict_id":233,"ucdp_dyad_id":464,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 233 (Government of Guatemala vs forces of Castillo Armas) is active in 1954 and ends 27 June 1954.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and Colombia, with a French amendment, would have referred Guatemala's complaint to the Organization of American States for urgent consideration, asked the OAS to report on its measures, and called for the immediate end of any action likely to cause bloodshed and for all Members to refrain from assisting such action.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said aggression against Guatemala was already under way, that the country would be overrun while the US-dominated OAS deliberated, and that the Council itself should act at once to stop it.","aftermath":"At the same meeting the Council unanimously adopted the French paragraph calling for an end to bloodshed as resolution 104 (1954). It declined on 25 June 1954 to put Guatemala's renewed complaint on its agenda, and President Arbenz resigned on 27 June 1954.","context":"Brazil and Colombia proposed that the Council refer Guatemala's complaint of invasion to the Organization of American States while calling for an end to bloodshed. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the US-dominated OAS would let Guatemala be overrun. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The Council then adopted the call to end bloodshed alone as resolution 104 (1954), and President Arbenz resigned a week later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.675; https://undocs.org/en/S/3236/Rev.1; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.676","notes":"The President ruled that the vote was not procedural and so was subject to the veto. On 25 June 1954 the Council rejected the provisional agenda by 4 votes to 5, with 2 abstentions (against: Brazil, China, Colombia, Turkey, United States; abstaining: France, United Kingdom) (S/PV.676). The follow-up resolution given, resolution 104 (1954), reproduced only the last paragraph of the vetoed text.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lebanon","member_iso3c":"LBN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":66,"un_id":66,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3506","draft_note":"S/3506 (Chinese amendment to S/3502, Republic of Korea)","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: South Korea (amendment to 18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CHN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The amendment by the Republic of China would have added South Korea to the applicants recommended for admission in the draft by Brazil and New Zealand (S/3502), on which the Council voted name by name.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the amendment was a new proposal that changed the meaning of the joint draft and was meant to obstruct a decision on the 18 applicants named by the General Assembly on 8 December 1955.","aftermath":"South Korea was admitted on 17 September 1991 (Security Council resolution 702 (1991), General Assembly resolution 46/1).","context":"As the Council voted on the package of 18 applicants backed by the General Assembly, the Republic of China moved to add South Korea. The Soviet Union vetoed the amendment, saying it was meant to wreck the package. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (New Zealand). South Korea joined the United Nations in 1991.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502","notes":"The vetoed item was the first country in the Chinese amendment S/3506, not a paragraph of S/3502 itself; the UN list gives S/3502. The UN list gives S/3502 for all 16 vetoes of 13 December 1955 (vetoes 66-81, with the Chinese veto at veto 75). The record shows this order of negative votes: Republic of Korea (USSR), Republic of Viet-Nam (USSR), Mongolian People's Republic (China), then Jordan, Ireland, Portugal, Italy, Austria, Finland, Ceylon, Nepal, Libya, Cambodia, Japan, Laos and Spain (all USSR). That order puts the Chinese veto third, so the UN list cannot be in meeting order; vetoes 66-68 are assigned here to the first three Soviet vetoes in meeting order.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":67,"un_id":67,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3506","draft_note":"S/3506 (Chinese amendment to S/3502, Republic of Viet-Nam)","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: South Vietnam (amendment to 18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Vietnam","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CHN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The amendment by the Republic of China would have added South Vietnam to the applicants recommended for admission in the draft by Brazil and New Zealand (S/3502), on which the Council voted name by name.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the amendment was a new proposal that changed the meaning of the joint draft and was meant to obstruct a decision on the 18 applicants named by the General Assembly on 8 December 1955.","aftermath":"South Vietnam was never admitted. Unified Vietnam was admitted on 20 September 1977 (Security Council resolution 413 (1977), General Assembly resolution 32/2).","context":"The Republic of China also moved to add South Vietnam to the package of 18 applicants backed by the General Assembly. The Soviet Union vetoed the amendment, saying it was meant to wreck the package. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (New Zealand). Vietnam was admitted only in 1977, after unification.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502","notes":"The vetoed item was the second country in the Chinese amendment S/3506; the UN list gives S/3502. VNM used for the Republic of Viet-Nam (South Vietnam). The UN list gives S/3502 for all 16 vetoes of 13 December 1955 (vetoes 66-81, with the Chinese veto at veto 75). The record shows this order of negative votes: Republic of Korea (USSR), Republic of Viet-Nam (USSR), Mongolian People's Republic (China), then Jordan, Ireland, Portugal, Italy, Austria, Finland, Ceylon, Nepal, Libya, Cambodia, Japan, Laos and Spain (all USSR). That order puts the Chinese veto third, so the UN list cannot be in meeting order; vetoes 66-68 are assigned here to the first three Soviet vetoes in meeting order.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":68,"un_id":68,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (name of Jordan, separate vote)","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Jordan (18-state package)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Jordan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Jordan.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it favoured admitting all 18 states, as its own 18 drafts (S/3484 to S/3501) showed, and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, whom it said represented no one and was backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Council adopted a Soviet draft as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 applicants including Jordan but not Japan or Mongolia. The General Assembly admitted Jordan on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Jordan and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Jordan among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502","notes":"The Soviet explanation was given after all the votes (Sobolev, para. 79 onward) and covers the whole series. The UN list gives S/3502 for all 16 vetoes of 13 December 1955 (vetoes 66-81, with the Chinese veto at veto 75). The record shows this order of negative votes: Republic of Korea (USSR), Republic of Viet-Nam (USSR), Mongolian People's Republic (China), then Jordan, Ireland, Portugal, Italy, Austria, Finland, Ceylon, Nepal, Libya, Cambodia, Japan, Laos and Spain (all USSR). That order puts the Chinese veto third, so the UN list cannot be in meeting order; vetoes 66-68 are assigned here to the first three Soviet vetoes in meeting order.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":69,"un_id":69,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Ireland\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ireland (18-state package)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ireland","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IRL","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Ireland.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Ireland; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Ireland. The General Assembly admitted Ireland on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Ireland and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Ireland among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":70,"un_id":70,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Portugal\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Portugal (18-state package)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Portugal","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PRT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Portugal.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Portugal; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Portugal. The General Assembly admitted Portugal on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Portugal and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Portugal among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":71,"un_id":71,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Italy\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Italy (18-state package)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Italy","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ITA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Italy.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Italy; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Italy. The General Assembly admitted Italy on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Italy and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Italy among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":72,"un_id":72,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Austria\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Austria (18-state package)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Austria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"AUT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Austria.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Austria; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Austria. The General Assembly admitted Austria on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Austria and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Austria among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":73,"un_id":73,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Finland\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Finland (18-state package)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Finland","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"FIN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Finland.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Finland; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Finland. The General Assembly admitted Finland on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Finland and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Finland among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":74,"un_id":74,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Ceylon\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Ceylon (18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Ceylon","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LKA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Ceylon.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Ceylon; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Ceylon. The General Assembly admitted Ceylon on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Ceylon and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Ceylon among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":75,"un_id":75,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the words \"Mongolian People's Republic\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Mongolia (18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Mongolia","vetoed_by":"China","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"MNG","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X); this vote was on including Mongolia.","stated_reason":"The Republic of China said Outer Mongolia had been an aggressor in Korea and that it was odd to include it while South Korea and South Vietnam, which it called victims of that aggression, were left out.","aftermath":"Mongolia was left out of resolution 109 (1955) of 14 December 1955. It was recommended in resolution 166 (1961) and admitted on 27 October 1961 (General Assembly resolution 1630 (XVI)), the same day as Mauritania.","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. The Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, saying it had been an aggressor in Korea. The vote was 8 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (Belgium and the United States). The Soviet Union then vetoed the Western-backed applicants, and Mongolia was admitted only in 1961.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. China's stated reason paraphrased from Tsiang's statement before the vote (S/PV.704, para. 24). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":76,"un_id":76,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Nepal\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Nepal (18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Nepal","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NPL","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Nepal.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Nepal; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Nepal. The General Assembly admitted Nepal on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Nepal and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Nepal among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":77,"un_id":77,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Libya\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Libya (18-state package)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Libya","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBY","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Libya.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Libya; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Libya. The General Assembly admitted Libya on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Libya and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Libya among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":78,"un_id":78,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Cambodia\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Cambodia (18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Cambodia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KHM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Cambodia.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Cambodia; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Cambodia. The General Assembly admitted Cambodia on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Cambodia and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Cambodia among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":79,"un_id":79,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Japan\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Japan (18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Japan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JPN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Japan.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Japan; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"Japan was left out of the package of 16 recommended the next day in resolution 109 (1955). Further Soviet vetoes on Japan followed on 14 and 15 December 1955 (S/PV.705, S/PV.706). The Council recommended Japan in resolution 121 (1956) of 12 December 1956 and the General Assembly admitted it on 18 December 1956 (resolution 1113 (XI)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Japan and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states without Japan, which was admitted in December 1956.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). The text of the draft names Japan; the Soviet Union said on 14 December it still favoured Japan's admission at the next session. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":80,"un_id":80,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Laos\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Laos (18-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Laos","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LAO","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Laos.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Laos; it said it supported all 18 applicants named by the General Assembly and blamed the representative of the Republic of China, backed by the United States, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Laos. The General Assembly admitted Laos on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Laos and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China, with US support, had broken the package. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Laos among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":81,"un_id":81,"date":"1955-12-13","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3502","draft_note":"S/3502 (separate vote on the word \"Spain\")","meeting_record":"S/PV.704","meeting_number":704,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Spain (18-state package)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Spain","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; NZL","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ESP","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft by Brazil and New Zealand would have recommended the admission of the 18 applicants named in General Assembly resolution 918 (X) of 8 December 1955; this vote was on including Spain.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to Spain; after the vote it said it supported all 18 applicants and blamed the Republic of China, which it said had US backing, for wrecking the package by vetoing Mongolia.","aftermath":"The next day the Soviet Union withdrew its objections to all applicants except Japan, and the Council adopted the Soviet draft S/3509 as resolution 109 (1955), recommending 16 states including Spain. The General Assembly admitted Spain on 14 December 1955 (resolution 995 (X)).","context":"The Council voted name by name on a draft by Brazil and New Zealand recommending the 18 applicants that the General Assembly had asked it to admit as a package. After the Republic of China vetoed Mongolia, the Soviet Union vetoed Spain and the other Western-backed applicants, saying it backed all 18 and that the Republic of China had broken the package. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Belgium). The next day the Council recommended 16 states, Spain among them.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.704; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.704&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3502; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=A/RES/995(X)&l=en&t=pdf","notes":"The UN list does not name the applicant for each veto, so the assignment follows meeting order with China's veto at 75. The vote was on single words in the second preambular paragraph of S/3502, by show of hands; the draft as a whole was never put to the vote because, after the vetoes, the amended paragraph (listing only Albania, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) was rejected 1-4-6 and the President ruled that the draft fell. Votes from S/PV.704, paras. 49-74; the English and French texts agree. The Assembly resolution cited in the draft as A/RES/357 is resolution 918 (X). Belgium abstained on Spain (S/PV.704, para. 72); 9-1-1. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":82,"un_id":82,"date":"1955-12-14","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3509","draft_note":"S/3509 (oral United States amendment adding Japan)","meeting_record":"S/PV.705","meeting_number":705,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Japan (amendment to 16-state package)","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Japan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JPN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The amendment, moved orally by the United States and seconded by the United Kingdom, would have added Japan to the list of states that the Soviet draft S/3509 recommended for admission.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said its vote did not change its support for Japan's admission and that the amendment would only put off Japan's admission to the next session of the General Assembly, to which it had proposed deferring both Japan and Mongolia.","aftermath":"The Council then adopted S/3509 without Japan as resolution 109 (1955), and the 16 states were admitted the same day (General Assembly resolution 995 (X)). After a further veto on 15 December 1955, Japan was recommended in resolution 121 (1956) and admitted on 18 December 1956.","context":"After the 18-state package failed on 13 December, the Soviet Union proposed recommending 16 applicants and leaving Japan and Mongolia until the next Assembly session. The United States moved to add Japan, and the Soviet Union vetoed the amendment, saying it still favoured Japan's admission later. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The Council then recommended the 16, and Japan was admitted in December 1956.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.705; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.705&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3509","notes":"The amendment was oral and has no document symbol; the UN list cites S/3509, the draft it would have amended. Vote from S/PV.705, para. 28; the named list has 10 members in favour. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":83,"un_id":83,"date":"1955-12-15","year":1955,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/3510","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.706","meeting_number":706,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Japan","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Japan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"JPN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US draft would have recommended that the General Assembly admit Japan at its eleventh regular session; the vote was taken in parts, and the rest of the draft fell after the recommendation to admit Japan was vetoed.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said its negative vote was not a vote against admitting Japan at the eleventh session, and pointed to its own draft (S/3512) recommending that Japan and the Mongolian People's Republic both be admitted at that session.","aftermath":"The Soviet draft S/3512 then failed (1 in favour, none against and 10 abstentions). Japan was recommended in resolution 121 (1956) of 12 December 1956 and admitted on 18 December 1956 (General Assembly resolution 1113 (XI)).","context":"A day after the Council recommended 16 new members, the United States proposed that Japan be recommended for admission at the next Assembly session. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it backed Japan only together with Mongolia, as its own draft proposed. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Japan was admitted in December 1956.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.706; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.706&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3510","notes":"The document filed as S/3510 in the UN documents system carries the symbol S/3511; the meeting record repeatedly cites the US draft as S/3510, which is used here. Vote from S/PV.706, para. 116. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":84,"un_id":84,"date":"1956-10-13","year":1956,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/3671","draft_note":"S/3671 (second part, as amended by Iran)","meeting_record":"S/PV.743","meeting_number":743,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Situation created by the unilateral action of the Egyptian Government in bringing to an end the system of international operation of the Suez Canal, which was confirmed and completed by the Suez Canal Convention of 1888","short_agenda":"Middle East (Suez Canal)","topic":"Suez Canal: canal settlement (second part of Anglo-French draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Egypt","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; GBR","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"EGY; FRA; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Diplomatic dispute over the canal regime before the outbreak of fighting on 29 October 1956 (UCDP 252 begins then).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The second part of the Anglo-French draft would have found the 18-Power proposals of the London Conference suitable for a settlement, invited Egypt to make its own proposals promptly, and said that until a final settlement the Suez Canal Users' Association and the Egyptian authorities should cooperate to run the canal.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the second part did not come out of the talks between Egypt, France and the United Kingdom, repeated proposals Egypt had already rejected and would complicate further negotiations.","aftermath":"The first part of the draft, with the six requirements, stood as the Council's decision (resolution 118 (1956)). Israel attacked Egypt on 29 October 1956, followed by British and French military action.","context":"France and the United Kingdom asked the Council to endorse the London Conference proposals for international operation of the Suez Canal after Egypt nationalized the canal company. The Council adopted six principles for a settlement unanimously, but the Soviet Union vetoed the part backing the 18-Power plan and the users' association, saying Egypt had already rejected these proposals. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia). Two weeks later Israel, followed by France and the United Kingdom, attacked Egypt.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.743; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.743&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3671; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/118(1956)","notes":"Yugoslavia, a non-permanent member, also voted against; only the Soviet vote counts as a veto. Soviet reason from Shepilov's statement just before the vote (S/PV.743, paras. 96-101). The Yugoslav draft S/3672 was not put to the vote. The Iranian amendment (742nd meeting) was accepted by the sponsors before the vote. The issue area is a judgement: the draft concerned the canal's operating regime, not armed force. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China. YUG for Yugoslavia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":85,"un_id":85,"date":"1956-10-30","year":1956,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/3713/Rev.1","draft_note":"S/3713/Rev.1 (as orally amended)","meeting_record":"S/PV.750","meeting_number":750,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 29 October 1956 from the representative of the United States of America adressed to the President of the Security Council, concerning \"The Palestine Question: Steps for the immediate cessation of the military action of Israel in Egypt.\"","short_agenda":"1956 Letter from US (Suez Canal)","topic":"Suez Canal: ceasefire (Soviet draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"France; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"RUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; EGY; FRA; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":252,"ucdp_dyad_id":510,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 252 (Suez 1956: Egypt vs France, Israel, UK) covers the war the draft sought to stop.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Soviet draft, as amended orally by its sponsor, would have called on Israel and Egypt to cease fire at once, called on Israel to withdraw behind the armistice lines, and asked the Secretary-General to report on compliance.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the draft ran counter to the policy announced by the British and French governments, for the reasons it gave on the US draft earlier that day; France said its instructions were unchanged.","aftermath":"On 31 October 1956 the Council adopted resolution 119 (1956) over British and French objections, calling the first emergency special session of the General Assembly under Uniting for Peace. The Assembly called for a ceasefire and withdrawal on 2 November (resolution 997 (ES-I)) and set up the UN Emergency Force on 5 November (resolution 1000 (ES-I)).","context":"Hours after vetoing a US draft, France and the United Kingdom vetoed a shorter Soviet text that would have called for an Israeli-Egyptian ceasefire and Israeli withdrawal. The United Kingdom said it ran counter to the policy the two governments had announced, and France said its instructions were unchanged. The vote was 7 in favour, 2 against and 2 abstentions (Belgium and the United States). The next day the Council sent the matter to the first emergency special session of the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.750; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.750/Rev.1&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3713/Rev.1","notes":"The Soviet text as tabled called on 'all the parties concerned' to cease fire; at the request of Australia, China and others Sobolev restored the wording 'Israel and Egypt' before the vote. The account follows S/PV.750/Rev.1, paras. 11-25. The UN list orders this veto (S/PV.750) before the US draft (S/PV.749), though it came later in the day. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China. YUG for Yugoslavia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":86,"un_id":86,"date":"1956-10-30","year":1956,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/3710","draft_note":"S/3710 (as amended by insertion of a new paragraph 1)","meeting_record":"S/PV.749","meeting_number":749,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 29 October 1956 from the representative of the United States of America adressed to the President of the Security Council, concerning \"The Palestine Question: Steps for the immediate cessation of the militry action of Israel in Egypt.","short_agenda":"1956 Letter from US (Suez Canal)","topic":"Suez Canal: ceasefire and Israeli withdrawal (US draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"France; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; EGY; FRA; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":252,"ucdp_dyad_id":510,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 252 (Suez 1956: Egypt vs France, Israel, UK) covers the war the draft sought to stop.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US draft would have called on Israel and Egypt to cease fire at once (new paragraph 1), called on Israel to withdraw behind the armistice lines, called on all members to refrain from force in the area, to help ensure the armistice agreements and to give Israel no military, economic or financial aid until it complied, and asked the Secretary-General to report.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the draft did not suit the circumstances and that the action announced by France and the United Kingdom was the only effective way to stop the fighting and keep the Suez Canal open.","aftermath":"On 31 October 1956 the Council adopted resolution 119 (1956) over British and French objections, calling the first emergency special session of the General Assembly under Uniting for Peace. The Assembly called for a ceasefire and withdrawal on 2 November (resolution 997 (ES-I)) and set up the UN Emergency Force on 5 November (resolution 1000 (ES-I)).","context":"The day after Israel invaded Sinai, the United States proposed a call for a ceasefire, Israeli withdrawal and a halt to aid for Israel. France and the United Kingdom, which had issued an ultimatum to both sides, vetoed it; the United Kingdom said their own action was the only effective course. The vote was 7 in favour, 2 against and 2 abstentions (Australia and Belgium). The Council called the first emergency special session of the General Assembly the next day.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.749; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.749&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3710","notes":"The United Kingdom's reason is paraphrased from its pre-vote statement (French column of S/PV.749, paras. 181-183); the French statement has not been separately confirmed. The new paragraph 1 ('Calls upon Israel and Egypt immediately to cease fire') was added orally by the United States. Vote from S/PV.749, para. 186. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China. YUG for Yugoslavia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":87,"un_id":87,"date":"1956-11-04","year":1956,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/3730/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.754","meeting_number":754,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Hungary","short_agenda":"Hungary","topic":"Hungary: Soviet intervention","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Hungary","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"HUN; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":250,"ucdp_dyad_id":506,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 250 (Hungary vs Soviet Union, 1956) is the intervention the draft addressed.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US draft would have deplored the use of Soviet forces to suppress the Hungarian people, called on the Soviet Union to stop intervening in Hungary's internal affairs, to bring in no more troops and to withdraw all its forces without delay, affirmed the Hungarian people's right to a government of their choosing, and asked the Secretary-General to explore Hungary's needs for food and medicine.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Council should wait for reliable information, that the events in Hungary were a counter-revolution by reactionary forces aided by Western, chiefly US, subversion, and that the Western powers were using the Hungarian question to divert attention from the attack on Egypt.","aftermath":"The same day the Council adopted resolution 120 (1956) (10 in favour and 1 against), calling the second emergency special session of the General Assembly under Uniting for Peace. The Assembly called on the Soviet Union to withdraw its forces (resolution 1004 (ES-II), 4 November 1956).","context":"After Soviet forces moved on Budapest on 4 November 1956, the United States asked the Council to demand an end to Soviet intervention and the withdrawal of Soviet troops. The Soviet Union vetoed it, calling the uprising a counter-revolution backed by Western subversion. The vote was 9 in favour and 1 against; Yugoslavia did not take part. The Council then referred the question to the second emergency special session of the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.754; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.754&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3730/Rev.1","notes":"Yugoslavia was recorded as 'present and not voting' because it had no instructions; a footnote in S/PV.754 says that at the 755th meeting it asked for its vote to be recorded as an abstention. It is coded here as not participating, following the vote as taken; coding it as an abstention would give 9-1-1-0. The original S/3730 differed only in operative paragraph 2 (a hope that the Soviet Union would withdraw by arrangement with Hungary). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China. YUG for Yugoslavia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iran","member_iso3c":"IRN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":88,"un_id":88,"date":"1957-02-20","year":1957,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/3787","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.773","meeting_number":773,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The India-Pakistan question","short_agenda":"India-Pakistan question","topic":"Kashmir: demilitarization and a temporary UN force","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"India","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; CUB; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IND; PAK","ucdp_conflict_id":218,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 218 (India vs Pakistan over Kashmir) was active in 1948; the draft concerned the post-war settlement and demilitarization.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have asked the Council President, Gunnar Jarring of Sweden, to examine with India and Pakistan proposals for the demilitarization of Jammu and Kashmir or other progress toward a settlement, bearing in mind Pakistan's proposal for a temporary UN force.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Charter allowed UN armed forces only to repel aggression, so sending a force to Kashmir for a plebiscite would breach it, and that the Kashmiri people had already settled the question.","aftermath":"On 21 February 1957 the Council adopted a revised text without the reference to a UN force as resolution 123 (1957), with the Soviet Union abstaining. Jarring visited the subcontinent and reported in April 1957.","context":"Western members proposed that the Council President explore the demilitarization of Kashmir with India and Pakistan, bearing in mind Pakistan's idea of a temporary UN force. The Soviet Union vetoed the draft, saying the Charter did not allow UN forces to be used for a plebiscite. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Sweden). A day later the Council adopted a version without the reference to a force as resolution 123 (1957).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.773; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.773&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3787; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/123(1957)","notes":"The description of the draft's purpose rests on the first page of S/3787 and the debate. Soviet reasons are from Sobolev's statement at S/PV.773, paras. 13-21. Resolution 123 (1957) was adopted on 21 February 1957 (774th meeting) by 10 votes to none with the Soviet Union abstaining; Jarring's report (S/3821) is dated 29 April 1957. Soviet amendments S/3789 and Colombian amendments S/3791/Rev.1 were rejected before the vote. The issue area is a judgement (territorial dispute; Peace operations would also fit). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":89,"un_id":89,"date":"1957-09-09","year":1957,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/3885","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.790","meeting_number":790,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: South Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Vietnam","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; CHN; COL; CUB; FRA; PHL; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; the draft did not address the insurgency in South Vietnam (UCDP 249).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The eight-power draft would have recommended to the General Assembly the admission of South Vietnam.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the admission of South Vietnam should wait until Vietnam was unified through free elections under the 1954 Geneva Agreements, and blamed the United States for the failure to hold those elections.","aftermath":"A similar draft was vetoed on 9 December 1958 (S/4130/Rev.1). A unified Vietnam was admitted in 1977 (Council resolution 413 (1977), General Assembly resolution 32/2).","context":"At the General Assembly's request the Council reconsidered South Vietnam's application. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying admission should wait for reunification under the Geneva Agreements. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Vietnam joined in 1977, after unification.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.790; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.790&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3885","notes":"VNM used for the Republic of Viet-Nam (South Vietnam), for which no separate country code exists. The UN list puts this veto before the Korea veto (S/3884), but in the meeting Korea was voted first. Votes from S/PV.790, paras. 55-56. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":90,"un_id":90,"date":"1957-09-09","year":1957,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/3884","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.790","meeting_number":790,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: South Korea","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; CHN; COL; CUB; FRA; PHL; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned in 1957.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The eight-power draft would have recommended to the General Assembly the admission of South Korea.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said both Korean states should be admitted at the same time, and vetoed the draft after the Council rejected its amendments (S/3887) to recommend North Korea as well.","aftermath":"A similar draft was vetoed on 9 December 1958 (S/4129/Rev.1). Both Korean states were admitted in 1991 (Council resolution 702 (1991), General Assembly resolution 46/1).","context":"The Council reconsidered South Korea's application at the Assembly's request. The Soviet Union first sought to add North Korea and, when that failed, vetoed the draft. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Both Koreas were admitted together in 1991.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.790; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.790&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3884","notes":"The Soviet representative made no statement at S/PV.790 explaining this vote beyond his amendments (S/3887, recommending the DPRK); the stated reason is inferred from those amendments and from Cuban, British and Philippine replies to them. Votes from S/PV.790, paras. 8-9. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":91,"un_id":91,"date":"1958-05-02","year":1958,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/3995","draft_note":"S/3995 (incorporating Swedish amendment S/3998)","meeting_record":"S/PV.817","meeting_number":817,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Complaint of rep. of USSR to Pre SC re United States military aircraft armed with atomic and hydrogen bombs flying in direction of frontiers of Soviet Union","short_agenda":"Complaint by USSR against US","topic":"Disarmament: Arctic zone of inspection against surprise attack","region":"Global","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":"United States","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"USA; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No armed conflict; Cold War arms-control proposal.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US draft would have recommended the prompt setting up of a northern zone of international inspection against surprise attack, covering the area north of the Arctic Circle as discussed in the UN Disarmament Sub-Committee in 1957, and called on Canada, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, Denmark, Norway and other Arctic states to begin technical talks at once.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the US proposal did not solve the problem it had raised, the flights of US bombers carrying atomic and hydrogen bombs toward Soviet borders, and did not remove the threat of sudden atomic war.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the item.","context":"The Soviet Union complained that US bombers carrying nuclear weapons were flying toward its borders, and the United States replied with a draft proposing an Arctic inspection zone against surprise attack. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it did not address the bomber flights. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.817; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.817&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/3995; https://undocs.org/en/S/3998","notes":"The Swedish amendment (S/3998, 29 April 1958) was incorporated by agreement; it inserted a paragraph expressing the view that the proposed discussions might serve as a useful basis for the disarmament deliberations at the planned summit conference. Region coded Global because the draft concerned a multi-state Arctic zone. That no further action followed rests on the record alone and has not been confirmed against later Council practice. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":92,"un_id":92,"date":"1958-07-18","year":1958,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/4050/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.834","meeting_number":834,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 22 May 1958 from the representative of Lebanon to the President of the Security Council concerning \"Complaint by Lebanon in respect of a situation arising from the intervention of the United Arab Republic in the internal affairs of Lebanon, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security\" (S/4007, S/4047/Rev.1, S/4050/Rev.1, S/4054); Letter dated 17 July 1958 from the representative of Jordan to the President of the Security Council concerning \" Complaint by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of interference in its domestic aflairs of the United Arab Republic\" (S/4053, S/4047/Rev.1)","short_agenda":"1958 Letter from Lebanon (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: US landing and UN observation group","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; EGY; USA; JOR","ucdp_conflict_id":260,"ucdp_dyad_id":526,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 260 (Lebanon 1958, government vs Independent Nasserite Movement) is the civil strife behind the complaint.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US draft would have noted Lebanon's request for help from friendly states and the US statement that its forces would stay only until the UN could take over, invited the UN Observation Group in Lebanon to continue its work, asked the Secretary-General to consult Lebanon and other states on additional measures, including contingents, to protect Lebanon's integrity and stop infiltration, and called for an end to illegal infiltration and hostile radio attacks.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft amounted to approval of the US armed intervention in Lebanon, which would mock the Charter's basic principles and affront world opinion.","aftermath":"After a Japanese draft was also vetoed on 22 July, the Council called the third emergency special session of the General Assembly (resolution 129 (1958), 7 August 1958), which adopted resolution 1237 (ES-III) on 21 August 1958. US forces left Lebanon in October 1958.","context":"After US marines landed in Lebanon on 15 July 1958 at the Lebanese government's request, the United States proposed that the UN take over with additional measures, possibly including troops. The Soviet Union vetoed the draft, saying it would endorse US intervention. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Sweden). The question went to the General Assembly in August.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.834; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.834&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4050/Rev.1; https://undocs.org/en/S/4114","notes":"The completion of the US withdrawal on 25 October 1958 is confirmed by UNOGIL's fifth report (S/4114, 17 November 1958); resolution 1237 (ES-III) was adopted on 21 August 1958 (746th plenary meeting); resolution 129 (1958) is dated 7 August 1958. EGY used for the United Arab Republic. Votes from S/PV.834, paras. 67-69. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":93,"un_id":93,"date":"1958-07-22","year":1958,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/4055/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.837","meeting_number":837,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 22 May 1958 from the representative of Lebanon to the President of the Security Council concerning \"Complaint by Lebanon in respect of a situation arising from the intervention of the United Arab Republic in the internal affairs of Lebanon, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security\" (S/4007, 4055/Rev.1, S/4056, S/4057, S/4063); Letter dated 17 July 1958 from the representative of Jordan to the President of the Security Council concerning \"Complaint by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of interference in its domestic affairs by the United Arab Republic\" (S/4053, S/4057)","short_agenda":"1958 Letter from Lebanon (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: UN measures to allow US withdrawal (Japanese draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"JPN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; EGY; USA; JOR","ucdp_conflict_id":260,"ucdp_dyad_id":526,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 260 (Lebanon 1958, government vs Independent Nasserite Movement) is the civil strife behind the complaint.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Japanese draft would have asked the Secretary-General to arrange at once whatever measures beyond the 11 June 1958 resolution he found necessary to ensure Lebanon's territorial integrity and independence, so as to make possible the withdrawal of US forces, and to report back.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft did not condemn what it called US and British aggression in the Middle East, in effect approved the landing of US and British troops in Lebanon and Jordan, and did not call for their immediate withdrawal, which it said should come before any UN action.","aftermath":"The Secretary-General said he would act within existing authority and later enlarged the observer group. The Council called the third emergency special session of the General Assembly in resolution 129 (1958) of 7 August 1958, and US forces left Lebanon in October 1958.","context":"After the US draft failed, Japan proposed that the Secretary-General take further steps to protect Lebanon so that US troops could leave. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it endorsed the US and British landings and did not call for immediate withdrawal. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. The question went to an emergency special session of the General Assembly in August.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.837; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.837&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.836; https://undocs.org/en/S/4055/Rev.1","notes":"The Soviet reason is from Sobolev's statement at S/PV.836 (para. 10). Soviet amendments S/4063 were rejected 8-1-2 before the vote. The Secretary-General's statement at the same meeting (S/PV.837, paras. 12-16) that he would use all opportunities within the Charter and further develop the Observation Group is in the record; the completion of the US withdrawal on 25 October 1958 is confirmed by S/4114; resolution 1237 (ES-III) is dated 21 August 1958. EGY used for the United Arab Republic. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":94,"un_id":94,"date":"1958-12-09","year":1958,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/4130/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.843","meeting_number":843,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members--Admission of new members (Viet-Nam)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: South Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Vietnam","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; JPN; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; the draft did not address the insurgency in South Vietnam (UCDP 249).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The four-power draft would have recommended the admission of South Vietnam, which the General Assembly had found qualified.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union made no statement on South Vietnam at this meeting that could be found in the record; in 1957 it had said admission should wait until Vietnam was unified under the 1954 Geneva Agreements.","aftermath":"South Vietnam was not admitted before unification. A unified Vietnam was admitted in 1977 (Council resolution 413 (1977), General Assembly resolution 32/2).","context":"The Council took up South Vietnam's application again at the Assembly's request. The Soviet Union vetoed it, as it had in 1957, when it said admission should await reunification. The vote was 8 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (Canada and Iraq); Canada cited its seat on the International Commission in Indochina. Vietnam was admitted in 1977.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.843; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.843&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4130/Rev.1","notes":"No Soviet explanation of this vote appears in S/PV.843; the reason given is the 1957 position (S/PV.790). Canada's reason is taken from the French column of the record (impartiality as a member of the international commission). VNM used for the Republic of Viet-Nam. The UN list puts this veto before the Korea veto, but Korea was voted first. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":95,"un_id":95,"date":"1958-12-09","year":1958,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/4129/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.843","meeting_number":843,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members--Admission of new members (Viet-Nam)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: South Korea","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; JPN; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KOR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned in 1958.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The four-power draft would have recommended the admission of South Korea, which the General Assembly had found qualified.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union rejected the description of North Korea as an aggressor and said the Charter did not require a prior Assembly resolution for North Korea's admission; it vetoed the draft after the Council rejected its amendments (S/4132) to recommend North Korea as well.","aftermath":"Both Korean states were admitted in 1991 (Council resolution 702 (1991), General Assembly resolution 46/1).","context":"The Council reconsidered South Korea's application at the Assembly's request. The Soviet Union again sought to add North Korea and, when that failed, vetoed the draft. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Iraq). Both Koreas were admitted in 1991.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.843; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.843&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4129/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=S/4132","notes":"The Soviet amendments were S/4132 (9 December 1958, amendments to S/4129/Rev.1), rejected 8-1-2 (Iraq and Sweden abstaining). The English text of S/PV.843 shows 'Abstaining: Iraq' for the vote on S/4129/Rev.1. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":96,"un_id":96,"date":"1960-07-26","year":1960,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/4411","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.883","meeting_number":883,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Telegrams dated 13 July 1960 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics addressed to the Secretary-General (S/4384, 8/4385, S/4406, S/4409 and Rev.l, 8/4411)","short_agenda":"1960 Telegram from USSR (USSR)","topic":"RB-47 incident: Red Cross access to US airmen","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"United States","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ITA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"USA; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Single air incident; no armed conflict in UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Italian draft, noting that two crew members of the US RB-47 aircraft shot down by Soviet forces on 1 July 1960 were held by Soviet authorities and three were missing, would have expressed the hope that the International Committee of the Red Cross be allowed to carry out its humanitarian tasks for the crew.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft had no real humanitarian purpose, was meant to divert attention from condemning the flights, and interfered in Soviet internal affairs by hindering the investigation of the two airmen, who would be tried by a Soviet court under Soviet law.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The two surviving airmen were released in January 1961.","context":"After Soviet forces shot down a US RB-47 reconnaissance plane, Italy proposed that the Red Cross be allowed to help the captured crew. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it interfered in a Soviet judicial matter. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union). The Council took no further action, and the airmen were freed in January 1961.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.883; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.883&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4411; https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v05/d47","notes":"Poland, a non-permanent member, also voted against. The release of the airmen (January 1961) is not documented in the UN records cited; FRUS 1961-63 vol. V doc. 47 (18 March 1961) confirms the USSR had released the RB-47 fliers by then. Region coded Europe for the Soviet Union; the incident took place over the Barents Sea. The UN list puts this veto before the US draft, but the US draft was voted first. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":97,"un_id":97,"date":"1960-07-26","year":1960,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/4409/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.883","meeting_number":883,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Telegrams dated 13 July 1960 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics addressed to the Secretary-General (S/4384, 8/4385, S/4406, S/4409 and Rev.l, 8/4411)","short_agenda":"1960 Telegram from USSR (USSR)","topic":"RB-47 incident: commission of inquiry or ICJ","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"United States","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"USA; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Single air incident; no armed conflict in UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US draft, as modified at Ecuador's suggestion, would have recommended that the Soviet Union and the United States settle their differences over the RB-47 incident either through a commission of inquiry with equal members from each side and a third party acceptable to both, or by referring the matter to the International Court of Justice, and asked them to report to the Council.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the evidence already showed an act of aggression, that the inquiry proposal was meant to distract attention and mislead opinion, and that the Court had no jurisdiction because the case was a direct act of aggression and not a dispute between states; it said the proposal would hand its sovereign right to defend its borders to outside bodies.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The two surviving airmen were released in January 1961.","context":"The Soviet Union asked the Council to condemn the United States over the RB-47 flight, and its draft was rejected. The United States then proposed an impartial inquiry or a reference to the International Court of Justice. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the facts were clear and the matter was not a legal dispute. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.883; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.883&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4409/Rev.1; https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v05/d47","notes":"Poland, a non-permanent member, also voted against. The Soviet draft S/4406 was rejected 2-9 at the same meeting. Soviet reasons from Kuznetsov's statement (S/PV.883, paras. 115-118). The release of the airmen (January 1961) is not documented in the UN records cited; FRUS 1961-63 vol. V doc. 47 (18 March 1961) confirms the USSR had released the RB-47 fliers by then. RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":98,"un_id":98,"date":"1960-09-17","year":1960,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/4523","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.906","meeting_number":906,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 13 July 1960 from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4381): fourth report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of Security Council resolutions S/4387 of 14 July 1960, S/4405 of 22 July 1960 and S/4426 of 9 August 1960 (S/4482 and Add.1-3)--Letter dated 8 September 1960 from the Permanent Representative of Yugoslavia addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4485)--Letter dated 12 September 1960 from the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4506)","short_agenda":"1960 Letter from the SG (Congo)","topic":"Congo: support for UN operation","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Congo (Leopoldville)","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"LKA; TUN","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"COD","ucdp_conflict_id":266,"ucdp_dyad_id":552,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 266 (South Kasai secession) is the only Congo conflict coded by UCDP for 1960; the Katanga secession (UCDP 265) is coded only from 1961, though the draft concerns the crisis as a whole.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Ceylon-Tunisia draft would have reaffirmed the Council's July and August 1960 resolutions on the Congo and urged the Secretary-General to carry them out vigorously, called on Congolese to settle their conflicts peacefully, said the UN Force should continue to restore law and order, appealed for voluntary contributions to a UN Fund for the Congo, and decided that no military aid be sent to the Congo except through the UN.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the UN machinery in the Congo was being used to set up a new form of colonial rule and to let the colonial powers and the United States break up the country, and that serious errors in carrying out the Council's decisions had to be corrected.","aftermath":"The same day the Council adopted resolution 157 (1960), with Poland and the Soviet Union voting against, calling the fourth emergency special session of the General Assembly under Uniting for Peace. The Assembly adopted resolution 1474 (ES-IV) on 20 September 1960, along the lines of the vetoed draft.","context":"As the Congo split between rival leaders, Ceylon and Tunisia proposed backing the UN operation, appealing for a voluntary fund and banning military aid outside UN channels. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the UN was serving colonial interests in the Congo. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (France). The Council then sent the question to the fourth emergency special session of the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.906; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.906&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4523; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/1474(ES-IV)","notes":"Poland, a non-permanent member, also voted against. Soviet amendments S/4524 and a Soviet draft S/4519 were rejected before the vote. The UCDP match is approximate. GA resolution 1474 (ES-IV) of 20 September 1960 follows the vetoed draft closely: it asks the Secretary-General to continue vigorous action, appeals for voluntary contributions to a UN Fund for the Congo, and calls on States to refrain from sending military assistance except through the United Nations. COD used for the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":99,"un_id":99,"date":"1960-12-04","year":1960,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/4567/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.911","meeting_number":911,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Applications for membership [Mauritania} and [Letter dated 3 Dec. 1960 from USSR re Mongolia]","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Mauritania","region":"Africa","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Mauritania","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; TUN","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"MRT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned in 1960.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The France-Tunisia draft would have recommended to the General Assembly the admission of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said many African states saw Mauritania as part of Morocco and its independence as a French manoeuvre, that French troops remained there, and that the Western powers were blocking the admission of Mongolia, which the Council had just refused to place on its agenda.","aftermath":"Mauritania and Mongolia were both recommended in October 1961 (Council resolutions 167 (1961) and 166 (1961)) and admitted on 27 October 1961 (General Assembly resolutions 1631 (XVI) and 1630 (XVI)).","context":"France and Tunisia proposed Mauritania's admission shortly after its independence, while Morocco claimed its territory. The Soviet Union vetoed it, citing Morocco's claim and the Western refusal to consider Mongolia's application. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Ceylon). Mauritania and Mongolia were admitted together in October 1961.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.911; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.911&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4567/Rev.1","notes":"Poland, a non-permanent member, also voted against. Earlier in the meeting the Council voted 4-5-2 against including Mongolia's application on the agenda. The Soviet Union held the presidency and gave its reasons as representative of the USSR (S/PV.911, paras. 220-232). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":100,"un_id":100,"date":"1960-12-13","year":1960,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/4578/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.920","meeting_number":920,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Statement dated 6 December 1960 by the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics concerning the situation in the Congo (S/4573)","short_agenda":"Congo question","topic":"Congo: detainees and human rights","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Congo (Leopoldville)","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG; ITA; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"COD","ucdp_conflict_id":266,"ucdp_dyad_id":552,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 266 (South Kasai secession) is the only Congo conflict UCDP codes for 1960; the draft concerns violence and detention during the wider crisis.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The four-power draft would have declared any violation of human rights in the Congo contrary to UN purposes, expected that no one held prisoner or under arrest would be treated contrary to law and order, hoped the International Committee of the Red Cross would be allowed to visit detainees, and asked the Secretary-General to keep helping the Congo restore law and order and protect civil and human rights.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft left matters to Kasa-Vubu and Mobutu and their Belgian, French and US advisers and did nothing for Patrice Lumumba, whom it said Mobutu's forces held unlawfully.","aftermath":"The Soviet draft S/4579 was rejected at the same meeting, and Lumumba was killed in Katanga on 17 January 1961. On 21 February 1961 the Council adopted resolution 161 (1961), which authorized the UN force to use force as a last resort to prevent civil war.","context":"With Lumumba under arrest by Mobutu's forces, Western members proposed a call to respect human rights and allow Red Cross visits to detainees across the Congo. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it protected Kasa-Vubu and Mobutu and did nothing to free Lumumba. The vote was 7 in favour, 3 against (Ceylon, Poland and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Tunisia). Lumumba was killed a month later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.920; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.920&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4578/Rev.1; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/161(1961)","notes":"The meeting began on 13 December 1960 at 8.30 p.m. and ran past 3 a.m.; the vote may have been taken after midnight on 14 December. Ceylon and Poland (non-permanent) also voted against. Five Soviet amendments (recorded as S/4597) were rejected first. The Soviet reason is a paraphrase of the Soviet President's statement as USSR representative (paras. 10-31). Lumumba's death on 17 January 1961 is the finding of the UN Commission of Investigation (A/4964-S/4976, 11 November 1961); resolution 161 (1961) of 21 February 1961 urges measures to prevent civil war including 'the use of force, if necessary, in the last resort'. The UCDP match is approximate. COD used for the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":101,"un_id":101,"date":"1961-02-21","year":1961,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/4733/Rev.1","draft_note":"S/4733/Rev.1 (US amendments to first preambular paragraph)","meeting_record":"S/PV.942","meeting_number":942,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Letter dated 13 July 1960 from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4381): Letter dated 26 J anuary 1961 from the PermanentRepresentatives of Ceylon, Ghana, Guinea, Libya, Mali, Morocco, United Arab Republic and Yugoslavia to the President of the Security Council (S/4641, S/4650): Telegram dated 24 January 1961 from the President of the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville) and the President of the College of Commissioners-General and CommissionerGeneral for Foreign Affairs addressed to the President of the Security Council (8/4639): Letter dated 29 January 1961 from the Permanent Representative of the Union of Soviet 80cialist Republ1cs to the President of the Security Council (8/4644): Report to the Secretary-General from hisSpecialRepresentativein the Congo regarding Mr. Patrice Lumumba (8/4688 and Add.l)","short_agenda":"1960 Letter from the SG (Congo)","topic":"Congo: wording on assassinations of political leaders (first amendment)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Congo (Leopoldville)","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"COD","ucdp_conflict_id":265,"ucdp_dyad_id":551,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 265 (Katanga secession, 1961) matches the killings in Katanga; South Kasai (UCDP 266) is also named in the draft.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US amendments to the first preambular paragraph of S/4733/Rev.1, a draft by Ceylon, Liberia and the United Arab Republic on the killings of Congolese political leaders, would have replaced the words naming atrocities and assassinations \"in Leopoldville, Katanga and South Kasai\" with \"in various parts of the Congo\" and added a reference to \"other reports\".","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Western members were trying to strip the draft of the concrete facts that had brought the matter to the Council and reduce it to a general point about human rights, and that some powers did not wish to condemn their Belgian allies.","aftermath":"The draft S/4733/Rev.1 as otherwise amended then failed for lack of seven votes, with 6 in favour, none against and 5 abstentions (China, France, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States). Earlier at the same meeting the Council had adopted resolution 161 (1961) (9 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions), which urged measures to prevent civil war, including force as a last resort, and an inquiry into Lumumba's death.","context":"After Lumumba's death was announced, three non-aligned members proposed condemning political killings in Leopoldville, Katanga and South Kasai and calling for an inquiry. The United States moved to replace the place names with \"various parts of the Congo\", and the Soviet Union vetoed the change, saying the West wanted to hide the facts. The vote was 8 in favour and 3 against (Ceylon, the Soviet Union and the United Arab Republic). The main draft later failed for lack of votes.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.942; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.942&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4733/Rev.1; https://undocs.org/en/S/4740","notes":"Vote from S/PV.942, paras. 138-139. Ceylon and the United Arab Republic (non-permanent) also voted against. Earlier, China's negative vote on retaining the words 'including, if necessary, the use of force as a last resort' in operative paragraph 3 (5-1-5) is not counted as a veto because the words lacked seven votes in any case. The Soviet reason is a paraphrase of Zorin's statements (S/PV.942, paras. 153-154, 183). The UN list gives the same symbol for both vetoes; the assignment of veto 101 to the first and veto 102 to the second amendment vote follows the order of voting. EGY used for the United Arab Republic; COD for the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":102,"un_id":102,"date":"1961-02-21","year":1961,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/4733/Rev.1","draft_note":"S/4733/Rev.1 (US amendment to first preambular paragraph, second version)","meeting_record":"S/PV.942","meeting_number":942,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Letter dated 13 July 1960 from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4381): Letter dated 26 J anuary 1961 from the PermanentRepresentatives of Ceylon, Ghana, Guinea, Libya, Mali, Morocco, United Arab Republic and Yugoslavia to the President of the Security Council (S/4641, S/4650): Telegram dated 24 January 1961 from the President of the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville) and the President of the College of Commissioners-General and CommissionerGeneral for Foreign Affairs addressed to the President of the Security Council (8/4639): Letter dated 29 January 1961 from the Permanent Representative of the Union of Soviet 80cialist Republ1cs to the President of the Security Council (8/4644): Report to the Secretary-General from hisSpecialRepresentativein the Congo regarding Mr. Patrice Lumumba (8/4688 and Add.l)","short_agenda":"1960 Letter from the SG (Congo)","topic":"Congo: wording on assassinations of political leaders (second amendment)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Congo (Leopoldville)","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"COD","ucdp_conflict_id":265,"ucdp_dyad_id":551,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 265 (Katanga secession, 1961) matches the killings in Katanga; South Kasai (UCDP 266) is also named in the draft.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The second US amendment would have deleted the words \"bringing to the urgent attention of the Council the atrocities and assassinations in Leopoldville, Katanga and South Kasai in the Congo\" from the first preambular paragraph of S/4733/Rev.1 and added \"and of other reports\" after the reference to the Secretary-General's statement of 20 February.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Western members were trying to strip the draft of the concrete facts that had brought the matter to the Council and reduce it to a general point about human rights, and that some powers did not wish to condemn their Belgian allies.","aftermath":"The draft S/4733/Rev.1 as otherwise amended then failed for lack of seven votes, with 6 in favour, none against and 5 abstentions (China, France, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States). Earlier at the same meeting the Council had adopted resolution 161 (1961) (9 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions), which urged measures to prevent civil war, including force as a last resort, and an inquiry into Lumumba's death.","context":"After its first amendment was vetoed, the United States proposed dropping the reference to killings in Leopoldville, Katanga and South Kasai. The Soviet Union vetoed this amendment too, saying Western members were trying to strip the draft of its concrete facts. The vote was 7 in favour, 3 against (Ceylon, the Soviet Union and the United Arab Republic) and 1 abstention (Liberia). The main draft then failed with six votes in favour.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.942; https://documents.un.org/api/symbol/access?s=S/PV.942&l=en&t=pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/4733/Rev.1; https://undocs.org/en/S/4740","notes":"Vote and text of the amendment from S/PV.942, paras. 167-175. Ceylon and the United Arab Republic (non-permanent) also voted against. Earlier, China's negative vote on retaining the words 'including, if necessary, the use of force as a last resort' in operative paragraph 3 (5-1-5) is not counted as a veto because the words lacked seven votes in any case. The Soviet reason is a paraphrase of Zorin's statements (S/PV.942, paras. 153-154, 183). The UN list gives the same symbol for both vetoes; the assignment of veto 101 to the first and veto 102 to the second amendment vote follows the order of voting. EGY used for the United Arab Republic; COD for the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville). RUS used for the USSR; CHN is the Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":103,"un_id":103,"date":"1961-07-07","year":1961,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/4855","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.960","meeting_number":960,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Complaint by Kuwait in respect of a situation arising from the threat by Iraq to the territorial independence of Kuwait, which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security (S/4845 and S/4844)--Complaint by the Government of the Republic of Iraq in respect of the situation arising out of the armed threat by the United Kingdom to the independence and security of Iraq, which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security (S/4847)","short_agenda":"Kuwait / Iraq","topic":"Kuwait: Iraqi claim and British troop deployment","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Kuwait","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GBR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KWT; IRQ; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Iraqi claim to Kuwait in 1961 with British deployment; no fighting and no UCDP conflict. UCDP 371 (Iraq-Kuwait) begins in 1990.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The British draft would have called on all states to respect the independence and territorial integrity of Kuwait, urged all concerned to work for peace in the area and kept the situation under review, and its preamble noted that British forces would leave once the Ruler judged the threat removed.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the landing of British forces in Kuwait and the concentration of the British fleet in the area were acts of provocation by a colonial power and the real threat to peace, that Iraq posed no military threat, and that the Council should instead demand the immediate withdrawal of British troops, as the United Arab Republic draft (S/4856) proposed.","aftermath":"The United Arab Republic draft (S/4856) calling for the immediate withdrawal of British forces then failed (3 in favour and 8 abstentions). Kuwait joined the Arab League on 20 July 1961, and an Arab League force replaced the British troops later that year.","context":"The British draft would have called on all states to respect Kuwait's independence and territorial integrity after Iraq claimed the newly independent state and the United Kingdom sent troops at the Ruler's request. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the British troops were the threat to peace and should leave at once. The vote was 7 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Ceylon, Ecuador and the United Arab Republic). A rival draft demanding British withdrawal also failed, and the matter passed to the Arab League.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.960; https://undocs.org/en/S/4855; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/539840; https://undocs.org/en/S/4966","notes":"The vote and the Soviet explanation are taken from S/PV.960. The Soviet Union explained its vote at paragraphs 25-30 and 58 of the record; the representative was Mr. Morozov. Kuwait informed the Council (S/4966, cable of 22 October 1961) that the withdrawal of British forces was completed on 19 October 1961 and that Arab League forces had replaced them. Country codes: RUS for the USSR, EGY for the United Arab Republic, LKA for Ceylon.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":104,"un_id":104,"date":"1961-11-24","year":1961,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/4989/Rev.2","draft_note":"S/4989/Rev.2, amendment 3 (amendment to S/4985/Rev.1)","meeting_record":"S/PV.982","meeting_number":982,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Letter dated 13 July 1960 from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4381)--Letter dated 3 November 1961 from the Permanent Representatives of Ethiopia, Nigeria and Sudan addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4973)","short_agenda":"1960 Letter from the SG (Congo)","topic":"Congo: armed action against UN forces (amendment)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Congo (Leopoldville)","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"COD","ucdp_conflict_id":265,"ucdp_dyad_id":551,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Amendment concerns the ONUC mandate against the Katanga secession; UCDP 265 (DR Congo vs State of Katanga), active 1961-1962.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The third US amendment would have replaced operative paragraph 2 of the three-Power draft on the Congo (S/4985/Rev.1, by Ceylon, Liberia and the United Arab Republic) with: \"Further deprecates all armed action against United Nations forces and personnel and against the Government of the Republic of the Congo\".","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union gave no reason specific to this amendment; in the same debate it said the Council's main task was to end the colonialist intervention in Katanga and opposed US amendments that it said would divert attention from that task.","aftermath":"The Council adopted the three-Power draft with US amendments 1, 2 and 4 as resolution 169 (1961) at the same meeting, with 9 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions (France and the United Kingdom). The United States said it reserved the right to present its amendments again in the General Assembly.","context":"The United States proposed amendments to a three-Power draft that authorized the Secretary-General to act against foreign mercenaries in Katanga. Its third amendment would have widened operative paragraph 2 to deprecate all armed action against UN forces and against the Congolese government, and the Soviet Union vetoed it. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (France). The amended three-Power text was then adopted as resolution 169 (1961).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.982; https://undocs.org/en/S/4989/Rev.2; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/631969; https://undocs.org/en/S/4985/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/631961","notes":"The UN veto list gives S/4985/Rev.1 for vetoes 104 and 105; the vetoed items were the third and sixth US amendments (S/4989/Rev.2) to that draft, voted separately at S/PV.982. The match of veto 104 to amendment 3 and veto 105 to amendment 6 follows the order of voting. The fifth US amendment also drew a Soviet negative vote but failed for lack of seven votes (6-1-3, with France, the United Arab Republic and the United Kingdom abstaining and Ceylon not participating), so it was not a veto. No Soviet statement specific to amendment 3 was found in the record. Country codes: LKA Ceylon, EGY United Arab Republic, RUS USSR, COD Congo (Leopoldville).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":105,"un_id":105,"date":"1961-11-24","year":1961,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/4989/Rev.2","draft_note":"S/4989/Rev.2, amendment 6 (amendment to S/4985/Rev.1)","meeting_record":"S/PV.982","meeting_number":982,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Letter dated 13 July 1960 from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4381)--Letter dated 3 November 1961 from the Permanent Representatives of Ethiopia, Nigeria and Sudan addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4973)","short_agenda":"1960 Letter from the SG (Congo)","topic":"Congo: retraining the Congolese army (amendment)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Congo (Leopoldville)","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"COD","ucdp_conflict_id":265,"ucdp_dyad_id":551,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Amendment concerns the ONUC mandate during the Katanga secession; UCDP 265 (DR Congo vs State of Katanga), active 1961-1962.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The sixth US amendment would have added a new operative paragraph 11 to the three-Power draft (S/4985/Rev.1), asking the Secretary-General to help the Congolese government reorganize and retrain its armed units and develop its armed forces.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the amendment would divert the Council from its main task of ending colonialist intervention in Katanga, that reorganizing the army was an internal Congolese matter, and that the resolution of 21 February 1961 already provided for such assistance if the government requested it.","aftermath":"The Council adopted the three-Power draft with US amendments 1, 2 and 4 as resolution 169 (1961) at the same meeting, with 9 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions (France and the United Kingdom).","context":"The sixth US amendment to the three-Power draft on the Congo would have asked the Secretary-General to help the Congolese government reorganize and retrain its army. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying this was an internal matter already covered by the February 1961 resolution and a distraction from ending the Katanga secession. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (France). The amended three-Power text was adopted as resolution 169 (1961).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.982; https://undocs.org/en/S/4989/Rev.2; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/631969; https://undocs.org/en/S/4985/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/631961","notes":"The UN veto list gives S/4985/Rev.1; the vetoed item was the sixth US amendment (S/4989/Rev.2). The Soviet reasons are from statements by Mr. Zorin (also Council President) at S/PV.982, paragraphs 31-35, made in reply to Ceylon's proposal to reword the amendment.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":106,"un_id":106,"date":"1961-11-30","year":1961,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/5006","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.985","meeting_number":985,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members to the United Nations (Kuwait)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Kuwait","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Kuwait","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"EGY","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KWT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict involving Kuwait in 1961 in UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that Kuwait be admitted to membership of the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Kuwait was completely dependent on the United Kingdom and lacked genuine independence.","aftermath":"At its 1034th meeting on 7 May 1963 the Council decided unanimously, without a numbered resolution, to recommend Kuwait's admission, and the General Assembly admitted Kuwait on 14 May 1963 (resolution 1872 (S-IV)).","context":"The United Arab Republic draft would have recommended Kuwait for UN membership. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying Kuwait was completely dependent on the United Kingdom; Iraq, which claimed Kuwait, also opposed the application. The vote was 10 in favour and 1 against. Kuwait was admitted in May 1963.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.985; https://undocs.org/en/S/5006; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/536998; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/1872(S-IV)","notes":"Vote from S/PV.985. The fuller Soviet case was made at the 984th meeting; the stated reason rests only on Soviet remarks at the 985th meeting (paragraphs 42-43 and 55-57). The 7 May 1963 recommendation is confirmed by the Council's compilation of resolutions and decisions for 1963 (an unnumbered decision); GA resolution 1872 (S-IV) of 14 May 1963 (1203rd plenary meeting) admitted Kuwait, citing the Council recommendation of 7 May 1963.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":107,"un_id":107,"date":"1961-12-18","year":1961,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/5033","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.988","meeting_number":988,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 18 December 1961 from the Permanent Representative of Portugal addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/5030)","short_agenda":"1961 Letter from Portugal (Goma, Damo and Diu)","topic":"Goa: Indian invasion of Portuguese territories","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"India","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":4,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; TUR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IND; PRT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Indian seizure of Goa, Daman and Diu in December 1961; no UCDP conflict for India-Portugal.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deplored India's use of force in Goa, Daman and Diu, called for an immediate cessation of hostilities, called on India to withdraw its forces to the positions held before 17 December 1961, and urged the parties to settle their differences peacefully.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft supported colonial powers and backed a rival draft calling on Portugal to end hostile action and cooperate with India in liquidating its colonial possessions, citing the 1960 Declaration on decolonization (General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV)).","aftermath":"The rival draft by Ceylon, Liberia and the United Arab Republic (S/5032) had already been rejected (4 in favour and 7 against). The Council took no further action, and India incorporated the territories.","context":"The Western draft would have called for a ceasefire in Goa and the withdrawal of Indian forces that had entered the Portuguese territories the day before. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the Council should support the liquidation of colonial possessions. The vote was 7 in favour and 4 against (Ceylon, Liberia, the Soviet Union and the United Arab Republic). The Council took no further action and Goa became part of India.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.988; https://undocs.org/en/S/5033; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/536999","notes":"Vote from S/PV.988. There were four negative votes but only one permanent member (USSR) among them. The Goa operation does not appear in the Correlates of War inter-state war list (v4.0); it has not been matched against the extra-state and intra-state lists, and no Correlates of War number is given.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Ceylon","member_iso3c":"LKA","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":108,"un_id":108,"date":"1962-06-22","year":1962,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/5134","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1016","meeting_number":1016,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The India-Pakistan question","short_agenda":"India-Pakistan question","topic":"Kashmir: call for India-Pakistan negotiations","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"India","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":7,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"IRL","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IND; PAK","ucdp_conflict_id":218,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Kashmir dispute between active years; UCDP 218 (India-Pakistan, Kashmir) is coded for 1948 and 1964-65, not 1962.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Irish draft would have reminded India and Pakistan of the principles in the Council resolution of 17 January 1948 and the UNCIP resolutions of 1948 and 1949, urged them to negotiate a settlement of the Kashmir question, and asked them to refrain from statements or actions that might aggravate the situation.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft was one-sided and copied a US summary of the debate, and that by recalling the 1948-1949 resolutions it kept alive the plebiscite on Kashmir, which it said had been overtaken by events.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on Kashmir until the 1965 war. India and Pakistan held bilateral ministerial talks on Kashmir between December 1962 and May 1963.","context":"The Irish draft would have urged India and Pakistan to negotiate over Kashmir on the basis of earlier Council and UNCIP resolutions. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the draft was one-sided and revived the plebiscite. The vote was 7 in favour, 2 against (Romania and the Soviet Union) and 2 abstentions (Ghana and the United Arab Republic). No further Council action followed until 1965.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1016; https://undocs.org/en/S/5134; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/539833; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=Kashmir%201963","notes":"Vote and Soviet reasons from S/PV.1016, paragraphs 68-75. The account of the 1962-63 bilateral talks (six ministerial rounds, 27 December 1962 to 16 May 1963) rests on secondary sources; no UN document confirms it.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Republic","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":109,"un_id":109,"date":"1963-09-03","year":1963,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/5407","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1063","meeting_number":1063,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Palestine question","short_agenda":"Palestine question","topic":"Israel/Syria: killing of two Israelis at Almagor","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GBR; USA","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Syria armistice-line incident; no UCDP Israel-Syria conflict before 1967. UCDP 234 (Israel vs Palestinian insurgents) is not clearly the subject.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the killing of two Israeli citizens at Almagor on 19 August 1963, drawn Syria's attention to evidence that the attackers came from and returned towards the Jordan River, appealed for an exchange of prisoners, and called on both parties to cooperate with the UNTSO Chief of Staff.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Western powers had put the blame squarely on Syria and had refused a mutually acceptable text, which it said could have been reached on the basis of Morocco's amendments.","aftermath":"Morocco's amendments had failed (2 in favour, none against and 9 abstentions). The Council took no further action on the incident.","context":"The Anglo-American draft would have condemned the killing of two Israeli farmers at Almagor and pointed Syria to UN evidence about the attackers' route. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the text blamed Syria alone. The vote was 8 in favour, 2 against (Morocco and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (Venezuela). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1063; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/613955; https://undocs.org/en/S/5407; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/625348","notes":"Vote and Soviet reasons (Mr. Fedorenko, paragraphs 80-85) from S/PV.1063. The Digital Library record for S/5407 lists both 625348 and 539828 as record numbers.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Morocco","member_iso3c":"MAR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":110,"un_id":110,"date":"1963-09-13","year":1963,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/5425/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1069","meeting_number":1069,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 2 August 1963 from the representatives of Ghana, Guinea, Morocco and the United Arab Republic addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/5382) and letter dated 30 August 1963 from the Chargé d'affaires of the Permanent Mission of the Congo (Brazzaville) addressed to the President of the Security Council on behalf of the representatives of Algeria, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo (Brazzaville), Congo (Leopoldville), Dahomey, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Tanganyika, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda and Upper Volta (S/5409) [regarding Southern Rhodesia]","short_agenda":"1963 Letters from African countries (Southern Rhodesia)","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: transfer of powers and armed forces","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"UK","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GHA; MAR; PHL","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"No armed conflict in Southern Rhodesia in 1963; UCDP 318 (Rhodesia) begins in 1967.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have invited the United Kingdom not to transfer to Southern Rhodesia, as then governed, any powers or attributes of sovereignty until a fully representative government was established, nor the armed forces and aircraft of the dissolving Central African Federation, and to implement General Assembly resolutions on the territory.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said nothing in the situation justified Council action under Chapter VI or VII, that the Council was no enforcement agency for General Assembly resolutions, and that Southern Rhodesia was tranquil.","aftermath":"The Federation was dissolved at the end of 1963 and its forces passed to the territories, including Southern Rhodesia. The minority government declared independence on 11 November 1965, and the Council responded with resolutions 216 and 217 (1965).","context":"The draft would have asked the United Kingdom not to hand the colony's white minority government sovereign powers or the Federation's armed forces before majority rule. The United Kingdom vetoed it, its first veto on Southern Rhodesia, saying the matter did not warrant Council action. The vote was 8 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (France and the United States). Southern Rhodesia declared independence unilaterally in 1965.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1069; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/613962; https://undocs.org/en/S/5425/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/539826; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/1883(XVIII)","notes":"Vote and UK reasons (Sir Patrick Dean, paragraphs 46-53) from S/PV.1069. ZWE used for Southern Rhodesia. The account of the transfer of Federation forces rests on secondary sources; the dissolution date (31 December 1963) and the transfer of most Federation forces, including the air force, to Southern Rhodesia are not confirmed by a UN document (GA resolution 1883 (XVIII) of 14 October 1963 had asked the UK not to transfer the armed forces to Southern Rhodesia).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Morocco","member_iso3c":"MAR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":111,"un_id":111,"date":"1964-09-17","year":1964,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/5973","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1152","meeting_number":1152,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 3 September 1964 from the Permanent Representative of Malaysia addressed to the President of thesecurity Council (S/5930)","short_agenda":"1964 Letter from Malaysia (Malaysia)","topic":"Indonesia/Malaysia: Indonesian landings in Malaysia","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Malaysia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NOR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"MYS; IDN","ucdp_conflict_id":281,"ucdp_dyad_id":579,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Indonesia-Malaysia confrontation; UCDP 281 (Indonesia vs Malaysia, North Borneo), active 1963-1966.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The Norwegian draft would have deplored the incident of 2 September 1964 (an Indonesian airdrop in Johore), called on the parties to refrain from the threat or use of force and to respect each other's territorial integrity and independence, and called on them to resume talks on the basis of the Tokyo summit of June 1964.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft treated the matter as an isolated incident and ignored the wider situation in South-East Asia, which it described as a struggle against colonialism in which Malaysia served as a neo-colonialist structure set up by the United Kingdom.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. Indonesia withdrew from the United Nations in January 1965 after Malaysia took a Council seat, and the confrontation ended with the agreement signed at Jakarta on 11 August 1966, following the Bangkok talks of June 1966.","context":"The Norwegian draft would have deplored an Indonesian paratroop landing in Malaysia and called on both states to respect each other's territory and resume talks. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the draft ignored British neo-colonialism in South-East Asia. The vote was 9 in favour and 2 against (Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union). The confrontation continued until 1966.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1152; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/608141; https://undocs.org/en/S/5973; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/537001; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1144; https://undocs.org/en/S/6157","notes":"Vote and Soviet reasons (Mr. Morozov speaking as USSR representative, paragraphs 50-55) from S/PV.1152. The available text of the draft is largely illegible; the summary of its content draws on the Digital Library title and the debate. The Labis (Johore) paratroop landing in the night of 1-2 September 1964 is described by Malaysia at the 1144th meeting (S/PV.1144, para. 37); Indonesia announced its withdrawal from the UN in a letter of 20 January 1965 (S/6157). The 1966 settlement (Bangkok talks of 29 May-1 June 1966, agreement to normalize relations signed at Jakarta on 11 August 1966) is from secondary sources.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Czechoslovakia","member_iso3c":"CSK","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Morocco","member_iso3c":"MAR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":112,"un_id":112,"date":"1964-12-21","year":1964,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/6113","draft_note":"S/6113 (as amended)","meeting_record":"S/PV.1182","meeting_number":1182,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Palestine question","short_agenda":"Palestine question","topic":"Israel/Syria: Tel el-Qadi clash of 13 November 1964","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":11,"vote_yes":8,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GBR; USA","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Syria armistice-line clash; no UCDP Israel-Syria conflict before 1967.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, as amended by Morocco, would have deplored the renewed military action on the Israel-Syria armistice line on 13 November 1964 and the loss of life, and recommended that both parties cooperate with the Mixed Armistice Commission, complete the survey and demarcation work begun in 1963 starting at Tel el-Qadi, and take part fully in the Commission's meetings.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said Israel had provoked the clash by unilateral action and broken the ceasefire with air strikes on Syrian villages, which the Council should condemn.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the incident.","context":"The Anglo-American draft, as amended by two Moroccan proposals, would have deplored a clash on the Israel-Syria line and asked both sides to cooperate with the armistice machinery. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the Council should have condemned Israel's air strikes. The vote was 8 in favour and 3 against (Czechoslovakia, Morocco and the Soviet Union). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1182; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/608534; https://undocs.org/en/S/6113; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/537002","notes":"Vote from S/PV.1182. Morocco submitted five amendments, voted one by one; the third (deleting \"tout particulierement\" and \"expressement\" in operative paragraph 2) and fifth (Israel, like Syria, to participate fully in MAC meetings) were adopted, each by 7 votes to none with 4 abstentions. Soviet reasons from Mr. Morozov at paragraphs 9-13.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Czechoslovakia","member_iso3c":"CSK","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Morocco","member_iso3c":"MAR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":113,"un_id":113,"date":"1966-11-04","year":1966,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/7575/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1319","meeting_number":1319,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Palestine question","short_agenda":"Palestine question","topic":"Israel/Syria: border incidents and guerrilla raids","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":4,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG; JPN; NLD; NZL; NGA; UGA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns Palestinian guerrilla raids into Israel from Syria; UCDP 234 (Israel vs PLO and non-PLO groups, Palestine) is active in 1966. There is no UCDP Israel-Syria state conflict before 1967.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The six-Power draft would have deplored the incidents on the Israel-Syria armistice line and the loss of life, invited Syria to strengthen its measures to prevent incidents that violated the General Armistice Agreement, invited Israel to cooperate fully with the Mixed Armistice Commission, called on both governments to help UNTSO observers and urged them to refrain from action that might increase tension.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said tension in the Middle East stemmed from the aggressive policy of Israel and its backers, and that the six-Power draft ignored Syria's statements and was unsatisfactory.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the Israeli complaint against Syria. After Israel's raid on Samu in Jordan on 13 November 1966, the Council censured Israel in resolution 228 (1966) of 25 November 1966.","context":"The draft, tabled by six non-permanent members, would have deplored incidents on the Israel-Syria line and invited Syria to do more to prevent raids from its territory. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the text ignored Israel's responsibility for the tension. The vote was 10 in favour, 4 against (Bulgaria, Jordan, Mali and the Soviet Union) and 1 abstention (China). Days later an Israeli raid on Samu in Jordan led to a separate Council censure of Israel.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1319; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/581595; https://undocs.org/en/S/7575/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/523608; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=S/7575/Rev.1","notes":"Vote and Soviet reasons (Mr. Fedorenko, paragraphs 34-37) from S/PV.1319. The available text of the draft is poor; operative paragraph 2 (inviting Syria to strengthen its measures) is reconstructed from the debate, where the sponsors refused a separate vote on paragraph 2. Country codes: CHN = Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Mali","member_iso3c":"MLI","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":114,"un_id":114,"date":"1968-08-22","year":1968,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/8761","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1443","meeting_number":1443,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 21 August 1968 from the representatives of Canada, Denmark, France, Paraguay, the United Kingdom and the United States addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/8758)","short_agenda":"1968 Letter from various Member States (Czechoslovakia)","topic":"Czechoslovakia: Warsaw Pact invasion","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Czechoslovakia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; CAN; DNK; FRA; PRY; SEN; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"CSK; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"1968 Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia; no UCDP conflict (largely unresisted).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have affirmed that Czechoslovakia's sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity must be respected, condemned the armed intervention of the Soviet Union and other Warsaw Pact members, called on them to refrain from violence or reprisals, withdraw their forces forthwith and end all other intervention, and asked UN members to use their diplomatic influence to secure compliance.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the matter concerned only Czechoslovakia and its Warsaw Treaty allies, that the allied forces had come to defend Czechoslovakia against imperialist and NATO threats under the Warsaw Treaty, and that the Western members were themselves interfering in Czechoslovakia's internal affairs by bringing the matter to the Council.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. An eight-Power draft (S/8767), sponsored by Brazil, Canada, Denmark, France, Paraguay, Senegal, the United Kingdom and the United States and introduced by Canada, which asked the Secretary-General to send a special representative to Prague to seek the release of the detained Czechoslovak leaders, was not put to a vote.","context":"The draft would have condemned the Soviet-led invasion of Czechoslovakia and demanded the withdrawal of Warsaw Pact forces. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the intervention was a matter for the Warsaw Treaty allies and not for the Council. The vote was 10 in favour, 2 against (Hungary and the Soviet Union) and 3 abstentions (Algeria, India and Pakistan). The Council took no further action and Soviet forces stayed.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1443; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/582001; https://undocs.org/en/S/8761; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/515998; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/516413","notes":"Vote and Soviet reasons (Mr. Malik) from S/PV.1443. Brazil and Senegal joined the six original sponsors in S/8761/Add.1. Country codes: CHN = Republic of China; CSK Czechoslovakia; DZA Algeria.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Hungary","member_iso3c":"HUN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Paraguay","member_iso3c":"PRY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":115,"un_id":115,"date":"1970-03-17","year":1970,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/9696","draft_note":"S/9696 and Corr.1 and 2 (without operative paragraphs 8 and 9)","meeting_record":"S/PV.1534","meeting_number":1534,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: response to the proclamation of a republic","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BDI; NPL; SLE; SYR; ZMB","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR; ZAF; PRT","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 318 (Rhodesia vs ZANU/ZAPU) has active years 1967-68 and 1973-79, not 1970.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have acted under Chapter VII to condemn the proclamation of a republic by the minority regime and the United Kingdom's refusal to use force against it, bar recognition of the regime, require all states to sever diplomatic, economic, military and communication links with it, and urge support for the Zimbabwe liberation movements.","stated_reason":"The United States said it could not support a text that by implication called on the United Kingdom to use force and that cutting all communications would cut off US citizens in Rhodesia; the United Kingdom said the draft contained provisions it could not support and rejected demands that it start a war in Rhodesia.","aftermath":"On 18 March 1970 the Council adopted a British draft as resolution 277 (1970), which condemned the proclamation of a republic and called on states to sever relations with the regime.","context":"The Afro-Asian draft would have condemned the United Kingdom for refusing to use force against the Smith regime and required states to cut all links with Rhodesia. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, in the first US veto, with the United States citing its opposition to force and the effect of a communications ban. The vote was 9 in favour, 2 against and 4 abstentions (Colombia, Finland, France and Nicaragua). The next day the Council adopted a British text as resolution 277 (1970).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1534; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/584332; https://undocs.org/en/S/9696; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/498226","notes":"Vote and US statement (Mr. Yost, paragraphs 199-202) from S/PV.1534. Paragraphs 8 (condemning South African and Portuguese assistance and demanding withdrawal of South African troops) and 9 (applying resolution 253 measures to South Africa and Portugal) each failed 7-0-8 at Spain's request for separate votes; the vote on the whole was on the remaining text. No separate UK explanation after the vote has been found; its reason combines Lord Caradon's remark before the vote (paragraph 198) and his earlier statement on force (paragraph 10 onward). Country codes: ZWE for Southern Rhodesia; CHN = Republic of China.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Burundi","member_iso3c":"BDI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":116,"un_id":116,"date":"1970-11-10","year":1970,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/9976","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1556","meeting_number":1556,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: no independence before majority rule","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"UK","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BDI; NPL; SLE; SYR; ZMB","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 318 (Rhodesia) has no active year in 1970.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, acting under Chapter VII, would have called on the United Kingdom not to grant independence to Southern Rhodesia without majority rule, decided that existing sanctions remain in force, deplored states helping the regime and urged states not to recognize it.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said it could not accept a new commitment that would restrict it in seeking a settlement within its five principles, and that binding it not to grant independence without majority rule would impinge on the sovereignty of the British Parliament.","aftermath":"On 17 November 1970 the Council adopted a British draft as resolution 288 (1970), which reaffirmed the condemnation of the regime and decided that sanctions remain in force.","context":"The Afro-Asian draft would have barred the United Kingdom from granting Rhodesia independence before majority rule and kept sanctions in place. The United Kingdom vetoed it, saying it would not accept conditions on its search for a settlement. The vote was 12 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (France and the United States). A week later the Council adopted a British text on sanctions as resolution 288 (1970).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1556; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/584810; https://undocs.org/en/S/9976; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/534690","notes":"Vote and UK reasons (Sir Colin Crowe, paragraphs 128-141) from S/PV.1556.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Burundi","member_iso3c":"BDI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China (Republic of China)","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":117,"un_id":117,"date":"1971-12-05","year":1971,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/10416","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1606","meeting_number":1606,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 4 December 1971 from the Permanent Representatives of Argentina, Belgium, Burundi, Italy, Japan, Nicaragua, Somalia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/10411)--Report of the Secretary-General (S/10410)","short_agenda":"1971 Letter from various Member States (India/Pakistan subcontinent)","topic":"India/Pakistan: US ceasefire and withdrawal draft","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"India","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IND; PAK; BGD","ucdp_conflict_id":218,"ucdp_dyad_id":422,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"India-Pakistan war of December 1971; UCDP 218 (India vs Pakistan) is coded for 1971. The East Pakistan insurgency is UCDP 312.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The US draft would have called for an immediate ceasefire and withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani armed forces to their own sides of the border, authorized the Secretary-General to station UN observers along the border at the request of either government, called for efforts toward the return of the East Pakistan refugees, and asked both governments to refrain from action that would endanger peace.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union called the draft one-sided and unacceptable, saying the conflict arose from the Pakistani authorities' repression in East Pakistan and that any decision had to address a political settlement there.","aftermath":"The Soviet draft S/10418 received two votes. On 6 December the Council referred the question to the General Assembly under the Uniting for Peace procedure in resolution 303 (1971), and the Assembly called for a ceasefire and withdrawal in resolution 2793 (XXVI) of 7 December 1971.","context":"The US draft, tabled the day after full-scale war broke out, would have called for a ceasefire and the withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani forces. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it was one-sided because it ignored the repression in East Pakistan that had caused the war. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 2 abstentions (France and the United Kingdom). The Council then passed the question to the General Assembly under Uniting for Peace.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1606; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586014; https://undocs.org/en/S/10416; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/499958","notes":"The UN list dates this vote 1971-12-04; the meeting record shows 1971-12-05, which is used here. Vote and Soviet statements (Mr. Malik) from S/PV.1606; the vote took place after midnight, early on 5 December 1971, at the resumed 1606th meeting. The UN list dates the vote 4 December. The available text of the draft is largely illegible; the summary relies on legible fragments. UCDP codes the 1971 war under the Kashmir dyad 218; 312 (Pakistan vs Mukti Bahini) would also fit. Country codes: CHN = PRC (seated 25 October 1971); BGD listed for East Pakistan/Bangladesh.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burundi","member_iso3c":"BDI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":118,"un_id":118,"date":"1971-12-05","year":1971,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/10423","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1607","meeting_number":1607,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 4 December 1971 from the Permanent Representatives of Argentina, Belgium, Burundi, Italy, Japan, Nicaragua, Somalia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/10411)--Report of the Secretary-General (S/10410)","short_agenda":"1971 Letter from various Member States (India/Pakistan subcontinent)","topic":"India/Pakistan: eight-Power ceasefire draft","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"India","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG; BEL; BDI; ITA; JPN; NIC; SLE; SOM","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IND; PAK; BGD","ucdp_conflict_id":218,"ucdp_dyad_id":422,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"India-Pakistan war of December 1971; UCDP 218 (India vs Pakistan) is coded for 1971.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The eight-Power draft would have called on India and Pakistan to bring about an immediate ceasefire and withdraw their armed forces from each other's territory, urged efforts to create conditions for the voluntary return of the East Pakistan refugees, and called for cooperation with the Secretary-General in relieving their distress.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft side-stepped the main cause of the conflict, the situation the Pakistani authorities had created in East Pakistan.","aftermath":"The Council referred the question to the General Assembly on 6 December in resolution 303 (1971). After Pakistan's surrender in the east on 16 December, the Council adopted resolution 307 (1971) on 21 December demanding a durable ceasefire.","context":"Eight non-permanent members proposed a ceasefire and mutual withdrawal in the India-Pakistan war. The Soviet Union vetoed it, its second veto in two days, saying the text ignored the situation in East Pakistan. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 2 abstentions (France and the United Kingdom). The Council then referred the matter to the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1607; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586015; https://undocs.org/en/S/10423; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/500042","notes":"Vote from S/PV.1607 (11-2-2). The Soviet reason is drawn from Soviet remarks in the same series of meetings that the drafts side-stepped the main cause of the conflict; Mr. Malik spoke right after the vote (S/PV.1607, paras. 266-268), saying the cease-fire and the political settlement in East Pakistan could not be separated and that anyone who side-stepped the problem preferred instability to continue. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burundi","member_iso3c":"BDI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":119,"un_id":119,"date":"1971-12-13","year":1971,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/10446/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1613","meeting_number":1613,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 26 December 1963 from the Permanent Representative of Cyprus addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/5488)--Letter dated 12 December 1971 from the Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/10444)","short_agenda":"1971 Letter from US (India/Pakistan subcontinent)","topic":"India/Pakistan: US draft after the General Assembly resolution","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"India","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IND; PAK; BGD","ucdp_conflict_id":218,"ucdp_dyad_id":422,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"India-Pakistan war of December 1971; UCDP 218 (India vs Pakistan) is coded for 1971.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The revised US draft would have noted General Assembly resolution 2793 (XXVI) and Pakistan's acceptance of it, regretted that India had not accepted an immediate ceasefire and withdrawal, called on both governments to take forthwith all measures for an immediate ceasefire and withdrawal of their forces, urged conditions for the return of the East Pakistan refugees, and called for the protection of civilians.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the main cause of the conflict was the violent repression of the people of East Pakistan by the Pakistani authorities, which had driven some 10 million refugees into India, and that the draft did not address it.","aftermath":"Pakistani forces in the east surrendered on 16 December 1971 and a ceasefire followed. The Council adopted resolution 307 (1971) on 21 December 1971, demanding a durable ceasefire and withdrawal of forces as soon as practicable.","context":"The United States brought back its ceasefire call after the General Assembly had demanded a ceasefire and withdrawal (104 in favour and 11 against). The Soviet Union vetoed it, its third veto in the crisis, saying the draft ignored the repression in East Pakistan. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 2 abstentions (France and the United Kingdom). The war ended three days later with Pakistan's surrender in the east.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1613; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586025; https://undocs.org/en/S/10446/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/500791","notes":"Vote and Soviet statement (Mr. Malik) from S/PV.1613. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burundi","member_iso3c":"BDI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":120,"un_id":120,"date":"1971-12-30","year":1971,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/10489","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1623","meeting_number":1623,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: rejection of the Anglo-Rhodesian settlement proposals","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"UK","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":5,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BDI; SLE; SOM; SYR","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 318 (Rhodesia) has no active year in 1971.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have rejected the \"proposals for a settlement\" agreed between the United Kingdom and the Smith regime in November 1971 as failing to guarantee the rights of the majority, declared that any settlement must rest on majority rule and universal adult suffrage, and urged states not to recognize any independence not based on majority rule.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the Pearce Commission would test the acceptability of the proposals to the people of Rhodesia as a whole, thoroughly and impartially, and that the Council should await its findings.","aftermath":"In May 1972 the Pearce Commission reported that the proposals were not acceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole, and the British government accepted the finding.","context":"The draft would have rejected the settlement terms the United Kingdom had agreed with the Smith regime and insisted on majority rule as the basis of independence. The United Kingdom vetoed it, saying the Pearce Commission should first test opinion in Rhodesia. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 5 abstentions (Belgium, France, Italy, Japan and the United States). The commission later found the terms unacceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1623; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586035; https://undocs.org/en/S/10489; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/490294","notes":"Vote and UK statement (Sir Colin Crowe, paragraphs 163-170) from S/PV.1623. Several paragraphs were voted separately and adopted before the vote on the whole. The Pearce Commission outcome (May 1972) is confirmed in the UK statement at S/PV.1666. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Burundi","member_iso3c":"BDI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":121,"un_id":121,"date":"1972-02-04","year":1972,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/10606","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1639","meeting_number":1639,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Consideration of questions relating to Africa with which the Security Council is currently seized and implementation of the Council's relevant resolutions","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: call to drop the settlement proposals (Addis Ababa session)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"UK","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":5,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; SOM; SDN","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 318 (Rhodesia) has no active year in 1972.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have noted the killings and detentions of Africans by the regime's forces, recognized the legitimacy of the Zimbabwean struggle and asked the United Kingdom not to implement the settlement proposals agreed with the Smith regime, with other provisions on sanctions and majority rule.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said its government could not accept a directive to change its policy while that policy was being worked out, as the Pearce Commission was still testing opinion in Rhodesia.","aftermath":"On 28 February 1972 the Council adopted resolution 314 (1972) urging full implementation of sanctions against Southern Rhodesia.","context":"Meeting in Addis Ababa, the Council considered an African draft that would have asked the United Kingdom to stop implementing its settlement terms with the Smith regime. The United Kingdom vetoed it, saying it would not accept a directive while the Pearce Commission was at work. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 5 abstentions (Belgium, France, Italy, Japan and the United States). On 28 February 1972 the Council adopted resolution 314 (1972) on sanctions.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1639; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586106; https://undocs.org/en/S/10606; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/534691","notes":"Vote and UK statement (Sir Colin Crowe, paragraph 43) from S/PV.1639, held in Addis Ababa. The Digital Library copy of S/10606 lacks page 3, so the full list of operative paragraphs is not confirmed; the request that Britain desist from implementing the settlement proposals (paragraph 5) is quoted by another speaker in the record. Country codes: CHN = PRC; ZWE for Southern Rhodesia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":122,"un_id":122,"date":"1972-08-25","year":1972,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/10771","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1660","meeting_number":1660,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of New Members (Bangladesh)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Bangladesh","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Bangladesh","vetoed_by":"China","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"IND; RUS; GBR; YUG","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"BGD","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The four-Power draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that Bangladesh be admitted to membership of the United Nations.","stated_reason":"China said Bangladesh could not be admitted until it complied with General Assembly resolution 2793 (XXVI) and Council resolution 307 (1971), which called for troop withdrawals and the repatriation of prisoners of war, and accused the Soviet Union and India of separating admission from those resolutions.","aftermath":"In November 1972 the General Assembly expressed the wish that Bangladesh be admitted soon. The Council recommended its admission in resolution 351 (1974) of 10 June 1974, and the General Assembly admitted it on 17 September 1974.","context":"The draft would have recommended Bangladesh for membership. China vetoed it, its first veto as the People's Republic of China, saying Bangladesh first had to comply with UN resolutions on troop withdrawal and the return of Pakistani prisoners of war. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Guinea, Somalia and Sudan). Bangladesh was admitted in 1974.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1660; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586172; https://undocs.org/en/S/10771; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/534870; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/191417","notes":"Vote and Chinese statement (Mr. Huang Hua, paragraphs 72-74) from S/PV.1660. Before this vote, a Chinese draft to defer consideration (S/10768) failed 3-3-9, and an amendment by Guinea, Somalia and Sudan (S/10775) failed 4-4-7. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":123,"un_id":123,"date":"1972-09-10","year":1972,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/10784","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1662","meeting_number":1662,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East","topic":"Middle East: Israeli air strikes on Syria and Lebanon after Munich","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; SOM; YUG","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; SYR; LBN","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israeli raids on Palestinian targets in Syria and Lebanon after the Munich attack; UCDP 234 (Israel vs PLO and non-PLO groups) is active in 1972.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The three-Power draft would have called on the parties concerned to cease all military operations at once and to exercise the greatest restraint.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft addressed the Israeli raids and ignored the terrorism at Munich that preceded them.","aftermath":"A US draft (S/10785) condemning the Munich attack was not put to a vote. The Council took no further action.","context":"The draft would have called for an immediate halt to military operations after Israeli air raids on Syria and Lebanon on 8 September 1972, three days after the killing of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics. The United States vetoed it, its second veto, saying the draft did not address the Munich killings. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Panama). European amendments to add a reference to terrorism had failed just before.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1662; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586176; https://undocs.org/en/S/10784; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/534882","notes":"Vote and US statement (Mr. Bush, paragraph 76) from S/PV.1662. The US draft S/10785 was circulated the same day; this record does not show whether it was later pressed to a vote. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":124,"un_id":124,"date":"1972-09-10","year":1972,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/10786","draft_note":"S/10786, paragraph 2 (a) (amendment to S/10784)","meeting_record":"S/PV.1662","meeting_number":1662,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East","topic":"Middle East: call on all parties to cease military operations (amendment)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":6,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEL; FRA; ITA; GBR","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; SYR; LBN","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israeli raids on Palestinian targets in Syria and Lebanon after the Munich attack; UCDP 234 (Israel vs PLO and non-PLO groups) is active in 1972.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The amendment by Belgium, France, Italy and the United Kingdom would have replaced \"the parties\" with \"all parties\" in the call of draft S/10784 to cease military operations; other parts of the amendment would have deplored all acts of terrorism and called for an end to terrorist activities.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said acts of terrorism by private persons could not be put on the same footing as the aggression of a state, that Syria and Lebanon bore no responsibility for Munich, and that drawing such a parallel would condone Israeli aggression. China said Israel was the aggressor, that the Palestinians were waging a just struggle, and that Israel was using Munich as a pretext.","aftermath":"The other parts of the amendment failed for lack of nine votes. The United States then vetoed the three-Power draft, and the Council took no further action.","context":"Belgium, France, Italy and the United Kingdom proposed amendments to extend the ceasefire call to all parties and to condemn terrorism. China and the Soviet Union vetoed the paragraph on all parties, saying Israel was the aggressor. The vote was 9 in favour and 6 against (China, Guinea, Somalia, the Soviet Union, Sudan and Yugoslavia). The United States then vetoed the draft itself.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1662; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586176; https://undocs.org/en/S/10786; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/536119","notes":"The UN veto list gives S/10784 for this veto; the vetoed item was paragraph 2 (a) of the amendments in S/10786, the only part of the amendments that reached nine votes (S/PV.1662). The Digital Library catalogue note for S/10786 says the amendment failed through a US negative vote, which is wrong: the record shows China and the USSR voting against. Paragraph 1 of the amendments (8-4-3, China against) and paragraph 2 (b) (8-7, China and USSR against) failed for lack of nine votes and were not vetoes. No separate explanation of the Chinese or Soviet vote on the amendment has been found; the reasons given are from their statements in the same meeting. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":125,"un_id":125,"date":"1972-09-29","year":1972,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/10805/Rev.1","draft_note":"S/10805/Rev.1 (as amended by the non-adoption of operative paragraphs 1 and 5)","meeting_record":"S/PV.1666","meeting_number":1666,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: constitutional conference and majority rule (draft as a whole)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"UK","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; SOM; SDN","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 318 (Rhodesia) has no active year in 1972; fighting resumed in December 1972 and UCDP codes 1973 onward.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, without operative paragraphs 1 and 5, which had failed in separate votes, would have called on the United Kingdom not to transfer any powers of sovereignty to the illegal regime, to convene a national constitutional conference with the political representatives of the people of Zimbabwe and to seek the release of political prisoners, the repeal of repressive laws and the removal of restrictions on political activity, and would have called for full support for the mandatory sanctions.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the draft would bind it, as administering power, to impractical courses of action that no government could accept, and that it would not commit itself to a constitutional conference until the parties were ready and success was possible.","aftermath":"At the same meeting the Council adopted the companion sanctions draft S/10804/Rev.1 as resolution 320 (1972) (13 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions), with the United Kingdom and the United States abstaining.","context":"After the Pearce Commission found the Anglo-Rhodesian settlement terms unacceptable to most Rhodesians, African members proposed that the United Kingdom call a constitutional conference and secure political freedoms in Southern Rhodesia. The United Kingdom vetoed the draft as a whole, after vetoing two of its paragraphs in separate votes, saying it would not be bound to impractical courses of action. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Belgium, France, Italy and the United States). A companion text on sanctions was adopted as resolution 320 (1972).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1666; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586276; https://undocs.org/en/S/10805/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/534760","notes":"S/PV.1666 shows three separate votes on S/10805/Rev.1, each 10-1-4 with the United Kingdom against: operative paragraph 1, operative paragraph 5, and the draft as a whole as amended by the non-adoption of paragraphs 1 and 5 (separate votes requested by Somalia). The UN list does not say which veto is which; here veto 125 (\"as amended\") is matched to the vote on the whole, and vetoes 126 and 127 to operative paragraphs 1 and 5 in the order voted. The sponsors orally revised the draft before the vote (e.g. operative paragraph 4 \"to try its utmost to bring about\", deletion of paragraph 6, adding \"Zimbabwe\" after Southern Rhodesia). UK reasons from Sir Colin Crowe, paragraphs 85-86, before the vote. Country codes: CHN = PRC; ZWE for Southern Rhodesia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":126,"un_id":126,"date":"1972-09-29","year":1972,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/10805/Rev.1","draft_note":"S/10805/Rev.1, operative paragraph 1 (separate vote)","meeting_record":"S/PV.1666","meeting_number":1666,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: no independence before majority rule (paragraph vote)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"UK","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; SOM; SDN","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 318 (Rhodesia) has no active year in 1972.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Operative paragraph 1 would have reaffirmed the principle that there should be no independence before majority rule in Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe).","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the draft would bind it, as administering power, to impractical courses of action that no government could accept, and that it would not commit itself to a constitutional conference until the parties were ready and success was possible.","aftermath":"The paragraph was dropped from the text, and the United Kingdom vetoed the remaining draft in the vote on the whole. At the same meeting the Council adopted the companion sanctions draft S/10804/Rev.1 as resolution 320 (1972) (13 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions), with the United Kingdom and the United States abstaining.","context":"At Somalia's request the Council voted separately on the paragraph reaffirming no independence before majority rule. The United Kingdom vetoed it, saying it would not accept directives that bound it to impractical courses of action. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Belgium, France, Italy and the United States). The United Kingdom also vetoed the rest of the draft in a later vote.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1666; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586276; https://undocs.org/en/S/10805/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/534760","notes":"S/PV.1666 shows three separate votes on S/10805/Rev.1, each 10-1-4 with the United Kingdom against: operative paragraph 1, operative paragraph 5, and the draft as a whole as amended by the non-adoption of paragraphs 1 and 5 (separate votes requested by Somalia). The UN list does not say which veto is which; here veto 125 (\"as amended\") is matched to the vote on the whole, and vetoes 126 and 127 to operative paragraphs 1 and 5 in the order voted. The sponsors orally revised the draft before the vote (e.g. operative paragraph 4 \"to try its utmost to bring about\", deletion of paragraph 6, adding \"Zimbabwe\" after Southern Rhodesia). UK reasons from Sir Colin Crowe, paragraphs 85-86, before the vote. Country codes: CHN = PRC; ZWE for Southern Rhodesia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":127,"un_id":127,"date":"1972-09-29","year":1972,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/10805/Rev.1","draft_note":"S/10805/Rev.1, operative paragraph 5 (separate vote)","meeting_record":"S/PV.1666","meeting_number":1666,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: universal suffrage in any test of opinion (paragraph vote)","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"UK","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; SOM; SDN","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 318 (Rhodesia) has no active year in 1972.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Operative paragraph 5 would have called on the United Kingdom to ensure that any test of the wishes of the people of Southern Rhodesia about their political future used universal adult suffrage and secret ballot on the basis of one man, one vote, without regard to race, colour, education, property or income.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the draft would bind it, as administering power, to impractical courses of action that no government could accept, and that it would not commit itself to a constitutional conference until the parties were ready and success was possible.","aftermath":"The paragraph was dropped from the text, and the United Kingdom vetoed the remaining draft in the vote on the whole. At the same meeting the Council adopted the companion sanctions draft S/10804/Rev.1 as resolution 320 (1972) (13 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions), with the United Kingdom and the United States abstaining.","context":"The Council voted separately on the paragraph requiring that any test of opinion in Southern Rhodesia use one man, one vote. The United Kingdom vetoed it, saying it would not accept directives that bound it to impractical courses of action. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Belgium, France, Italy and the United States). The United Kingdom also vetoed the rest of the draft in the next vote.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1666; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586276; https://undocs.org/en/S/10805/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/534760","notes":"S/PV.1666 shows three separate votes on S/10805/Rev.1, each 10-1-4 with the United Kingdom against: operative paragraph 1, operative paragraph 5, and the draft as a whole as amended by the non-adoption of paragraphs 1 and 5 (separate votes requested by Somalia). The UN list does not say which veto is which; here veto 125 (\"as amended\") is matched to the vote on the whole, and vetoes 126 and 127 to operative paragraphs 1 and 5 in the order voted. The sponsors orally revised the draft before the vote (e.g. operative paragraph 4 \"to try its utmost to bring about\", deletion of paragraph 6, adding \"Zimbabwe\" after Southern Rhodesia). UK reasons from Sir Colin Crowe, paragraphs 85-86, before the vote. Country codes: CHN = PRC; ZWE for Southern Rhodesia.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":128,"un_id":128,"date":"1973-03-21","year":1973,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/10931/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1704","meeting_number":1704,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Consideration of measures for the maintenance and strengthening of international peace and security in Latin America in conformity with the provisions and principles of the Charter","short_agenda":"Maintenance and strengthening of international peace and security in Latin America (Panama)","topic":"Panama Canal: call for a new treaty","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Panama","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; IND; IDN; KEN; PAN; PER; SDN; YUG","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PAN; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Dispute over the Panama Canal Zone; no armed conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have noted that Panama and the United States had agreed to reach a just and fair agreement to remove the causes of conflict between them, urged the two governments to continue negotiations and conclude without delay a new treaty on the Canal, and kept the question under consideration.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council should not adopt a resolution on the substance of a bilateral negotiation still under way, as the text would be seen as outside pressure on one party, although it agreed with much in it.","aftermath":"At the same meeting the Council adopted resolution 330 (1973) on coercive economic measures in Latin America, with France, the United Kingdom and the United States abstaining. Panama and the United States signed the Panama Canal treaties on 7 September 1977.","context":"Meeting in Panama City, the Council considered a draft that would have urged Panama and the United States to conclude a new Canal treaty without delay. The United States vetoed it, saying the Council should not intervene in a bilateral negotiation. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). The two governments signed new Canal treaties in 1977.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1704; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/579160; https://undocs.org/en/S/10931/Rev.1","notes":"Vote and US statement (Mr. Scali, paragraphs 68-75) from S/PV.1704, held in Panama City. The text of S/10931/Rev.1 is not available in the UN Digital Library; the description of the draft's purpose rests on a summary in the meeting record and on the debate. The date of the 1977 treaties is not documented in the sources cited. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Austria","member_iso3c":"AUT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":129,"un_id":129,"date":"1973-05-22","year":1973,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/10928","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1716","meeting_number":1716,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia","short_agenda":"Southern Rhodesia","topic":"Southern Rhodesia: wider sanctions affecting South Africa and Portugal","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Southern Rhodesia","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; KEN; SDN","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZWE; ZAF; PRT; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":318,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Sanctions on the Smith regime during the Rhodesian war; UCDP 318 (Rhodesia vs ZANU, ZAPU) is active in 1973.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have decided that all states limit purchases of chromium, asbestos, tobacco, pig iron, copper, sugar, maize and other products from South Africa, Mozambique and Angola to 1965 levels, asked states to deny landing rights to carriers serving Southern Rhodesia, extended the Beira blockade to Lourenco Marques, and condemned South Africa and Portugal for violating sanctions.","stated_reason":"The United States said it was unrealistic to call for broader sanctions before UN members took existing sanctions seriously, and that adopting an unenforceable resolution would damage the UN's credibility. The United Kingdom said it could not vote for proposals it would not think it right to put into effect.","aftermath":"At the same meeting the Council adopted the companion draft S/10927 as resolution 333 (1973), which endorsed the sanctions committee's recommendations.","context":"The African draft would have extended Southern Rhodesia sanctions to trade with South Africa and the Portuguese colonies and to the port of Lourenco Marques. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the United States saying wider sanctions could not be enforced and the United Kingdom that it would not vote for measures it would not carry out. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against and 2 abstentions (Austria and France). A companion text on existing sanctions was adopted as resolution 333 (1973).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1716; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/93412; https://undocs.org/en/S/10928; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/491810","notes":"Vote, US statement (Mr. Scali, paragraphs 82-87) and UK remark (paragraph 75) from S/PV.1716. S/10928 is a reissue of S/10927 for technical reasons according to its footnote, but the record treats S/10927 (adopted) and S/10928 (vetoed) as two drafts. Country codes: CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Austria","member_iso3c":"AUT","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":130,"un_id":130,"date":"1973-07-26","year":1973,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/10974","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1735","meeting_number":1735,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East","topic":"Middle East: comprehensive review and Israeli occupation","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"GIN; IND; IDN; KEN; PAN; PER; SDN; YUG","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; EGY; SYR; JOR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns Israeli occupation since 1967 and Palestinian rights; matched to UCDP 234 (Israel vs PLO, Palestine), active in 1973. Interstate dyads 11343 (Egypt-Israel) and 302 (Israel-Syria) also relate.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have regretted the lack of progress in carrying out resolution 242 (1967), strongly deplored Israel's continuing occupation of the territories taken in 1967, expressed concern at Israel's lack of cooperation with the Secretary-General's Special Representative, declared that a settlement must respect the rights and legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, and declared that no changes obstructing a settlement should be introduced or recognized in the occupied territories.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was highly partisan and unbalanced, and that adopting it would put another obstacle in the way of serious negotiations between the parties.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action before the October 1973 war, after which it adopted resolution 338 (1973).","context":"After a Middle East debate, eight non-aligned members proposed a text that would have deplored Israel's occupation and affirmed Palestinian rights. The United States vetoed it, saying the text was unbalanced and would harm negotiations. The vote was 13 in favour and 1 against; China did not take part. The Council took no further action before the October 1973 war.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1735; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/15885; https://undocs.org/en/S/10974; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/488245; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=S/RES/338(1973)","notes":"Vote and US statement (Mr. Scali, paragraphs 123-126) from S/PV.1735. China did not participate in the vote. The choice of UCDP 234 over the interstate dyads is a judgement. Country codes: PSE used for Palestine; CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Austria","member_iso3c":"AUT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sudan","member_iso3c":"SDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":131,"un_id":131,"date":"1974-07-31","year":1974,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/11400","draft_note":"S/11400 (as amended)","meeting_record":"S/PV.1788","meeting_number":1788,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Cyprus","short_agenda":"Cyprus","topic":"Cyprus: UNFICYP role after the Geneva ceasefire declaration","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Cyprus","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":null,"n_sponsors":null,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"CYP; TUR; GRC; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":323,"ucdp_dyad_id":706,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns UNFICYP during the July-August 1974 fighting; UCDP 323 (Cyprus vs Turkey, Northern Cyprus), active 1974.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have taken note of the Secretary-General's statement on the role of UNFICYP under the Geneva declaration of 30 July 1974 and asked him to act in the light of it, with a Soviet amendment, adopted before the vote, describing the ceasefire as the first step in implementing resolution 353 (1974).","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said it had no instructions and needed time to receive them, and that it had waited two weeks for the document to which other members were referring.","aftermath":"On 1 August 1974 the Council adopted resolution 355 (1974), with the same text including the Soviet amendment.","context":"After Turkey's invasion of Cyprus and the Geneva talks among Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom, the draft would have asked the Secretary-General to act on his statement about UNFICYP's role under the Geneva declaration. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it had no instructions, after its motion to suspend the meeting for two hours failed with 7 votes. The vote was 12 in favour and 2 against (the Byelorussian SSR and the Soviet Union); China did not take part. The Council adopted the same text the next day as resolution 355 (1974).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1788; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/47136; https://undocs.org/en/S/11400; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/486359","notes":"The UN list gives S/11400/Rev.1; the record and the Digital Library show S/11400, voted \"as amended through the adoption of the first Soviet amendment\" (adopted 14-0, China not participating); no Rev.1 was found. The draft lists no sponsor in the Digital Library, and the record refers only to \"the sponsors\", so no sponsors are listed. The Soviet explanation in the record is brief (paragraphs 134-136, 233); the reference to the Geneva declaration of 30 July 1974 comes from the debate. Country codes: BLR Byelorussian SSR; CMR United Republic of Cameroon; CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Austria","member_iso3c":"AUT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":132,"un_id":132,"date":"1974-10-30","year":1974,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/11543","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1808","meeting_number":1808,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Relationship between the United Nations and South Africa","short_agenda":"United Nations and South Africa","topic":"Membership: expulsion of South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"South Africa","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"KEN; MRT; CMR","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Expulsion over apartheid; not about an armed conflict, though the draft cites Namibia (UCDP 298).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, responding to General Assembly resolution 3207 (XXIX), would have recommended to the General Assembly the immediate expulsion of South Africa from the United Nations under Article 6 of the Charter, citing apartheid, South Africa's refusal to withdraw from Namibia and its support for the Rhodesian regime.","stated_reason":"France said expulsion would tell the most hardened racists that their indifference was justified, would set a damaging precedent and would not speed Namibia's independence. The United Kingdom said it shared the aims of those seeking expulsion but did not think expulsion an effective means of pressure. The United States said expulsion ran against the principle of universality.","aftermath":"On 12 November 1974 the President of the General Assembly ruled that South Africa could not take part in the work of the twenty-ninth session, and the Assembly upheld the ruling.","context":"The African draft would have recommended expelling South Africa from the United Nations over apartheid and its conduct in Namibia and Southern Rhodesia. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the first triple veto, saying expulsion would remove pressure on South Africa and breach the principle of universality. The vote was 10 in favour, 3 against and 2 abstentions (Austria and Costa Rica). The General Assembly then barred South Africa from taking part in its session.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1808; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/54817; https://undocs.org/en/S/11543; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/488826; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/743674","notes":"Vote and Western statements (Mr. Scali para. 48; Mr. de Guiringaud; Mr. Richard para. 81) from S/PV.1808. Country codes: BLR Byelorussian SSR; CMR United Republic of Cameroon; CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Austria","member_iso3c":"AUT","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":133,"un_id":133,"date":"1975-06-06","year":1975,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/11713","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1829","meeting_number":1829,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: Chapter VII arms embargo on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GUY; IRQ; MRT; CMR; TZA","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Namibian independence struggle; UCDP 298 (South Africa vs SWAPO, Namibia), active 1966-1989.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia and its failure to comply with resolution 366 (1974), demanded its withdrawal, called for UN-supervised elections by 1 July 1976, and, under Chapter VII, determined that the occupation was a threat to international peace and security and imposed a mandatory arms embargo on South Africa.","stated_reason":"France said its main disagreement with the sponsors was over whether a threat to the peace existed, and it opposed the arms embargo. The United Kingdom said before the vote that it did not regard the situation in Namibia as a threat to international peace and security and would oppose any resolution to that effect, while continuing its own embargo on arms exports to South Africa. The United States said the situation in Namibia, however illegal, did not constitute a threat to international peace and security.","aftermath":"On 30 January 1976 the Council unanimously adopted resolution 385 (1976), which demanded UN-supervised elections in Namibia but did not invoke Chapter VII.","context":"The African draft would have declared South Africa's occupation of Namibia a threat to the peace and imposed a mandatory arms embargo. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, saying the situation did not amount to a threat to international peace and security. The vote was 10 in favour, 3 against and 2 abstentions (Italy and Japan). On 30 January 1976 the Council adopted resolution 385 (1976), which demanded UN-supervised elections without invoking Chapter VII.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1829; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/54831; https://undocs.org/en/S/11713; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/488464","notes":"Vote from S/PV.1829. US (Mr. Scali, paragraph 173) and French statements confirm the threat argument; the UK reason is from Mr. Richard's statement earlier in the same meeting (paragraphs 28-29); after the vote he spoke only in reply to Tanzania. Country codes: NAM for Namibia; TZA Tanzania; CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":134,"un_id":134,"date":"1975-08-11","year":1975,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/11796","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1836","meeting_number":1836,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Report of the Security Council Committee on the Admission of New Members concerning the applications of the Republic of South Viet-Nam and the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam (S/1.1794)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: North Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"North Vietnam","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BLR; CHN; GUY; IRQ; MRT; SWE; RUS; CMR; TZA","n_sponsors":9,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VDR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The nine-Power draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that North Vietnam (the Democratic Republic of Vietnam) be admitted to membership of the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council had declined to consider the application of South Korea and that it would have nothing to do with selective universality, which it said admitted only new members acceptable to the totalitarian states; it would have voted to admit both Vietnams and North Korea along with South Korea.","aftermath":"In resolution 3366 (XXX) of 19 September 1975 the General Assembly asked the Council to reconsider both applications, and the United States vetoed them again on 30 September 1975. After unification, the Council recommended the Socialist Republic of Vietnam in resolution 413 (1977) of 20 July 1977, and it was admitted in September 1977.","context":"The nine-Power draft would have recommended North Vietnam for membership. The United States vetoed it, one of its first two vetoes of a membership application, saying the Council had refused to take up South Korea's application. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Costa Rica). A unified Vietnam was admitted in 1977.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1836; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/70849; https://undocs.org/en/S/11796; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/447680","notes":"Vote and US statement (Mr. Moynihan, paragraph 109) from S/PV.1836. The UN list orders the 11 August vetoes as 134 = S/11796 and 135 = S/11795; the record shows S/11795 (South Viet-Nam) was voted first and S/11796 (DRV) second, with identical results. Country codes: VDR for the DRV; CHN = PRC; BLR Byelorussian SSR; CMR Cameroon; TZA Tanzania.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":135,"un_id":135,"date":"1975-08-11","year":1975,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/11795","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1836","meeting_number":1836,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Report of the Security Council Committee on the Admission of New Members concerning the applications of the Republic of South Viet-Nam and the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam (S/1.1794)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Republic of South Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Republic of South Viet-Nam","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BLR; CHN; GUY; IRQ; MRT; SWE; RUS; CMR; TZA","n_sponsors":9,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The nine-Power draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that the Republic of South Vietnam (the Provisional Revolutionary Government) be admitted to membership of the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council had declined to consider the application of South Korea and that it would have nothing to do with selective universality, which it said admitted only new members acceptable to the totalitarian states; it would have voted to admit both Vietnams and North Korea along with South Korea.","aftermath":"In resolution 3366 (XXX) the General Assembly asked the Council to reconsider, and the United States vetoed the application again on 30 September 1975. After unification in 1976, Vietnam was admitted in 1977 following Council resolution 413 (1977).","context":"The nine-Power draft would have recommended the Republic of South Vietnam, then governed by the Provisional Revolutionary Government, for membership. The United States vetoed it, saying the Council had refused to take up South Korea's application. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Costa Rica). The two Vietnams unified in 1976 and joined the United Nations as one state in 1977.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1836; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/70849; https://undocs.org/en/S/11795; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/449206","notes":"Vote from S/PV.1836, first of the two votes. No current country code exists for the Republic of South Viet-Nam; VNM is used. CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":136,"un_id":136,"date":"1975-09-30","year":1975,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/11833","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1846","meeting_number":1846,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 19 September 1975 from the President of the General Assembly addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/11826)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: North Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"North Vietnam","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BLR; CHN; GUY; IRQ; MRT; SWE; RUS; CMR; TZA","n_sponsors":9,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VDR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The nine-Power draft, submitted after General Assembly resolution 3366 (XXX) asked the Council to re-examine the application, would have recommended that North Vietnam (the Democratic Republic of Vietnam) be admitted to membership of the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council had again declined to consider the application of South Korea, a qualified state, and that the admission of a qualified applicant should not depend on the wishes of a non-member; it said it favoured admitting all qualified states, including both Vietnams.","aftermath":"After unification in 1976, a US veto blocked the Socialist Republic of Vietnam in November 1976. The Council recommended its admission in resolution 413 (1977) of 20 July 1977, and it joined the United Nations in September 1977.","context":"After the General Assembly asked the Council to reconsider, the nine-Power draft would again have recommended North Vietnam for membership. The United States vetoed it, saying again that the Council had refused to consider South Korea's application. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. A unified Vietnam was admitted in 1977.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1846; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/86830; https://undocs.org/en/S/11833; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/441695; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1972","notes":"Vote and US statement (Mr. Moynihan, paragraphs 46-49) from S/PV.1846. Two drafts were vetoed at this meeting: S/11832 (Republic of South Viet-Nam, voted first) and S/11833 (Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam, voted second, this veto). Both received 14 votes to 1. Country codes: VDR for the DRV; CHN = PRC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":137,"un_id":137,"date":"1975-09-30","year":1975,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/11832","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1846","meeting_number":1846,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 19 September 1975 from the President of the General Assembly addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/11826)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Republic of South Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Republic of South Viet-Nam","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BLR; CHN; GUY; IRQ; MRT; SWE; RUS; CMR; TZA","n_sponsors":9,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; the draft concerns no armed conflict (the Vietnam war conflict, UCDP 293, ended in 1975).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The nine-Power draft, submitted after General Assembly resolution 3366 (XXX) asked the Council to re-examine the application, would have recommended that the Republic of South Vietnam be admitted to membership of the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council had again declined to consider the application of South Korea, a qualified state, and that the admission of a qualified applicant should not depend on the wishes of a non-member; it said it favoured admitting all qualified states, including both Vietnams.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed the companion draft on North Vietnam (S/11833) at the same meeting. After the two Vietnamese states unified in July 1976, the United States vetoed the application of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on 15 November 1976; the Council recommended its admission in resolution 413 (1977), and the General Assembly admitted it on 20 September 1977 (resolution 32/2).","context":"After the General Assembly asked the Council to reconsider, the nine-Power draft would again have recommended the Republic of South Vietnam for membership. The United States vetoed it, saying again that the Council had refused to consider South Korea's application. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. A unified Vietnam was admitted in 1977.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1846; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/86830; https://undocs.org/en/S/11832; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/441696; https://undocs.org/en/S/11833; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=S/RES/413(1977)","notes":"S/11832 concerns the Republic of South Viet-Nam and S/11833 the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam (as the draft texts show). Both were vetoed by the United States at this meeting by identical votes of 14-1; the S/11833 veto is veto 136. The Republic of South Viet-Nam has no country code; VNM is used. CMR is used for the United Republic of Cameroon, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":138,"un_id":138,"date":"1975-12-08","year":1975,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/11898","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1862","meeting_number":1862,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli air raids","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GUY; IRQ; MRT; CMR; TZA","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; LBN","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The raids targeted Palestinian groups in Lebanon; UCDP codes Israel vs PLO/Rejectionist Front (234) as active in 1975.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly condemned Israel for premeditated air attacks on Lebanon, called on Israel to stop all military attacks on Lebanon and warned that the Council would consider steps to give effect to its decisions if the attacks were repeated.","stated_reason":"The United States said it deplored all loss of innocent life, whether caused by governments or organized groups, and that a one-sided resolution would not help its role as mediator in the Middle East.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no resolution on the raids.","context":"After Israeli air raids on Palestinian refugee camps and villages in Lebanon on 2 December 1975, five non-aligned members tabled a draft that would have condemned Israel. Two US amendments condemning all violence in the region received 7 votes and failed. The United States then vetoed the draft, saying it was one-sided. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Costa Rica).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1862; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/70856; https://undocs.org/en/S/11898; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/432910; https://undocs.org/en/S/11901","notes":"The two US amendments (S/11901) each received 7 votes in favour, none against and 6 abstentions, with China and Iraq not participating. CMR is used for the United Republic of Cameroon.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Byelorussian SSR","member_iso3c":"BLR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Iraq","member_iso3c":"IRQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritania","member_iso3c":"MRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":139,"un_id":139,"date":"1976-01-26","year":1976,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/11940","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1879","meeting_number":1879,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The Middle East problem including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Palestinian rights and settlement framework","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":2,"sponsors":"BEN; GUY; PAK; PAN; ROU; TZA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israel and the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, where UCDP records the Israel–Palestinian conflict (234) as active in this year.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have affirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including an independent state in Palestine, the right of refugees to return or receive compensation, Israeli withdrawal from all Arab territories occupied since June 1967 and guarantees for the security of all states in the area within secure and recognized boundaries, to be taken into account in all UN peace efforts.","stated_reason":"The United States said it had to preserve the negotiating framework of resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), which the draft would have altered in ways harmful to the peace process, and that its vote did not reflect hostility to Palestinian aspirations.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the text. The Palestinian question returned to the Council in June 1976, when the United States vetoed S/12119.","context":"Six non-aligned members proposed that the Council endorse Palestinian statehood with Israeli withdrawal and security guarantees for all states in the region. A UK amendment linking the text to resolutions 242 and 338 failed. The United States vetoed the draft, saying it would undermine the agreed basis for negotiations. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Italy, Sweden and the United Kingdom); China and Libya did not take part.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1879; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/70870; https://undocs.org/en/S/11940; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/224782; https://undocs.org/en/S/11942","notes":"Issue area coded as self-determination; the draft also covers withdrawal from occupied territory. China said it did not take part because the text could be used to maintain a \"no war, no peace\" situation; Libya also did not participate. PSE used for the Palestinian people.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":140,"un_id":140,"date":"1976-02-06","year":1976,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/11967","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1888","meeting_number":1888,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Comoros","short_agenda":"Comoros","topic":"Comoros: French referendum in Mayotte","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Comoros","vetoed_by":"France","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEN; GUY; LBY; PAN; TZA","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"COM; FRA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Territorial dispute over Mayotte with no armed conflict recorded by UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have declared that the French referendum planned in Mayotte for 8 February 1976 was interference in the internal affairs of the Comoros, called on France not to hold it, and asked France to respect the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros, composed of Anjouan, Grande-Comore, Mayotte and Mohéli, and to negotiate with the Comorian Government.","stated_reason":"France said Mayotte had voted against independence in the December 1974 referendum and that it could not let the Council impose a binding decision on the composition of the Comoros; it said it remained ready to negotiate with the Comoros.","aftermath":"France held the referendum on 8 February 1976 and Mayotte voted to remain French. The General Assembly continued to affirm Comorian sovereignty over Mayotte, beginning with resolution 31/4 of 21 October 1976.","context":"Five non-aligned members proposed that France cancel a referendum on the status of Mayotte and respect the territorial integrity of the newly admitted Comoros. France vetoed the draft, saying the people of Mayotte had already chosen to stay French and that the Council should not decide the matter. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States). The referendum went ahead two days later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1888; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/70879; https://undocs.org/en/S/11967; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/224855; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/31/4","notes":"Libya and Benin argued after the vote that France, as a party to the dispute, should have abstained under Article 27(3) of the Charter; the President treated the draft as not adopted. The date of the referendum (8 February 1976) is confirmed in S/PV.1888; its result is not documented in the sources cited. General Assembly resolution 31/4 (Question of the Comorian Island of Mayotte) was adopted on 21 October 1976.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":141,"un_id":141,"date":"1976-03-25","year":1976,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/12022","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1899","meeting_number":1899,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Request by the Libyan Arab Republic and Pakistan for consideration of the serious situation arising from recent developments in the occupied Arab territories:","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Jerusalem and the occupied territories","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEN; GUY; PAK; PAN; TZA","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israel and the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, where UCDP records the Israel–Palestinian conflict (234) as active in this year.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deplored Israel's failure to stop actions changing the status of Jerusalem, called on Israel to refrain from measures against Arab inhabitants of the occupied territories, to respect the Holy Places and to stop expropriating Arab land and building settlements.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft rested on judgements that did not match the situation, including that Israel sought to change the religious character of Jerusalem, and that it would not help the peace process in which the United States was engaged.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the text at that meeting. In May 1976 it returned to the occupied territories and the President issued a statement on behalf of the majority.","context":"After unrest in Jerusalem and the West Bank, five non-aligned members proposed a text that would have deplored Israeli measures in Jerusalem and called for an end to settlements and land expropriation. The United States vetoed it, saying the text did not match the situation and would not help negotiations. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The Council took no further action on the text.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1899; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/86831; https://undocs.org/en/S/12022; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/224960; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1922","notes":"The sponsors are taken from the draft document and from Libya's statement in the record (Benin, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama and Tanzania).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":142,"un_id":142,"date":"1976-06-23","year":1976,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/12110","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1932","meeting_number":1932,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (Angola)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Angola","region":"Africa","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Angola","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"BEN; GUY; LBY; ROU; RUS; TZA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"AGO","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; the Angolan civil war (UCDP 327) was the background to the US objection but the draft itself concerns admission only.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that the People's Republic of Angola be admitted to the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The United States said Angola did not yet meet the requirements of Article 4 of the Charter because of the continued presence and influence of a large Cuban military force, at a time when major hostilities had ended and South Africa had withdrawn.","aftermath":"The Council recommended Angola's admission in resolution 397 (1976) of 22 November 1976, with the United States abstaining, and the General Assembly admitted Angola on 1 December 1976 (resolution 31/44).","context":"Six members proposed that the Council recommend Angola's admission. The United States vetoed the draft, citing the presence of Cuban troops in Angola. The vote was 13 in favour and 1 against; China did not take part. Angola was admitted five months later after the United States abstained on a new recommendation.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1932; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/88799; https://undocs.org/en/S/12110; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/225045; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1974","notes":"China said it would not participate, objecting to Soviet and Cuban involvement in Angola.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":143,"un_id":143,"date":"1976-06-29","year":1976,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/12119","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1938","meeting_number":1938,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The question of the exercise by Palestinians of inalienable rights","short_agenda":"Exercise by Palestinian people of inalienable rights","topic":"Israel/Palestine: inalienable rights of the Palestinian people","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GUY; PAK; PAN; TZA","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israel and the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, where UCDP records the Israel–Palestinian conflict (234) as active in this year.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have taken note of the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and affirmed the Palestinian right to self-determination, including the right of return and the right to national independence and sovereignty in Palestine.","stated_reason":"The United States said the text lacked balance, stressing the rights of one party and ignoring those of others, and that the political interests of the Palestinians and their role in a settlement had to be negotiated between the parties before the Council defined them.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The General Assembly continued to endorse the Committee's recommendations in later sessions.","context":"Four non-aligned members proposed that the Council affirm Palestinian self-determination and statehood, as recommended by the General Assembly's Palestinian rights committee. The United States vetoed the draft, saying it was unbalanced and that such matters had to be negotiated. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (France, Italy, Sweden and the United Kingdom). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1938; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/86946; https://undocs.org/en/S/12119; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/225054","notes":"The vote result line in the scanned record is partly illegible (\"10 in favour... and 4 abstentions\"), but the vote lists are clear and sum to 15. PSE used for the Palestinian people.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":144,"un_id":144,"date":"1976-10-19","year":1976,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/12211","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1963","meeting_number":1963,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: arms embargo on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEN; GUY; LBY; PAK; PAN; ROU; TZA","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 298 (South Africa vs SWAPO, territory Namibia) was active in 1976.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned South Africa's continued occupation of Namibia and the Turnhalle conference and, under Chapter VII, determined that the occupation and the war in Namibia threatened international peace and security and imposed a mandatory arms embargo on South Africa, including bans on military cooperation, arms licensing and the recruitment of mercenaries.","stated_reason":"France said it had no objection to the substance or to an arms embargo, and that it considered the use of Chapter VII inappropriate. The United Kingdom said it could not support a Chapter VII determination while talks between South Africa and SWAPO were possible. The United States said Western negotiations led by Secretary of State Kissinger had brought independence within sight and that new Council measures could break up the negotiations.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no resolution, and the five Western members began negotiations in 1977 that led to the settlement plan endorsed in resolution 435 (1978). A mandatory arms embargo on South Africa was adopted in resolution 418 (1977).","context":"Seven non-aligned members proposed a Chapter VII arms embargo on South Africa over its occupation of Namibia. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, citing negotiations under way and objecting to a Chapter VII determination. The vote was 10 in favour, 3 against and 2 abstentions (Italy and Japan). A year later the Council imposed a mandatory arms embargo in resolution 418 (1977).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1963; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/87539; https://undocs.org/en/S/12211; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/225156","notes":"Coded as decolonization because the draft concerns Namibian independence, although its main operative measure is an arms embargo (Sanctions would also fit). Panama, a sponsor, proposed a separate vote on the preamble but withdrew the motion. The account of the contact group in the aftermath is not documented in the sources cited; resolution 418 (1977) is confirmed in later records.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":145,"un_id":145,"date":"1976-11-15","year":1976,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/12226","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.1972","meeting_number":1972,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new Members (SR Viet Nam)","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Vietnam","region":"Asia","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Vietnam","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEN; CHN; FRA; GUY; LBY; PAK; PAN; ROU; SWE; RUS; TZA","n_sponsors":11,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that the Socialist Republic of Vietnam be admitted to the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The United States said it doubted Vietnam's willingness to carry out Charter obligations, citing its failure to account for American servicemen missing in action and to return the remains of the dead, and said it would reconsider a renewed application if Vietnam showed such willingness.","aftermath":"The Council recommended Vietnam's admission in resolution 413 (1977) of 20 July 1977, and the General Assembly admitted it on 20 September 1977 (resolution 32/2).","context":"Eleven members proposed that the Council recommend the admission of the newly unified Vietnam. The United States vetoed the draft, citing Vietnam's handling of the issue of US servicemen missing in action. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The United States did not block a new application in 1977.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1972; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/86964; https://undocs.org/en/S/12226; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/225067; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=S/RES/413(1977)","notes":"The draft document lists ten sponsors; the President also named France when putting it to the vote, so France is included. The result line of the vote is illegible in the record, but the vote lists (14 in favour, the United States against) are legible.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":146,"un_id":146,"date":"1977-10-31","year":1977,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/12312/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2045","meeting_number":2045,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The question of South Africa","short_agenda":"South Africa","topic":"South Africa: end to foreign investment and loans","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"South Africa","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":5,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEN; LBY; MUS","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Apartheid sanctions; UCDP records no South Africa government conflict in 1977 (the ANC conflict, 345, begins in 1981).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called on all governments to refrain from investments, loans and export and import credits to South Africa and South African companies, to stop companies under their jurisdiction from investing in or lending to them, and to refrain from measures promoting trade with South Africa, and would have asked UN agencies to stop loans and assistance.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council should act on measures that united it, that the Western members were working together and could support a mandatory arms embargo, and that it could not support three of the four African drafts. Canada, also voting against, said action-oriented drafts would work only if adopted unanimously. France and the United Kingdom did not explain their votes at this meeting. At the morning meeting the same day (S/PV.2044), France condemned apartheid and announced it would vote for a mandatory arms embargo, urging the Council to be firm but wise and to preserve opportunities for peaceful solutions. At S/PV.2042 (28 October) the United Kingdom said it would vote for a mandatory arms embargo under Chapter VII, but would use its political and economic influence to encourage change in South Africa, not merely as a punitive measure.","aftermath":"The Council adopted a mandatory arms embargo on South Africa in resolution 418 (1977) on 4 November 1977, based on a draft by Canada and West Germany. It adopted no economic measures.","context":"The three African members proposed that the Council call for an end to foreign investment and credit to South Africa after the death of Steve Biko in detention. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, and Canada and West Germany voted against; the United States said the Council should act only on measures that could unite it. The vote was 10 in favour and 5 against (Canada, France, the United Kingdom, the United States and West Germany). Four days later the Council adopted a mandatory arms embargo in resolution 418 (1977).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2045; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/224277; https://undocs.org/en/S/12312/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/536101; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/418(1977); https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2044; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2042","notes":"The three drafts (S/12310/Rev.1, S/12311/Rev.1, S/12312/Rev.1) were voted in succession after a fourth African draft (S/12309/Rev.1) was adopted unanimously as resolution 417 (1977). Each failed by 10 votes to 5, with Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany also voting against. France and the United Kingdom gave no explanation at this meeting; their general positions are taken from S/PV.2044 (France) and S/PV.2042 (United Kingdom). DEU used for the Federal Republic of Germany, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritius","member_iso3c":"MUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":147,"un_id":147,"date":"1977-10-31","year":1977,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/12311/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2045","meeting_number":2045,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The question of South Africa","short_agenda":"South Africa","topic":"South Africa: mandatory arms embargo and nuclear cooperation","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"South Africa","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":5,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEN; LBY; MUS","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Apartheid sanctions; UCDP records no South Africa government conflict in 1977 (the ANC conflict, 345, begins in 1981).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Acting under Chapter VII, the draft would have required all states to stop selling arms, ammunition and military equipment to South Africa, revoke arms licences, refrain from nuclear cooperation and stop corporations from helping South Africa's military build-up.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council should act on measures that united it, that the Western members were working together and could support a mandatory arms embargo, and that it could not support three of the four African drafts. Canada, also voting against, said action-oriented drafts would work only if adopted unanimously. France and the United Kingdom did not explain their votes at this meeting. At the morning meeting the same day (S/PV.2044), France condemned apartheid and announced it would vote for a mandatory arms embargo, urging the Council to be firm but wise and to preserve opportunities for peaceful solutions. At S/PV.2042 (28 October) the United Kingdom said it would vote for a mandatory arms embargo under Chapter VII, but would use its political and economic influence to encourage change in South Africa, not merely as a punitive measure.","aftermath":"On 4 November 1977 the Council unanimously adopted resolution 418 (1977), a narrower mandatory arms embargo under Chapter VII based on a draft by Canada and West Germany.","context":"The African members proposed a mandatory Chapter VII arms embargo that would also have barred nuclear cooperation with South Africa. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, and Canada and West Germany voted against; the United States said it would support an embargo the Western members had agreed. The vote was 10 in favour and 5 against (Canada, France, the United Kingdom, the United States and West Germany). Four days later the Council adopted a narrower mandatory arms embargo in resolution 418 (1977).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2045; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/224277; https://undocs.org/en/S/12311/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/536097; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/418(1977); https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2044; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2042","notes":"The three drafts (S/12310/Rev.1, S/12311/Rev.1, S/12312/Rev.1) were voted in succession after a fourth African draft (S/12309/Rev.1) was adopted unanimously as resolution 417 (1977). Each failed by 10 votes to 5, with Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany also voting against. France and the United Kingdom gave no explanation at this meeting; their general positions are taken from S/PV.2044 (France) and S/PV.2042 (United Kingdom). DEU used for the Federal Republic of Germany, RUS for the USSR.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritius","member_iso3c":"MUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":148,"un_id":148,"date":"1977-10-31","year":1977,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/12310/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2045","meeting_number":2045,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The question of South Africa","short_agenda":"South Africa","topic":"South Africa: threat to peace and warning of Chapter VII action","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":5,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEN; LBY; MUS","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF; NAM; AGO; ZMB","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Mainly about apartheid policies; it also cites the occupation of Namibia (UCDP 298, active in 1977) but is not about that conflict as such.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have declared that South Africa's policies and actions, including apartheid, the occupation of Namibia and attacks on neighbouring states, violated the Charter and were a grave threat to international peace and security, called on South Africa to comply with Council resolutions and decided to consider action under Articles 39 to 46 of Chapter VII if it did not.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council should act on measures that united it, that the Western members were working together and could support a mandatory arms embargo, and that it could not support three of the four African drafts. Canada, also voting against, said action-oriented drafts would work only if adopted unanimously. France and the United Kingdom did not explain their votes at this meeting. At the morning meeting the same day (S/PV.2044), France condemned apartheid and announced it would vote for a mandatory arms embargo, urging the Council to be firm but wise and to preserve opportunities for peaceful solutions. At S/PV.2042 (28 October) the United Kingdom said it would vote for a mandatory arms embargo under Chapter VII, but would use its political and economic influence to encourage change in South Africa, not merely as a punitive measure.","aftermath":"The Council adopted a mandatory arms embargo on South Africa in resolution 418 (1977) on 4 November 1977.","context":"The African members proposed that the Council declare South Africa's policies a grave threat to the peace and warn of Chapter VII measures. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, and Canada and West Germany voted against; the United States said the Council should act only on measures that could unite it. The vote was 10 in favour and 5 against (Canada, France, the United Kingdom, the United States and West Germany). Four days later the Council adopted a mandatory arms embargo in resolution 418 (1977).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2045; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/224277; https://undocs.org/en/S/12310/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/536095; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/418(1977); https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2044; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2042","notes":"The three drafts (S/12310/Rev.1, S/12311/Rev.1, S/12312/Rev.1) were voted in succession after a fourth African draft (S/12309/Rev.1) was adopted unanimously as resolution 417 (1977). Each failed by 10 votes to 5, with Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany also voting against. France and the United Kingdom gave no explanation at this meeting; their general positions are taken from S/PV.2044 (France) and S/PV.2042 (United Kingdom). DEU used for the Federal Republic of Germany, RUS for the USSR. Issue area coded as Sanctions because the draft threatens Chapter VII measures; Political crises and human rights would also fit.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritius","member_iso3c":"MUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":149,"un_id":149,"date":"1979-01-15","year":1979,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/13027","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2112","meeting_number":2112,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Telegram dated 3 January 1979 from the Deputy Prime Minister in charge of Foreign Affairs of Democratic Kampuchea to the President of the Security Council (S/13003)","short_agenda":"1979 Telegram from Kampuchea (Kampuchea)","topic":"Cambodia: withdrawal of foreign forces","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Cambodia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BGD; BOL; GAB; JAM; KWT; NGA; ZMB","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"KHM; VNM","ucdp_conflict_id":300,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 300 (Government of Cambodia vs KNUFNS/KR) records Vietnam as a secondary party in 1978-79, covering the Vietnamese invasion the draft addresses.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have reaffirmed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every state, called on all foreign forces in Democratic Kampuchea to observe a ceasefire and withdraw, and demanded non-interference in the internal affairs of states.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the Pol Pot regime had collapsed in a popular uprising, that a legitimate government, the People's Revolutionary Council, now held power, and that the Council was being used to rescue that regime and interfere in Cambodia's internal affairs.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The General Assembly took up the situation in Cambodia and in resolution 34/22 of 14 November 1979 called for the withdrawal of all foreign forces.","context":"After Vietnamese forces took Phnom Penh on 7 January 1979, seven non-aligned members proposed that the Council call for a ceasefire and the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Cambodia. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the Pol Pot regime had fallen to a popular uprising. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against (Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union). In resolution 34/22 the General Assembly later called for the withdrawal of all foreign forces.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2112; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1668; https://undocs.org/en/S/13027; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1575; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/34/22","notes":"China did not press its own draft (S/13022) to a vote. The draft does not name Viet Nam; the target is inferred from the debate. CSK used for Czechoslovakia; KHM for Kampuchea.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bangladesh","member_iso3c":"BGD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Czechoslovakia","member_iso3c":"CSK","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jamaica","member_iso3c":"JAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":150,"un_id":150,"date":"1979-03-16","year":1979,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/13162","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2129","meeting_number":2129,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in South-East Asia and its implications for international peace and security","short_agenda":"South East Asia","topic":"South-East Asia: China-Vietnam and Cambodia conflicts","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"China","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"IDN; MYS; PHL; SGP; THA","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"CHN; VNM; KHM","ucdp_conflict_id":334,"ucdp_dyad_id":737,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 334 (China vs Vietnam) was at war intensity in 1979; the draft also covers Kampuchea (UCDP 300).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called on all parties to the conflicts in the region to cease hostilities and withdraw their forces to their own countries, appealed for restraint, reaffirmed respect for territorial integrity and welcomed the good offices of the Secretary-General.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft did not clearly condemn Chinese aggression against Vietnam or demand reparations, and that it linked that aggression to the situation in Cambodia and put the aggressor on the same footing as its victim.","aftermath":"China said its forces had completed their withdrawal from Vietnam on 16 March 1979, the day of the vote. The Council took no further action.","context":"The five ASEAN states, none of them Council members, tabled a draft on both China's attack on Vietnam and Vietnam's intervention in Cambodia; Norway and Portugal asked for a vote. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it did not condemn China and equated aggressor and victim. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against (Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union). China announced the same day that its troops had left Vietnam.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2129; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1683; https://undocs.org/en/S/13162; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1629","notes":"The draft was submitted by non-members under rule 38 and put to a vote at the request of Norway and Portugal, so these two are not listed as sponsors. The draft also concerns the Kampuchea conflict (UCDP 300); UCDP conflict 334 is given as primary because the meeting was convened over the Chinese attack.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bangladesh","member_iso3c":"BGD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Czechoslovakia","member_iso3c":"CSK","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jamaica","member_iso3c":"JAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":151,"un_id":151,"date":"1980-01-07","year":1980,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/13729","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2190","meeting_number":2190,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 3 January 1980 addressed to the President of the Security Council by the representatives of Australia, the Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Liberia, Luxembourg, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Portugal, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America, Uruguay and Venezuela (S/13724 and Add.1 and 2)","short_agenda":"1980 Letter from various Member States (Afghanistan)","topic":"Afghanistan: Soviet intervention","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Afghanistan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BGD; JAM; NER; PHL; TUN; ZMB","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"AFG; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":333,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 333 (Government of Afghanistan vs mujahideen groups) lists the Soviet Union as secondary party from 1980; the December 1979 Soviet–Amin fighting is UCDP 431.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deeply deplored the recent armed intervention in Afghanistan, affirmed the country's sovereignty and non-aligned status, and called for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all foreign troops so that Afghans could choose their own government.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said its limited contingent had entered Afghanistan at the repeated request of the Afghan Government under their 1978 treaty to repel outside armed intervention, and that the draft aimed to legitimize subversion against the Afghan Government and interfere in its internal affairs.","aftermath":"On 9 January 1980 the Council adopted resolution 462 (1980) by a procedural vote, calling an emergency special session of the General Assembly, which adopted resolution ES-6/2 on 14 January 1980 calling for the immediate withdrawal of foreign troops. Soviet forces left Afghanistan in February 1989.","context":"After Soviet troops entered Afghanistan in late December 1979, six non-aligned members proposed a draft that would have deplored the intervention and called for the withdrawal of foreign troops. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying it had been invited by the Afghan Government. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against (East Germany and the Soviet Union). The Council then referred the matter to the sixth emergency special session of the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2190; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/11040; https://undocs.org/en/S/13729; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/10503; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/462(1980); https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=S/RES/462(1980)","notes":"The UN list dates this vote 1980-01-09; the meeting record shows 1980-01-07, which is used here. The record (meeting held 7 and 9 January 1980) shows that the vote on S/13729 took place on 7 January, before the meeting was suspended; Mexico, elected that day, voted. The 9 January part of the meeting adopted the Mexico–Philippines draft S/13731 (12-2-1). DDR used for the German Democratic Republic.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bangladesh","member_iso3c":"BGD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jamaica","member_iso3c":"JAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":152,"un_id":152,"date":"1980-01-13","year":1980,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/13735","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2191","meeting_number":2191,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 22 December 1979 from the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/13705)","short_agenda":"1979 Letter from US (Iran)","topic":"Iran: sanctions over US embassy hostages","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Iran","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"IRN; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Diplomatic hostage crisis; no armed conflict between Iran and the United States in UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Acting under Articles 39 and 41, the draft would have called again on Iran to release the US hostages and decided that, until they were freed, all member states would bar the sale or supply of most goods to Iran (food and medicine excepted), new credits and loans, and related services.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the hostage-taking violated the Vienna Convention, but that coercive measures under Chapter VII were inadmissible, that Iran posed no threat to peace, and that the draft would draw the UN into US pressure on Iran and hinder a peaceful settlement.","aftermath":"The United States and several allies imposed national sanctions on Iran. The hostages were released on 20 January 1981 under the Algiers Declarations.","context":"After Iran failed to comply with resolutions 457 and 461 (1979), the United States proposed economic sanctions under Chapter VII until the embassy hostages were freed. The Soviet Union vetoed the draft, saying sanctions were inadmissible and would hinder a peaceful settlement. The vote was 10 in favour, 2 against (East Germany and the Soviet Union) and 2 abstentions (Bangladesh and Mexico); China did not take part. The hostages were released on 20 January 1981 under the Algiers Declarations.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2191; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/549704; https://undocs.org/en/S/13735; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/10976","notes":"The meeting was held on 11 and 13 January 1980; the vote was on 13 January. The account of the national sanctions and the Algiers Declarations is not documented in the sources cited.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bangladesh","member_iso3c":"BGD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jamaica","member_iso3c":"JAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":153,"un_id":153,"date":"1980-04-30","year":1980,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/13911","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2220","meeting_number":2220,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The question of the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights","short_agenda":"Exercise by Palestinian people of inalienable rights","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Palestinian self-determination and statehood","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"TUN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israel and the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, where UCDP records the Israel–Palestinian conflict (234) as active in this year.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have affirmed the Palestinian right to self-determination, including an independent state, and the right of refugees to return or receive compensation, reaffirmed that Israel should withdraw from all Arab territories occupied since 1967 including Jerusalem, and provided for guarantees for all states in the area, including a Palestinian state.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Camp David negotiations on autonomy for the West Bank and Gaza were the only politically viable path, that a solution could not be imposed by fiat and had to come through negotiation, and that it therefore opposed the draft.","aftermath":"The General Assembly met in its seventh emergency special session on the question of Palestine from 22 to 29 July 1980 and adopted resolution ES-7/2.","context":"Tunisia proposed that the Council affirm Palestinian statehood and Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied since 1967. The United States vetoed the text, saying the Camp David autonomy talks were the only workable path. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (France, Norway, Portugal and the United Kingdom). The General Assembly then held its seventh emergency special session on Palestine.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2220; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/13064; https://undocs.org/en/S/13911; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/13023; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-7/2","notes":"The session was requested through the General Assembly, not by a Council resolution.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bangladesh","member_iso3c":"BGD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Jamaica","member_iso3c":"JAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":154,"un_id":154,"date":"1981-04-30","year":1981,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/14462","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2277","meeting_number":2277,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: comprehensive mandatory arms embargo on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NER; TUN; UGA","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 298 (South Africa vs SWAPO, territory Namibia) was active in 1981.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strengthened the arms embargo on South Africa by ending all supply of arms and related materiel, closing loopholes through third countries, banning spare parts, technology transfer, investment in arms production and imports of South African arms, ending military exchanges and preventing the recruitment of mercenaries.","stated_reason":"France said sanctions would run counter to the goal of resumed negotiations and that the texts had been imposed without negotiation on substance. The United Kingdom said comprehensive mandatory sanctions would hamper efforts to reach a negotiated settlement under resolution 435 (1978) and would harm many African and Western economies. The United States said the votes did not reflect members' attitudes to Namibian independence and that it would keep working with the Western contact group for an early settlement.","aftermath":"The General Assembly met in its eighth emergency special session on Namibia in September 1981 and adopted resolution ES-8/2 calling for sanctions against South Africa. Namibia became independent on 21 March 1990 under the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978).","context":"After the Geneva pre-implementation meeting on Namibia failed in January 1981, Niger, Tunisia and Uganda tabled four sanctions drafts against South Africa; this one would have tightened the mandatory arms embargo. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed all four, saying sanctions would undermine negotiations on resolution 435 (1978). The vote was 12 in favour and 3 against. Namibia became independent in 1990 under the negotiated plan.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2277; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/22203; https://undocs.org/en/S/14462; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/21406; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-8/2","notes":"Five drafts were before the Council; the fifth (S/14463, on a sanctions committee) was not put to a vote because it depended on the others. The date \"15 July 1981\" was inserted orally into each draft before the vote. DDR used for the German Democratic Republic. Japan explained it voted in favour because it supported an arms embargo, with reservations on elements beyond the existing framework.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":155,"un_id":155,"date":"1981-04-30","year":1981,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/14459","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2277","meeting_number":2277,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: comprehensive mandatory sanctions on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"MEX; NER; PAN; PHL; TUN; UGA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 298 (South Africa vs SWAPO, territory Namibia) was active in 1981.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Acting under Chapter VII, the draft would have determined that South Africa's occupation of Namibia was a breach of the peace and an act of aggression, condemned South Africa, and imposed comprehensive mandatory sanctions, including economic and political sanctions and oil and arms embargoes, with a Council committee to monitor them.","stated_reason":"France said sanctions would run counter to the goal of resumed negotiations and that the texts had been imposed without negotiation on substance. The United Kingdom said comprehensive mandatory sanctions would hamper efforts to reach a negotiated settlement under resolution 435 (1978) and would harm many African and Western economies. The United States said the votes did not reflect members' attitudes to Namibian independence and that it would keep working with the Western contact group for an early settlement.","aftermath":"The General Assembly met in its eighth emergency special session on Namibia in September 1981 and adopted resolution ES-8/2 calling for sanctions against South Africa. Namibia became independent on 21 March 1990 under the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978).","context":"Six non-aligned members proposed comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa over its refusal to implement the UN plan for Namibia, one of four sanctions drafts. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it and the three other drafts, saying sanctions would hamper a negotiated settlement. The vote was 9 in favour, 3 against and 3 abstentions (Ireland, Japan and Spain). Namibia became independent in 1990 under resolution 435 (1978).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2277; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/22203; https://undocs.org/en/S/14459; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/22084; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-8/2","notes":"Five drafts were before the Council; the fifth (S/14463, on a sanctions committee) was not put to a vote because it depended on the others. The date \"15 July 1981\" was inserted orally into each draft before the vote. DDR used for the German Democratic Republic. Spain said it abstained because of the reference to Article 6 of the Charter (expulsion) and to political sanctions.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":156,"un_id":156,"date":"1981-04-30","year":1981,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/14460/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2277","meeting_number":2277,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: break of relations and trade embargo on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NER; TUN; UGA","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 298 (South Africa vs SWAPO, territory Namibia) was active in 1981.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have required all states to sever diplomatic, consular and trade relations with South Africa, ban imports and exports, deny entry to holders of South African passports, cut air links, withhold financial support for trade and prohibit new investment in South Africa and occupied Namibia.","stated_reason":"France said sanctions would run counter to the goal of resumed negotiations and that the texts had been imposed without negotiation on substance. The United Kingdom said comprehensive mandatory sanctions would hamper efforts to reach a negotiated settlement under resolution 435 (1978) and would harm many African and Western economies. The United States said the votes did not reflect members' attitudes to Namibian independence and that it would keep working with the Western contact group for an early settlement.","aftermath":"The General Assembly met in its eighth emergency special session on Namibia in September 1981 and adopted resolution ES-8/2 calling for sanctions against South Africa. Namibia became independent on 21 March 1990 under the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978).","context":"As one of four sanctions drafts, Niger, Tunisia and Uganda proposed a full break of relations with South Africa and a trade, travel and investment embargo. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, saying sanctions would undermine the negotiations on Namibia. The vote was 9 in favour, 3 against and 3 abstentions (Ireland, Japan and Spain). Namibia became independent in 1990 under resolution 435 (1978).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2277; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/22203; https://undocs.org/en/S/14460/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/21405; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-8/2","notes":"Five drafts were before the Council; the fifth (S/14463, on a sanctions committee) was not put to a vote because it depended on the others. The date \"15 July 1981\" was inserted orally into each draft before the vote. DDR used for the German Democratic Republic.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":157,"un_id":157,"date":"1981-04-30","year":1981,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/14461","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2277","meeting_number":2277,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: oil embargo on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NER; TUN; UGA","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 298 (South Africa vs SWAPO, territory Namibia) was active in 1981.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have required all states to prohibit the sale or supply of petroleum and petroleum products to South Africa and occupied Namibia, and called for further measures under Article 41.","stated_reason":"France said sanctions would run counter to the goal of resumed negotiations and that the texts had been imposed without negotiation on substance. The United Kingdom said comprehensive mandatory sanctions would hamper efforts to reach a negotiated settlement under resolution 435 (1978) and would harm many African and Western economies. The United States said the votes did not reflect members' attitudes to Namibian independence and that it would keep working with the Western contact group for an early settlement.","aftermath":"The General Assembly met in its eighth emergency special session on Namibia in September 1981 and adopted resolution ES-8/2 calling for sanctions against South Africa. Namibia became independent on 21 March 1990 under the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978).","context":"As one of four sanctions drafts, three non-aligned members proposed a mandatory oil embargo on South Africa. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, saying sanctions would hamper negotiations on Namibia. The vote was 11 in favour, 3 against and 1 abstention (Japan). Namibia became independent in 1990 under resolution 435 (1978).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2277; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/22203; https://undocs.org/en/S/14461; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/22086; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-8/2","notes":"Five drafts were before the Council; the fifth (S/14463, on a sanctions committee) was not put to a vote because it depended on the others. The date \"15 July 1981\" was inserted orally into each draft before the vote. DDR used for the German Democratic Republic.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":158,"un_id":158,"date":"1981-08-31","year":1981,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/14664/Rev.2","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2300","meeting_number":2300,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Complaint by Angola against South Africa","short_agenda":"Complaint by Angola against South Africa","topic":"Angola: South African invasion","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"MEX; NER; PAN; PHL; TUN; UGA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"AGO; ZAF; NAM","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The incursion targeted SWAPO bases in Angola within the South Africa–SWAPO conflict (UCDP 298); South Africa is also a secondary party in the Angola–UNITA conflict (327).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly condemned South Africa's invasion of Angola from occupied Namibia, declared it a flagrant violation of Angola's sovereignty and a threat to peace, demanded the immediate withdrawal of South African troops, called for full compensation and decided to send a commission of investigation to Angola.","stated_reason":"The United States said it deplored the South African action, but that the draft placed blame solely on South Africa, ignoring the presence of Cuban combat forces in Angola, Soviet arms to SWAPO and Soviet military advisers, which also fuelled violence in the region.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the incursion at that time. In resolution 545 (1983) it later condemned South Africa's occupation of parts of southern Angola.","context":"After a large South African incursion into southern Angola in August 1981, six non-aligned members proposed a draft that would have condemned South Africa and demanded its withdrawal. The United States vetoed it, saying it blamed only South Africa and ignored Cuban and Soviet involvement. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). In resolution 545 (1983) the Council later condemned South Africa's occupation of parts of southern Angola.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2300; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/23316; https://undocs.org/en/S/14664/Rev.2; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/23294; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=S/RES/545(1983)","notes":"The United Kingdom said it would abstain and that, if adopted, operative paragraph 3 would not in its view be a determination under Article 39. The name of the operation (Protea) is not documented in the sources cited and does not appear in S/PV.2300; resolution 545 (1983) of 20 December 1983 concerns South Africa's occupation of Angolan territory. The UCDP match could also be 327.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"East Germany","member_iso3c":"DDR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":159,"un_id":159,"date":"1982-01-20","year":1982,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/14832/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2329","meeting_number":2329,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Syria: Golan Heights annexation","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":5,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"JOR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 302 (Israel–Syria, Golan Heights) has no active year in this period; no armed conflict over the Golan in January 1982.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Acting under Chapter VII, the draft would have condemned Israel for not complying with resolution 497 (1981), determined that Israel's measures in the occupied Golan Heights were an act of aggression, and called on member states to consider concrete measures, including ending assistance and dealings with Israel, with a committee under Article 29.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft misused Chapter VII, which was meant to prevent aggravation of a situation, and would itself aggravate tensions. It said it did not approve of Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights and urged implementation of resolutions 242, 338 and 497 through negotiation.","aftermath":"On 28 January 1982 the Council adopted resolution 500 (1982), calling an emergency special session of the General Assembly. The ninth emergency special session adopted resolution ES-9/1 on 5 February 1982, declaring Israel's annexation an act of aggression and calling on states to apply measures against Israel.","context":"After Israel extended its law to the occupied Golan Heights in December 1981 and ignored resolution 497, Jordan proposed that the Council determine an act of aggression and call for measures against Israel. The United States vetoed the draft, saying it misused Chapter VII. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 5 abstentions (France, Ireland, Japan, Panama and the United Kingdom). The matter then went to the ninth emergency special session of the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2329; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/28533; https://undocs.org/en/S/14832/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/28498; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/500(1982); https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=S/RES/500(1982)","notes":"The United Kingdom and France said they abstained because they objected to an \"act of aggression\" determination and preferred a consensus text. COD used for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":160,"un_id":160,"date":"1982-04-02","year":1982,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/14941","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2347","meeting_number":2347,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 19 March 1982 from the Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General (S/14913)","short_agenda":"1982 Letter from Nicaragua (Nicaragua)","topic":"Nicaragua: complaint of threats and intervention","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Nicaragua","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"PAN; GUY","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NIC; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":336,"ucdp_dyad_id":742,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 336 (Government of Nicaragua vs Contras) was active in 1982; the complaint concerned US support for armed opposition.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have reminded all states of their obligations under Article 2(4) of the Charter and of General Assembly resolutions on non-intervention, appealed to all states to refrain from direct, indirect, overt or covert use of force against any country of Central America and the Caribbean, and urged dialogue.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft did not support the inter-American system for settling disputes and failed to identify the key problem in the region, which it described as intervention by the Sandinista government in its neighbours' affairs with outside support. It said Nicaragua's allegations had no foundation and that the door to negotiation remained open.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the complaint at that time. Nicaragua filed a case against the United States at the International Court of Justice in April 1984.","context":"After Nicaragua complained of US threats and plans for intervention, Panama and Guyana proposed a general appeal against the use of force in Central America and the Caribbean. The United States vetoed it, saying it ignored Nicaraguan intervention in its neighbours and bypassed regional bodies. The vote was 12 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (the United Kingdom and Zaire).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2347; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/30784; https://undocs.org/en/S/14941; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/30925; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/41/31","notes":"The title of the draft document is illegible; Panama introduced it and Guyana said it was a co-sponsor. The United Kingdom abstained over references to GA resolutions 2131 (XX) and 2160 (XXI). COD used for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":161,"un_id":161,"date":"1982-04-02","year":1982,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/14943","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2348","meeting_number":2348,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: dismissal of West Bank mayors","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"JOR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israel and the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, where UCDP records the Israel–Palestinian conflict (234) as active in this year.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have denounced measures imposed on the Palestinian population of the occupied territories, called on Israel to rescind the disbanding of the Al-Bireh municipal council and the dismissal of the mayors of Nablus and Ramallah, reaffirmed the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention and called on Israel to stop measures in the West Bank and Gaza.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft used denunciatory language, did not reflect the complexity of the problem or the loss of life on both sides, made no reference to resolutions 242 and 338, and that article 54 of the Fourth Geneva Convention allowed an occupying power to dismiss officials.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The question was taken up in the resumed seventh emergency special session of the General Assembly later in April 1982.","context":"After Israel dismissed elected Palestinian mayors and unrest spread in the West Bank and Gaza, Jordan proposed a draft calling on Israel to reverse the measures. The United States vetoed it, saying the text used denunciatory language and did not reflect the complexity of the problem. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Zaire). The question then went to the resumed seventh emergency special session of the General Assembly.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2348; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/551986; https://undocs.org/en/S/14943; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/34463; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-7/4","notes":"The result line of the vote is missing from the available text of the record; Zaire's abstention is confirmed by its own statement in the record, giving 13-1-1. COD used for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":162,"un_id":162,"date":"1982-04-20","year":1982,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/14985","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2357","meeting_number":2357,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: shooting at the Haram al-Sharif","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"JOR; MAR; IRQ; UGA","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israeli obligations in occupied East Jerusalem, within the Israel–Palestinian conflict (UCDP 234) active in 1982; the attack itself was by an individual.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the shooting at the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque on 11 April 1982, called on Israel as the occupying power to observe the fourth Geneva Convention and protect the Holy Places in Jerusalem, and supported the role of the Islamic Higher Council in their administration.","stated_reason":"The United States said it condemned the attack but that the text implied Israeli responsibility for the act of an individual gunman, implied that Israel had hindered the Islamic Higher Council and would deepen divisions in the region.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action. The resumed seventh emergency special session of the General Assembly took up the occupied territories later in April 1982.","context":"After a gunman killed worshippers at the Dome of the Rock on 11 April 1982, Jordan, Morocco, Iraq and Uganda proposed a text condemning the attack and calling on Israel to protect the Holy Places. The United States vetoed it, saying the text implied Israeli responsibility for the attack. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2357; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/31542; https://undocs.org/en/S/14985; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/34465; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-7/4","notes":"The shooting is described from the debate; casualty figures have not been confirmed. Morocco and Iraq were not Council members. The UCDP match is loose because the incident was an individual's attack. COD used for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":163,"un_id":163,"date":"1982-06-04","year":1982,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/15156/Rev.2","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2373","meeting_number":2373,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Question concerning the situation in the region of the Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas)","short_agenda":"Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas)","topic":"Falkland Islands (Malvinas): ceasefire","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Argentina","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"PAN; ESP","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ARG; GBR","ucdp_conflict_id":346,"ucdp_dyad_id":767,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 346 (Argentina vs United Kingdom, Malvinas/Falkland Islands), active in 1982.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have asked the parties to cease fire immediately in the region of the Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas) and to begin implementing resolutions 502 (1982) and 505 (1982) in their entirety at the same time, with the Secretary-General authorized to verify compliance.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the draft did not link the ceasefire directly and inseparably to an immediate Argentine withdrawal within a fixed time, as required by resolution 502 (1982), and would lead back to procrastination. The United States said after the vote that it had been asked by its government to record that, were it possible, it would change its vote from a veto to an abstention.","aftermath":"Fighting continued until Argentine forces surrendered at Stanley on 14 June 1982. The General Assembly in resolution 37/9 of November 1982 asked both governments to resume negotiations.","context":"During the war over the Falkland Islands, Panama and Spain proposed an immediate ceasefire combined with implementation of resolutions 502 and 505. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the United Kingdom saying it did not tie the ceasefire to immediate Argentine withdrawal and the United States saying after the vote that it would have preferred to abstain. The vote was 9 in favour, 2 against and 4 abstentions (France, Guyana, Jordan and Togo). Argentine forces surrendered 10 days later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2373; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/35190; https://undocs.org/en/S/15156/Rev.2; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/541860; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/37/9","notes":"Ambassador Kirkpatrick's statement that the United States would change its vote to an abstention if possible is in the record; the vote stands as recorded. The surrender date is not documented in the sources cited; GA resolution 37/9 was adopted on 4 November 1982. COD used for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":164,"un_id":164,"date":"1982-06-08","year":1982,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/15185","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2377","meeting_number":2377,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli invasion and non-compliance","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ESP","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; LBN; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP codes the 1982 Israeli invasion as part of Israel vs PLO (234), with Syria as secondary party in 1982.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned Israel's non-compliance with resolutions 508 and 509 (1982), repeated the demand that Israel withdraw all its forces from Lebanon at once and unconditionally, demanded that all hostilities stop within six hours and decided to meet again on practical measures if they did not.","stated_reason":"The United States said earlier resolutions 508 and 509 had contained balancing language reflecting the complexity of the conflict, while this text was not balanced enough to end the cycle of violence and establish conditions for a lasting peace.","aftermath":"The Council later adopted resolution 512 (1982) on humanitarian aid. The General Assembly, in its resumed seventh emergency special session, adopted resolution ES-7/5 on 26 June 1982 demanding Israeli compliance with resolutions 508 and 509.","context":"Two days after Israel invaded Lebanon, Spain proposed a draft condemning Israel's non-compliance with the Council's ceasefire and withdrawal demands. The United States vetoed it, saying the text was not balanced. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The war continued into the siege of West Beirut.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2377; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/34502; https://undocs.org/en/S/15185; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/30345; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/ES-7/5","notes":"The Lebanese government conflict (UCDP 260) was also active in 1982 but the draft concerns the Israeli invasion.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":165,"un_id":165,"date":"1982-06-26","year":1982,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/15255/Rev.2","draft_note":"S/15255/Rev.2 (as orally corrected)","meeting_record":"S/PV.2381","meeting_number":2381,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: disengagement in Beirut and UN observers","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP codes the 1982 fighting in Lebanon between Israel and the PLO under conflict 234.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an immediate cessation of hostilities throughout Lebanon, the withdrawal of Israeli forces to 10 km from Beirut and the simultaneous withdrawal of Palestinian armed forces from Beirut to existing camps, supported the Lebanese army taking up positions in and around the capital, and asked the Secretary-General to station UN military observers to supervise the ceasefire and disengagement.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft, while containing elements it supported, failed to call for the removal from Beirut and elsewhere of armed Palestinian elements that did not accept the authority of the Lebanese Government, which it called a fatal flaw.","aftermath":"The Council authorized UN observers in and around Beirut in resolution 516 (1982) on 1 August 1982. PLO fighters left Beirut in late August 1982 under a US-brokered plan supervised by a multinational force.","context":"During the Israeli siege of West Beirut, France proposed a disengagement of Israeli and Palestinian forces and UN observers to supervise the ceasefire. The United States vetoed it, saying it did not require the removal of armed Palestinian groups from Beirut. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The Council authorized observers five weeks later in resolution 516 (1982).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2381; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/30800; https://undocs.org/en/S/15255/Rev.2; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/30985","notes":"The UN list gives \"S/15255/Rev.2 in prov. form orally modified\"; the President read corrections to operative paragraphs 1, 5 and 8 before the vote, which took place at 2.45 a.m. on 26 June 1982. Resolution 516 (1982) is confirmed in the record of the 2391st meeting; the details of the PLO evacuation are not documented in the sources cited.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":166,"un_id":166,"date":"1982-08-06","year":1982,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/15347/Rev.1","draft_note":"S/15347/Rev.1 (as orally revised)","meeting_record":"S/PV.2391","meeting_number":2391,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: arms embargo on Israel for non-compliance","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"RUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; LBN","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP codes the 1982 fighting in Lebanon between Israel and the PLO under conflict 234.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly condemned Israel for not implementing resolutions 516 and 517 (1982), demanded their full implementation and decided that all member states should refrain from supplying Israel with weapons or military aid until Israeli forces had fully withdrawn from Lebanon.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft called for sanctions against Israel, was unbalanced and would not help achieve a negotiated settlement through the mission of Philip Habib.","aftermath":"PLO forces left Beirut between 21 August and 1 September 1982 under the Habib arrangements and a multinational force. The Council took no further action on sanctions.","context":"As Israeli forces continued operations in Beirut despite resolutions 516 and 517, the Soviet Union proposed an arms embargo on Israel until it withdrew from Lebanon. The United States vetoed it, saying sanctions were unbalanced and would harm the Habib mediation. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Togo, the United Kingdom and Zaire). The Council took no further action on sanctions.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2391; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/31557; https://undocs.org/en/S/15347/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/31667","notes":"The draft was orally revised before the vote at the request of one delegation; the exact oral change has not been confirmed against the published text. The evacuation dates are not documented in the sources cited. COD used for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":167,"un_id":167,"date":"1983-08-02","year":1983,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/15895","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2461","meeting_number":2461,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab Territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Israeli settlements and Hebron","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; BHR; YMD; DJI; IRQ; JOR; KWT; LBN; LBY; MRT; MAR; OMN; QAT; SAU; SOM; SDN; SYR; TUN; ARE; YEM","n_sponsors":20,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israel and the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, where UCDP records the Israel–Palestinian conflict (234) as active in this year.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have determined that Israeli settlements in the territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, had no legal validity and obstructed peace, deplored their expansion, condemned recent attacks on Arab civilians including in Hebron, and called on all states not to assist Israel in connection with settlements.","stated_reason":"The United States said a settlement freeze would help negotiations but that it was not practical or appropriate to call for dismantling existing settlements, whose future was a matter for negotiation, and that the draft did not adequately address the recent series of attacks in the West Bank, including the killing of an Israeli settler in Hebron.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the text.","context":"After violence in Hebron in July 1983, including an attack on the Islamic College, 20 Arab states proposed a draft declaring Israeli settlements illegal and condemning attacks on Arab civilians. The United States vetoed it, saying the future of settlements had to be negotiated and the text did not address attacks on Israelis. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Zaire). The Council took no further action on the text.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2461; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/46171; https://undocs.org/en/S/15895; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/46646","notes":"Jordan was the only sponsor on the Council. YMD used for Democratic Yemen and YEM for the Yemen Arab Republic; COD for Zaire. The 26 July 1983 attack on Hebron University is from the US statement in the record.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Zimbabwe","member_iso3c":"ZWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":168,"un_id":168,"date":"1983-09-12","year":1983,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/15966/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2476","meeting_number":2476,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 1 September 1983 from the Acting Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15947)--Letter dated 1 September 1983 from the Permanent Observer for the Republic of Korea to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15948)--Letter dated 1 September 1983 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15949)--Letter dated 1 September 1983 from the Permanent Representative of Japan to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15950)--Letter dated 2 September 1983 from the Acting Permanent Representative of Australia to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15951)","short_agenda":"1983 Letters from various Member States (South Korean airliner)","topic":"Korean Air Lines flight 007: shooting down of airliner","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"USSR","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; BEL; CAN; COL; FJI; FRA; DEU; ITA; JPN; MYS; NLD; NZL; PRY; PHL; THA; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":17,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"RUS; KOR; USA; JPN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Single incident with no armed conflict recorded by UCDP.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deeply deplored the destruction of the Korean airliner and the loss of civilian life, declared such use of armed force against international civil aviation incompatible with norms of international behaviour, welcomed an urgent ICAO Council meeting and asked the Secretary-General to conduct a full investigation.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the airliner had entered Soviet airspace on a deliberate intelligence mission directed from the United States, that it had flown over important military installations without responding to attempts at contact, and that the debate was an anti-Soviet propaganda exercise.","aftermath":"The ICAO Council condemned the shooting down on 16 September 1983, and in May 1984 the ICAO Assembly adopted Article 3 bis of the Chicago Convention, barring the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight.","context":"After a Soviet fighter shot down Korean Air Lines flight 007 near Sakhalin on 1 September 1983, killing all 269 people on board, 17 states proposed a draft deploring the act and calling for an investigation. The Soviet Union vetoed it, saying the airliner was on a spy mission. The vote was 9 in favour, 2 against (Poland and the Soviet Union) and 4 abstentions (China, Guyana, Nicaragua and Zimbabwe). ICAO later amended the Chicago Convention.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2476; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/48005; https://undocs.org/en/S/15966/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/47972","notes":"Canada's statement in the record confirms that the text put to the vote invited the Secretary-General to conduct a full investigation. The casualty figure and the ICAO actions are not documented in the sources cited. The Republic of Korea was not a UN member. Issue area could also be Use of force.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zimbabwe","member_iso3c":"ZWE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":169,"un_id":169,"date":"1983-10-27","year":1983,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/16077/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2491","meeting_number":2491,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Grenada","short_agenda":"Grenada","topic":"Grenada: US-led intervention","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Grenada","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GUY; NIC; ZWE","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GRD; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":350,"ucdp_dyad_id":774,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 350 (Grenada vs United States), active in 1983.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deeply deplored the armed intervention in Grenada as a flagrant violation of international law and of Grenada's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, deplored the deaths of civilians, and called for an immediate end to the intervention and the withdrawal of foreign troops.","stated_reason":"The United States said it had acted with Barbados and Jamaica at the request of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States to help restore order after the killing of Prime Minister Maurice Bishop, citing the danger to its citizens and the build-up of Cuban and Soviet presence, and said the action was compatible with international law.","aftermath":"The General Assembly deplored the intervention in resolution 38/7 of 2 November 1983. US combat forces withdrew from Grenada by mid-December 1983 and elections were held in December 1984.","context":"Two days after US and Caribbean forces landed in Grenada on 25 October 1983, Guyana, Nicaragua and Zimbabwe proposed a draft deploring the intervention and calling for withdrawal. The United States vetoed it, saying it had responded to a regional request after the killing of Maurice Bishop. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Togo, the United Kingdom and Zaire). The General Assembly then deplored the intervention.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2491; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/59398; https://undocs.org/en/S/16077/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/57142; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/?ln=en&p=A/RES/38/7","notes":"The meeting opened on 27 October 1983 and rose at 3.05 a.m. on 28 October; the vote came late in the meeting and may have taken place after midnight, so the vote date could be 28 October. The dataset gives the date on which the meeting opened. GA resolution 38/7 was adopted on 2 November 1983; the withdrawal and election dates are not documented in the sources cited. COD used for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Zimbabwe","member_iso3c":"ZWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":170,"un_id":170,"date":"1984-02-29","year":1984,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/16351/Rev.2","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2519","meeting_number":2519,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: UN force to replace the multinational force in Beirut","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN","ucdp_conflict_id":260,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 260 (Government of Lebanon, with France and the United States, vs Amal and NSF) was active in 1984.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have appealed for an immediate ceasefire throughout Lebanon, asked the UN Beirut observer group to monitor it, and decided, with Lebanon's agreement, to set up a UN force drawn from states other than the permanent members to deploy in the Beirut area, while calling on states to refrain from intervention in Lebanon.","stated_reason":"The Soviet Union said the draft did not ensure that the countries of the multinational force would not resume military interference in Lebanon, that its wording on the mandate of the UN force was unacceptable or ambiguous, and that it had been forced to a vote without further consultation.","aftermath":"No UN force was deployed in Beirut. The multinational force completed its withdrawal from Lebanon by the end of March 1984.","context":"As the US-led multinational force prepared to leave Beirut, France proposed a ceasefire and a UN force to take its place. The Soviet Union vetoed the draft, saying it did not guarantee against renewed Western intervention. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against (the Soviet Union and the Ukrainian SSR). The multinational force left without a UN replacement.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2519; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/62805; https://undocs.org/en/S/16351/Rev.2; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/62043","notes":"The withdrawal dates of the multinational force are not documented in the sources cited. UKR used for the Ukrainian SSR, BFA for Upper Volta. The Secretary-General said after the vote that disagreement among members prevented an expanded UN role.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Upper Volta","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Zimbabwe","member_iso3c":"ZWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":171,"un_id":171,"date":"1984-04-04","year":1984,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/16463","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2529","meeting_number":2529,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 29 March 1984 from the Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/16449)","short_agenda":"1984 Letter from Nicaragua (Nicaragua)","topic":"Nicaragua: mining of Nicaraguan ports","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Nicaragua","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NIC","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NIC; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":336,"ucdp_dyad_id":742,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The mining of the ports was part of US support for the Contra war against the Nicaraguan government (UCDP 336, Government of Nicaragua vs Contras, active 1984).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the mining of Nicaragua's main ports and called for it to end immediately, affirmed the right of free navigation and commerce in international waters, called on all States to refrain from military action against any State of the region, and supported the Contadora Group.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was unbalanced because it addressed only one kind of violence against one target and said nothing of Nicaraguan arms shipments to Salvadorian guerrillas or of border violations against Honduras and Costa Rica.","aftermath":"Nicaragua instituted proceedings against the United States at the International Court of Justice on 9 April 1984. The Court indicated provisional measures on 10 May 1984 and gave judgment on the merits on 27 June 1986 (Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua).","context":"The draft, submitted by Nicaragua, would have condemned the mining of its main ports and called for it to end. The United States vetoed it, saying the text addressed only violence against Nicaragua and ignored Nicaragua's own actions against its neighbours. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). Nicaragua took the dispute to the International Court of Justice five days later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2529; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/62801; https://undocs.org/en/S/16463; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/64781","notes":"Sponsor taken from the President's statement that S/16463 was submitted by Nicaragua; the Digital Library record lists Nicaragua as author. The link to the Contras in the conflict match is not documented in the sources cited; the draft itself names no State as responsible for the mining.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Upper Volta","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zimbabwe","member_iso3c":"ZWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":172,"un_id":172,"date":"1984-09-06","year":1984,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/16732","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2556","meeting_number":2556,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli practices in occupied southern Lebanon","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"LBN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"The draft concerns Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon after 1982; UCDP codes Israel vs Hezbollah (426) only from 1990, and the Israel-PLO conflict (234) concerns the territory of Palestine, so no clear match.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the areas of southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district occupied by Israel, called on Israel to respect the rights of the civilian population there, and demanded that Israel lift restrictions on movement of people and goods and on Lebanese government institutions in those areas.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft addressed foreign forces and humanitarian problems only in southern Lebanon, made no mention of all foreign forces and was silent on the role of organizations such as the ICRC, and that Israel had stated its willingness to leave southern Lebanon and to negotiate security arrangements with Lebanon.","aftermath":"Lebanon brought a further draft on Israeli practices in southern Lebanon in March 1985 (S/17000), which the United States also vetoed.","context":"The Lebanese draft would have applied the Fourth Geneva Convention to the areas of southern Lebanon occupied by Israel and demanded that Israel lift restrictions there. The United States vetoed it, saying the text looked at one part of Lebanon's problems and ignored the presence of other foreign forces. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. Lebanon returned to the Council with a similar draft in March 1985.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2556; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/68799; https://undocs.org/en/S/16732; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/67768","notes":"No Correlates of War number is given: the 1982 Lebanon war had ended, and no Correlates of War entry for the 1984 occupation has been identified.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nicaragua","member_iso3c":"NIC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zimbabwe","member_iso3c":"ZWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":173,"un_id":173,"date":"1985-03-12","year":1985,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/17000","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2573","meeting_number":2573,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli practices in southern Lebanon","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"LBN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli occupation practices in southern Lebanon in 1985; no UCDP dyad between Israel and a Lebanese actor is coded before 1990 (Hezbollah, 426).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned Israeli practices and measures against civilians in southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district as violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention, reaffirmed the demand for Israeli withdrawal under resolutions 425, 508 and 509, demanded that Israel stop these practices, and asked the Secretary-General to send a fact-finding mission.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was unbalanced and did not treat Israel fairly and that Lebanon had declined to discuss changes to the text, although it supported Israeli withdrawal and the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention to occupied areas of Lebanon.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed a further draft on Israeli practices in southern Lebanon in January 1986 (S/17730/Rev.2).","context":"The Lebanese draft would have condemned Israeli practices against civilians in southern Lebanon and asked the Secretary-General to send a fact-finding mission. The United States vetoed it, saying the text was unbalanced and that Lebanon had refused to negotiate its wording. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Australia, Denmark and the United Kingdom). The United States vetoed a further draft on southern Lebanon in January 1986.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2573; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/77602; https://undocs.org/en/S/17000; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/77551","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":174,"un_id":174,"date":"1985-05-10","year":1985,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/17172","draft_note":"S/17172 (eighth preambular paragraph)","meeting_record":"S/PV.2580","meeting_number":2580,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Letter dated 6 May 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security-Council (S/17156)","short_agenda":"1985 Letter from Nicaragua (Nicaragua)","topic":"Nicaragua: US trade embargo (eighth preambular paragraph)","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Nicaragua","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NIC","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NIC; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":336,"ucdp_dyad_id":742,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The US trade embargo of May 1985 was part of US pressure on the Nicaraguan government during the Contra war (UCDP 336, active 1985).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The eighth preambular paragraph of the Nicaraguan draft would have expressed serious concern at increased tension in Central America aggravated by the trade embargo and other coercive economic measures against Nicaragua, which it said endangered regional stability and undermined the Contadora Group.","stated_reason":"The United States gave no separate explanation of its negative votes at this meeting; at the preceding meeting (S/PV.2578) it said nothing in the Charter prevents a State from ending trade, that the embargo was consistent with the OAS Charter and that it was meant to stop Nicaragua benefiting from US trade while conducting subversion and aggression against its neighbours.","aftermath":"The rest of the draft, without the eighth preambular paragraph and operative paragraphs 1 and 2, was adopted unanimously as resolution 562 (1985) at the same meeting.","context":"At the United States' request the Nicaraguan draft on the US trade embargo was voted paragraph by paragraph, and its eighth preambular paragraph would have linked rising regional tension to the embargo. The United States vetoed the paragraph, having argued at the previous meeting that States may lawfully end trade. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). The rest of the draft became resolution 562 (1985).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2580; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83928; https://undocs.org/en/S/17172; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83935","notes":"The UN veto list gives S/17172 for three vetoes (174-176) without naming the paragraphs. The record shows three paragraphs defeated by a US negative vote: the eighth preambular paragraph, operative paragraph 1 and operative paragraph 2, in that order. Vetoes 174-176 are matched to them in voting order; this mapping is an inference.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":175,"un_id":175,"date":"1985-05-10","year":1985,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/17172","draft_note":"S/17172 (operative paragraph 1)","meeting_record":"S/PV.2580","meeting_number":2580,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Letter dated 6 May 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security-Council (S/17156)","short_agenda":"1985 Letter from Nicaragua (Nicaragua)","topic":"Nicaragua: US trade embargo (operative paragraph 1)","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Nicaragua","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NIC","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NIC; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":336,"ucdp_dyad_id":742,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The US trade embargo of May 1985 was part of US pressure on the Nicaraguan government during the Contra war (UCDP 336, active 1985).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Operative paragraph 1 of the Nicaraguan draft would have deplored the trade embargo and other coercive economic measures against Nicaragua as inconsistent with non-interference in the internal affairs of States and a danger to regional stability, and called for an immediate end to them.","stated_reason":"The United States gave no separate explanation of its negative votes at this meeting; at the preceding meeting (S/PV.2578) it said nothing in the Charter prevents a State from ending trade, that the embargo was consistent with the OAS Charter and that it was meant to stop Nicaragua benefiting from US trade while conducting subversion and aggression against its neighbours.","aftermath":"The rest of the draft, without the eighth preambular paragraph and operative paragraphs 1 and 2, was adopted unanimously as resolution 562 (1985) at the same meeting.","context":"In the paragraph-by-paragraph vote on the Nicaraguan draft, operative paragraph 1 would have deplored the US trade embargo and called for it to end. The United States vetoed the paragraph, having argued at the previous meeting that States may lawfully end trade. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Egypt, Thailand and the United Kingdom). The rest of the draft was adopted as resolution 562 (1985).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2580; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83928; https://undocs.org/en/S/17172; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83935","notes":"See note on veto 174: the mapping of vetoes 174-176 to paragraphs follows the voting order and is an inference. The opening verb of operative paragraph 1 (\"Deplores\") is taken from the draft text.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":176,"un_id":176,"date":"1985-05-10","year":1985,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/17172","draft_note":"S/17172 (operative paragraph 2)","meeting_record":"S/PV.2580","meeting_number":2580,"vetoed_item":"part of draft","agenda":"Letter dated 6 May 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security-Council (S/17156)","short_agenda":"1985 Letter from Nicaragua (Nicaragua)","topic":"Nicaragua: trade embargoes and destabilization (operative paragraph 2)","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Nicaragua","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"NIC","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NIC; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":336,"ucdp_dyad_id":742,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The US trade embargo of May 1985 was part of US pressure on the Nicaraguan government during the Contra war (UCDP 336, active 1985).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"Operative paragraph 2 of the Nicaraguan draft would have called on the interested States to refrain from any action to destabilize or undermine other States or their institutions, including trade embargoes, blockades or other measures incompatible with the Charter and with commitments made multilaterally or bilaterally.","stated_reason":"The United States gave no separate explanation of its negative votes at this meeting; at the preceding meeting (S/PV.2578) it said nothing in the Charter prevents a State from ending trade, that the embargo was consistent with the OAS Charter and that it was meant to stop Nicaragua benefiting from US trade while conducting subversion and aggression against its neighbours.","aftermath":"The rest of the draft, without the eighth preambular paragraph and operative paragraphs 1 and 2, was adopted unanimously as resolution 562 (1985) at the same meeting.","context":"Operative paragraph 2 of the Nicaraguan draft would have called on States to refrain from destabilizing other States, including through trade embargoes and blockades. The United States vetoed the paragraph, having argued at the previous meeting that States may lawfully end trade. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). The rest of the draft was adopted unanimously as resolution 562 (1985).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2580; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83928; https://undocs.org/en/S/17172; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83935","notes":"See note on veto 174: the mapping of vetoes 174-176 to paragraphs follows the voting order and is an inference.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":177,"un_id":177,"date":"1985-07-26","year":1985,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/17363","draft_note":"S/17363 (amendment to S/17354/Rev.1)","meeting_record":"S/PV.2602","meeting_number":2602,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"The question of South Africa","short_agenda":"South Africa","topic":"South Africa: amendment warning of Chapter VII measures","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"South Africa","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BFA; EGY; IND; MDG; PER; TTO","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":345,"ucdp_dyad_id":766,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The amendment concerns pressure on the South African government over apartheid and the 1985 state of emergency; UCDP 345 (Government of South Africa vs ANC) is active in 1985.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The amendment, to be inserted after operative paragraph 5 of the Danish-French draft S/17354/Rev.1, would have warned South Africa that failure to comply would compel the Council to meet forthwith to consider appropriate measures under the Charter, including Chapter VII.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said it would not be responsible to call for measures that would not bring the desired change in South Africa and could be counter-productive, that economic advancement had been a catalyst for change, and that Chapter VII measures would not be an effective way to bring internal change. The United States said after the vote that restrictions on investment and economic sanctions would harm the black majority in South Africa.","aftermath":"The Council then adopted the Danish-French draft without the amendment as resolution 569 (1985), with the United Kingdom and the United States abstaining (13 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions). It urged States to adopt voluntary measures against South Africa.","context":"Six non-aligned members proposed adding to the Danish-French draft on South Africa's state of emergency a warning that the Council would consider measures under Chapter VII. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed the amendment, the United Kingdom saying such measures would be ineffective and counter-productive. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention (France). The Council then adopted the unamended draft as resolution 569 (1985), which urged voluntary measures.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2602; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/88369; https://undocs.org/en/S/17363; https://undocs.org/en/S/17354/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/87527","notes":"Discrepancy with the UN veto list: the list gives S/17354/Rev.1 as the vetoed draft, but S/17354/Rev.1 was adopted as resolution 569 (1985). The item vetoed was the amendment S/17363 submitted by Burkina Faso, Egypt, India, Madagascar, Peru and Trinidad and Tobago. The amendment text is taken from the meeting record; document S/17363 itself has not been consulted.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":178,"un_id":178,"date":"1985-09-13","year":1985,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/17459","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2605","meeting_number":2605,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Israeli measures against Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BFA; EGY; IND; MDG; PER; TTO","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli measures in the occupied Palestinian territories; UCDP 234 (Government of Israel vs PLO and others, territory Palestine) is active in 1985.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deplored the repressive measures taken by Israel since 4 August 1985 against the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza, called on Israel to stop them, including curfews, administrative detention and deportation, to release detainees, and to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.","stated_reason":"The United States said it considered administrative detention and deportation inconsistent with the Fourth Geneva Convention but could not support a draft that condemned Israeli policies without equally condemning the acts of terror against Israeli civilians and officials that had provoked them.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed the next Council draft on the occupied territories, on the Haram al-Sharif, in January 1986 (S/17769/Rev.1).","context":"The non-aligned draft would have deplored Israel's measures against Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza since August 1985 and called for an end to detentions and deportations. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored attacks on Israelis that had provoked these measures. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Australia, Denmark, France and the United Kingdom).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2605; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/99958; https://undocs.org/en/S/17459; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153958","notes":"Among the countries concerned, PSE denotes the Palestinian population and territory.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":179,"un_id":179,"date":"1985-11-15","year":1985,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/17633","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2629","meeting_number":2629,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: mandatory selective sanctions on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BFA; EGY; IND; MDG; PER; TTO","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns South Africa's occupation of Namibia; UCDP 298 (Government of South Africa vs SWAPO, territory Namibia) is active in 1985.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have determined that South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia was a breach of the peace and its attacks from Namibia acts of aggression, and, under Chapter VII, imposed mandatory selective sanctions against South Africa, including an oil embargo, a ban on new investment and loans, and a ban on krugerrand sales, with a monitoring committee.","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said the draft was likely to be counter-productive and would pre-empt the strategy of voluntary measures agreed with Commonwealth partners at Nassau in October 1985; it had offered to support a text with non-mandatory measures. The United States said it opposed mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII and that supporting them would negate its good offices in seeking a negotiated settlement in Namibia.","aftermath":"A further draft imposing comprehensive mandatory sanctions over Namibia was vetoed in April 1987 (S/18785). Namibia became independent on 21 March 1990 after the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978) was implemented from April 1989.","context":"The non-aligned draft would have imposed mandatory selective sanctions on South Africa under Chapter VII to end its occupation of Namibia. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the United Kingdom citing its preference for voluntary measures agreed in the Commonwealth and the United States its opposition to mandatory sanctions and its mediation role. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention (France). Namibia became independent in 1990 under the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2629; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/107988; https://undocs.org/en/S/17633; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/105827","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukrainian SSR","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":180,"un_id":180,"date":"1986-01-17","year":1986,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/17730/Rev.2","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2642","meeting_number":2642,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli practices in southern Lebanon","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"LBN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli occupation practices in southern Lebanon in 1986; no UCDP dyad between Israel and a Lebanese actor is coded before 1990.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored Israeli acts of violence and practices against the civilian population of southern Lebanon as violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention, reaffirmed the demand for Israeli withdrawal under resolutions 425, 508 and 509, and demanded that Israel stop these practices.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft could not bring peace closer, that the incident at the village of Kounin that prompted the complaint was being resolved through UNIFIL, and that the text did not deal fairly with security problems in southern Lebanon, including recent rocket attacks on Israel from Lebanese soil.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed a further draft on southern Lebanon in January 1988 (S/19434).","context":"The Lebanese draft would have deplored Israeli practices against civilians in southern Lebanon and repeated the call for Israeli withdrawal. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored rocket attacks on Israel and that UNIFIL was resolving the immediate incident. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Australia, Denmark and the United Kingdom). The United States vetoed a further draft on southern Lebanon in January 1988.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2642; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/110287; https://undocs.org/en/S/17730/Rev.2; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153948","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":181,"un_id":181,"date":"1986-01-30","year":1986,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/17769/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2650","meeting_number":2650,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: incidents at the Haram al-Sharif","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COG; GHA; MDG; TTO; ARE","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns occupied East Jerusalem; UCDP 234 (Israel vs PLO and others, territory Palestine) is active in 1986, though the incidents themselves were not armed clashes.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored provocative acts, including by members of the Knesset, that violated the sanctity of the Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem, reaffirmed that Israeli measures altering the status of Jerusalem and the occupied territories have no legal validity, and called on Israel to observe the Fourth Geneva Convention and not hinder the Supreme Islamic Council.","stated_reason":"The United States said it deplored the incidents but that Israeli officials had condemned them and acted quickly, that the text wrongly blamed the Government of Israel for the acts of a few individuals, and that it used the incidents as a pretext to address the status of Jerusalem.","aftermath":"No resolution on the incidents was adopted.","context":"The draft would have deplored provocative acts at the Haram al-Sharif and restated the Council's position on the status of Jerusalem. The United States vetoed it, saying Israeli officials had condemned the incidents and that the text used them to reopen wider questions. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Thailand). No resolution on the incidents was adopted.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2650; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/110381; https://undocs.org/en/S/17769/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153947","notes":"That no resolution was adopted on the incidents has not been confirmed against a full list of 1986 resolutions.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":182,"un_id":182,"date":"1986-02-06","year":1986,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/17796/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2655","meeting_number":2655,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 4 February 1986 from the Permanent Representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17787)","short_agenda":"1986 Letter from Syria (Libya)","topic":"Israel/Libya: interception of a Libyan civil aircraft","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COG; GHA; MDG; TTO; ARE","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; LBY; SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"A single interception of a civil aircraft; no armed conflict in UCDP between Israel and Libya or Syria in 1986.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned Israel for forcibly intercepting and diverting a Libyan civilian aircraft in international airspace and detaining it, called this a serious violation of international law and civil aviation conventions, and warned Israel that the Council would consider measures if such acts were repeated.","stated_reason":"The United States said it deplored Israel's action because Israel had not shown strong evidence that terrorists were on board, but that it could not accept a text implying that interception is wrongful in all cases, since a State facing terrorist attacks may in exceptional circumstances use such force in self-defence.","aftermath":"No resolution on the interception was adopted.","context":"The draft would have condemned Israel's interception on 4 February 1986 of a Libyan aircraft carrying Syrian officials. The United States vetoed it, saying it deplored the interception but would not accept that intercepting aircraft is always unlawful. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Australia, Denmark, France and the United Kingdom). No resolution on the interception was adopted.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2655; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/112779; https://undocs.org/en/S/17796/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/111019","notes":"The date of the interception (4 February 1986) and the presence of an official Syrian delegation on board come from the agenda letter and statements in S/PV.2655, not from the draft text, which names only a Libyan civilian aircraft. The aftermath has not been confirmed against a full list of 1986 resolutions.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":183,"un_id":183,"date":"1986-04-21","year":1986,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/18016/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2682","meeting_number":2682,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 15 April 1986 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17991)--Letter dated 15 April 1986 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Burkina Faso to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17992)--Letter dated 15 April 1986 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17993)--Letter dated 15 April 1986 from the Permanent Representative of Oman to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17994)","short_agenda":"1986 Letters from various Member States (Libya)","topic":"Libya: US air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Libya","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":5,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COG; GHA; MDG; TTO; ARE","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBY; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"The US strikes were a single operation; UCDP codes no US-Libya armed conflict in 1986, and it is below the COW war threshold.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the armed attack by the United States on Tripoli and Benghazi as a violation of the Charter, called on the United States to refrain from further attacks or threats, condemned all terrorist activities, and asked the Secretary-General to help restore peace in the central Mediterranean.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft wrongly assumed that the problem stemmed from US action against Libya, ignored Libya's campaign of terrorism against Americans and others, and would mock the Council's commitment to oppose terrorism. France, speaking through its representative in the presidency just before the vote, said that although it had not associated itself with the US intervention, the text was excessive and unbalanced and did not mention Libyan responsibility. The United Kingdom did not explain its vote at this meeting; at S/PV.2679 it had defended the US action as self-defence after evidence of direct Libyan government involvement in terrorist attacks.","aftermath":"On 20 November 1986 the General Assembly adopted resolution 41/38, which condemned the US attack on Libya of April 1986.","context":"The draft would have condemned the US air strikes of 15 April 1986 on Tripoli and Benghazi. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, and the United States said the text ignored Libyan terrorism, while France called it excessive and unbalanced for not mentioning Libyan responsibility. The vote was 9 in favour, 5 against (Australia, Denmark, France, the United Kingdom and the United States) and 1 abstention (Venezuela). The General Assembly condemned the attack in resolution 41/38 in November 1986.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2682; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/117708; https://undocs.org/en/S/18016/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/115866","notes":"France explained its vote in S/PV.2682 (the President speaking as representative of France). The United Kingdom gave no explanation in S/PV.2682; its position is from Sir John Thomson's statement in S/PV.2679. Region coded Middle East for Libya (North Africa) by MENA convention.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":184,"un_id":184,"date":"1986-05-23","year":1986,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/18087/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2686","meeting_number":2686,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in southern Africa","short_agenda":"Southern Africa","topic":"South Africa: raids on Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"South Africa","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COG; GHA; MDG; TTO; ARE","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF; BWA; ZMB; ZWE","ucdp_conflict_id":345,"ucdp_dyad_id":766,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The South African raids targeted alleged ANC bases in neighbouring States; UCDP 345 (Government of South Africa vs ANC) is active in 1986.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly condemned South Africa's military raids of 19 May 1986 on Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe, demanded compensation, and, determining that South Africa's policies were a threat to international peace and security, imposed selective sanctions: suspension of new investment and export loan guarantees, a ban on krugerrand sales, sports and cultural restrictions, and bans on new nuclear contracts and computer sales.","stated_reason":"The United States said it opposed mandatory economic sanctions because destroying South Africa's economy would harm those who suffer under apartheid and cut off Western leverage, and that each State should decide its own measures. The United Kingdom said it would have voted for all operative paragraphs except paragraph 6 on sanctions, and would not take steps that could undermine the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group initiative.","aftermath":"No resolution on the raids was adopted. A similar draft on a South African attack on Angola, with the same sanctions, was vetoed in June 1986 (S/18163).","context":"The draft would have condemned South Africa's raids on three neighbouring States and imposed selective sanctions. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it because of the sanctions paragraph, the United Kingdom saying it would have backed the rest of the text. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention (France). The United Kingdom had asked for a paragraph-by-paragraph vote, which the sponsors refused.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2686; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/118045; https://undocs.org/en/S/18087/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/118080","notes":"The draft does not name the ANC; speakers in S/PV.2686 (e.g. Madagascar) refer to the raids as aimed at the ANC.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":185,"un_id":185,"date":"1986-06-18","year":1986,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/18163","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2693","meeting_number":2693,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Complaint by Angola against South Africa","short_agenda":"Complaint by Angola against South Africa","topic":"Angola: South African attack on the port of Namibe","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Angola","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COG; GHA; MDG; TTO; ARE","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"AGO; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":327,"ucdp_dyad_id":714,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"South Africa fought in Angola in support of UNITA; UCDP 327 (Government of Angola vs UNITA) lists South Africa as secondary party on side B in 1986.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned South Africa for its attack on the Angolan port of Namibe and its occupation of parts of Angola, demanded withdrawal and compensation, asked States to strengthen the defence capabilities of Angola and other front-line States, and imposed selective sanctions on South Africa (new investment, krugerrands, export loans, sports and culture, nuclear contracts, computers).","stated_reason":"The United Kingdom said it condemned the attack but could not accept the call for mandatory selective sanctions under Chapter VII, since economic boycotts do not work and it would not be pushed into measures before consulting its Commonwealth and European partners. The United States cited the lack of independent fact-finding, rejected the call to assist Angola's military capabilities, and opposed mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII.","aftermath":"On 25 November 1987 the Council adopted resolution 602 (1987), condemning South Africa's continued incursions into Angola, without sanctions.","context":"The draft would have condemned South Africa's attack on Namibe and its occupation of parts of Angola and imposed selective sanctions. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, both objecting to mandatory sanctions and the United States also to the call to strengthen Angola's defences. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention (France). In November 1987 the Council adopted resolution 602 (1987), which condemned South African incursions into Angola without sanctions.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2693; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/118451; https://undocs.org/en/S/18163; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/118478","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":186,"un_id":186,"date":"1986-07-31","year":1986,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/18250","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2704","meeting_number":2704,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 22 July 1986 from the Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/18230)","short_agenda":"1986 Letter from Nicaragua (Nicaragua)","topic":"Nicaragua: compliance with the ICJ judgment of 27 June 1986","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Nicaragua","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COG; GHA; MDG; TTO; ARE","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NIC; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":336,"ucdp_dyad_id":742,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The ICJ judgment concerned US support for the Contras (UCDP 336, Government of Nicaragua vs Contras, active 1986).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have reaffirmed the role of the International Court of Justice, made an urgent call for full compliance with its judgment of 27 June 1986 in the case of Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, and called on all States to refrain from actions that might impede the Contadora Group's peace objectives.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Court had asserted jurisdiction without proper basis, and that the draft would give a false picture of Central America as a dispute between Nicaragua and the United States and ignored Nicaragua's own responsibility.","aftermath":"A shorter draft calling for compliance with the judgment was vetoed on 28 October 1986 (S/18428). The General Assembly called for full and immediate compliance in resolution 41/31 of 3 November 1986.","context":"The draft would have called for full compliance with the ICJ judgment that found US support for the Contras and the mining of ports unlawful. The United States vetoed it, saying the Court lacked jurisdiction and the text ignored Nicaragua's conduct. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (France, Thailand and the United Kingdom). The United States vetoed a shorter draft on the judgment in October 1986.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2704; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/119215; https://undocs.org/en/S/18250; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/119176","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":187,"un_id":187,"date":"1986-10-28","year":1986,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/18428","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2718","meeting_number":2718,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 17 October 1986 from the Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/18415)","short_agenda":"1986 Letter from Nicaragua (Nicaragua)","topic":"Nicaragua: compliance with the ICJ judgment (second draft)","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Nicaragua","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COG; GHA; MDG; TTO; ARE","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NIC; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":336,"ucdp_dyad_id":742,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The ICJ judgment concerned US support for the Contras (UCDP 336, active 1986).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have urgently called for full and immediate compliance with the judgment of the International Court of Justice of 27 June 1986 in the case of Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, and asked the Secretary-General to report.","stated_reason":"The United States said, as in July, that the draft would not help a peaceful settlement in Central America, that the Court had neither jurisdiction nor competence to give the judgment, and that the text ignored Nicaragua's responsibility for the situation.","aftermath":"On 3 November 1986 the General Assembly adopted resolution 41/31, calling for full and immediate compliance with the judgment.","context":"This two-paragraph draft would have called only for compliance with the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the Nicaragua case. The United States vetoed it for the reasons it gave in July, saying the Court lacked jurisdiction. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (France, Thailand and the United Kingdom). The General Assembly called for full compliance in resolution 41/31 on 3 November 1986.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2718; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/122518; https://undocs.org/en/S/18428; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/123485","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Madagascar","member_iso3c":"MDG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Thailand","member_iso3c":"THA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Trinidad and Tobago","member_iso3c":"TTO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":188,"un_id":188,"date":"1987-02-20","year":1987,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/18705","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2738","meeting_number":2738,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The question of South Africa","short_agenda":"South Africa","topic":"South Africa: mandatory selective sanctions","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"South Africa","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG; COG; GHA; ARE; ZMB","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":345,"ucdp_dyad_id":766,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns pressure on the South African government over apartheid; UCDP 345 (Government of South Africa vs ANC) is active in 1987.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have determined that apartheid was a serious threat to international peace and security and, under Chapter VII, imposed mandatory sanctions on South Africa, including bans on krugerrand imports, loans, air links, nuclear trade, new investment, imports of uranium, coal, iron, steel and agricultural products, and oil exports.","stated_reason":"The United States said mandatory sanctions would not end apartheid peacefully, would destroy the South African economy, harm black South Africans and neighbouring States and increase repression, that each State should choose its own measures, and that the Council could not agree on when to lift them. The United Kingdom did not speak at this meeting; in the debate (S/PV.2736, 19 February 1987) it said punitive economic sanctions were not an effective way to end apartheid, would exacerbate the conflict, encourage a siege mentality among white South Africans, harm neighbouring States and undermine the political contacts needed to press for reform.","aftermath":"The Council did not adopt mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa; its mandatory measures remained the arms embargo of resolution 418 (1977).","context":"The draft would have imposed a long list of mandatory trade, financial and transport sanctions on South Africa under Chapter VII. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the United States saying mandatory sanctions would harm the people they aimed to help. The vote was 10 in favour, 3 against (the United Kingdom, the United States and West Germany) and 2 abstentions (France and Japan). The Council's only mandatory measure against South Africa remained the arms embargo of resolution 418 (1977).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2738; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/129224; https://undocs.org/en/S/18705; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/129021; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2736","notes":"DEU is used for the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). The United Kingdom gave no explanation in S/PV.2738; its position is from its statement in the debate at S/PV.2736.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":189,"un_id":189,"date":"1987-04-09","year":1987,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/18785","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2747","meeting_number":2747,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Namibia","short_agenda":"Namibia","topic":"Namibia: comprehensive mandatory sanctions on South Africa","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Decolonization and self-determination","situation":"Namibia","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG; COG; GHA; ARE; ZMB","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"NAM; ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":298,"ucdp_dyad_id":641,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns South Africa's occupation of Namibia; UCDP 298 (Government of South Africa vs SWAPO, territory Namibia) is active in 1987.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia, rejected linkage of Namibian independence to extraneous issues, determined that the occupation was a breach of international peace and security, and imposed comprehensive mandatory sanctions on South Africa under Chapter VII.","stated_reason":"At the morning meeting the same day (S/PV.2746), the United Kingdom said it could not vote for mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII because they would be counter-productive and give South Africa an excuse to remain intransigent. The United States said it remained opposed to mandatory sanctions, that each State should be free to choose its own measures, and that such sanctions would limit the initiative of States seeking to bring about implementation of resolution 435 (1978).","aftermath":"Namibia became independent on 21 March 1990 after the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978) was implemented from April 1989.","context":"The draft would have imposed comprehensive mandatory sanctions on South Africa over its occupation of Namibia. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, both saying mandatory sanctions would not advance Namibian independence. The vote was 9 in favour, 3 against (the United Kingdom, the United States and West Germany) and 3 abstentions (France, Italy and Japan). Namibia became independent in 1990 under the settlement plan of resolution 435 (1978).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2747; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/39636; https://undocs.org/en/S/18785; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/132875; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/133791","notes":"DEU is used for the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). The UN Digital Library record lists Afghanistan as a sponsor; the draft itself reads Argentina, Congo, Ghana, United Arab Emirates and Zambia, and Argentina is used. US and UK reasons are from S/PV.2746 (morning meeting, same day); neither explained its vote in S/PV.2747 apart from a UK right of reply.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":190,"un_id":190,"date":"1988-01-18","year":1988,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/19434","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2784","meeting_number":2784,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli attacks and encroachment in southern Lebanon","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; ARG; NPL; SEN; YUG; ZMB","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli military action in southern Lebanon in 1987-88; UCDP codes Israel vs Hezbollah (426) only from 1990, so no clear match.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored repeated Israeli attacks on Lebanese territory and measures against civilians, requested that Israel stop encroaching on land, building roads and fences across the border and trying to change the status of Lebanese territory, and reaffirmed the demand for Israeli withdrawal under resolutions 425 and 509.","stated_reason":"The United States said peace could not come to southern Lebanon until the Israel-Lebanon border was secure, that the area was used for terrorist raids and rocket attacks on Israel, and that resolutions without concern for the security of northern Israel would have no effect.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed a further draft on southern Lebanon, after an Israeli incursion, in May 1988 (S/19868).","context":"The non-aligned draft would have deplored Israeli attacks on Lebanon and border encroachments and called again for Israeli withdrawal. The United States vetoed it, saying it ignored attacks on northern Israel from Lebanon. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). The United States vetoed a further draft on southern Lebanon in May 1988.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2784; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/154156; https://undocs.org/en/S/19434; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153949","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":191,"un_id":191,"date":"1988-02-01","year":1988,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/19466","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2790","meeting_number":2790,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Fourth Geneva Convention during the intifada","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; ARG; NPL; SEN; YUG; ZMB","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli conduct during the first intifada; UCDP 234 (Israel vs PLO and others, territory Palestine) is active in 1988.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called on Israel to accept the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the territories occupied since 1967 and comply with it, called on Israel to stop violating Palestinians' human rights, asked Israel to facilitate the work of the ICRC and UNRWA, and asked the Secretary-General to monitor the situation and promote a settlement.","stated_reason":"The United States said the three resolutions adopted since the unrest began in December 1987 had expressed the Council's views, that further resolutions were redundant and could detract from diplomatic efforts, and that the draft tried to impose a negotiating process on the parties.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed a further draft on deportations and the conduct of Israeli forces on 15 April 1988 (S/19780).","context":"The draft, the fourth Council text on the West Bank and Gaza since the intifada began, would have called on Israel to accept and apply the Fourth Geneva Convention. The United States vetoed it, saying the Council had already stated its views in resolutions 605, 607 and 608 and that further texts would hinder diplomacy. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2790; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/155832; https://undocs.org/en/S/19466; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153950","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":192,"un_id":192,"date":"1988-03-08","year":1988,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/19585","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2797","meeting_number":2797,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The question of South Africa","short_agenda":"South Africa","topic":"South Africa: mandatory sanctions after the banning of 17 organizations","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"South Africa","vetoed_by":"US; UK","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; ARG; NPL; SEN; YUG; ZMB","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ZAF","ucdp_conflict_id":345,"ucdp_dyad_id":766,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns pressure on the South African government over apartheid; UCDP 345 (Government of South Africa vs ANC) is active in 1988.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned increased repression in South Africa, including the restriction of 17 organizations and 18 individuals in February 1988, determined that apartheid was a serious threat to international peace and security, and imposed mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII: an end to new investment and loans, bans on iron and steel imports and krugerrand sales, an end to trade promotion and to military and police cooperation, and an oil embargo.","stated_reason":"The United States said it condemned South Africa's banning of opposition groups but that mandatory sanctions would weaken those seeking a non-violent end to apartheid, harm the black majority and the economies of the region, and would not work. The United Kingdom said before the vote that the call for sanctions under Chapter VII was language it could not accept, that mandatory economic sanctions would worsen the prospects for peaceful change and stiffen those resisting it, and that each country should decide its own measures; it had already adopted most of the measures in the draft as political signals.","aftermath":"The Council did not adopt mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa; its mandatory measures remained the arms embargo of resolution 418 (1977).","context":"The draft would have responded to South Africa's banning of 17 anti-apartheid organizations by imposing mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII. The United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the United Kingdom saying mandatory sanctions would worsen the prospects for peaceful change and the United States that they would hurt black South Africans. The vote was 10 in favour, 2 against and 3 abstentions (France, Japan and West Germany). The Council's only mandatory measure against South Africa remained the arms embargo of resolution 418 (1977).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2797; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/158144; https://undocs.org/en/S/19585; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/158700","notes":"The record lists the abstainers explicitly: \"Abstaining: France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Japan\"; the Federal Republic of Germany also said it would abstain. DEU is used for the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). The United Kingdom explained its vote before the vote in S/PV.2797 (Sir Crispin Tickell).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":193,"un_id":193,"date":"1988-04-15","year":1988,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/19780","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2806","meeting_number":2806,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: deportations and shooting of Palestinians","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; ARG; NPL; SEN; YUG; ZMB","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli conduct during the first intifada; UCDP 234 is active in 1988.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have urged Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind the order to deport Palestinian civilians and allow the return of those deported, and to stop deportations, condemned Israeli policies that violated Palestinians' human rights, in particular the opening of fire on civilians, and asked the Secretary-General for periodic reports.","stated_reason":"The United States said its position on the Fourth Geneva Convention and its opposition to deportations were unchanged, but that the draft was redundant and inappropriate, lacked balance and contained no appeal for calm.","aftermath":"The United States cast further vetoes on drafts on the occupied territories in February, June and November 1989 (S/20463, S/20677, S/20945/Rev.1).","context":"The draft would have urged Israel to stop deporting Palestinians and condemned the shooting of civilians during the intifada. The United States vetoed it, saying the text lacked balance and duplicated earlier resolutions. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The United States vetoed three further drafts on the occupied territories in 1989.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2806; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/160718; https://undocs.org/en/S/19780; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153951","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":194,"un_id":194,"date":"1988-05-10","year":1988,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/19868","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2814","meeting_number":2814,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli incursion into southern Lebanon, May 1988","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; ARG; NPL; SEN; YUG; ZMB","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"The May 1988 incursion targeted Hezbollah and others, but UCDP codes Israel vs Hezbollah (426) only from 1990; no clear match for 1988.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the recent invasion of southern Lebanon by Israeli forces, repeated the call for the immediate withdrawal of all Israeli forces and an end to acts violating Lebanese sovereignty and the security of civilians, and reaffirmed resolutions 425, 426 and 509.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council should not address southern Lebanon in texts that fail to recognize attacks and reprisals on both sides of the border, that armed Palestinian elements and Hezbollah had repeatedly tried to enter Israel from Lebanon, and that it could not accept a text that did not acknowledge hostile acts against Israel from Lebanon.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed a further draft, on an Israeli attack on Lebanon, in December 1988 (S/20322).","context":"The draft would have condemned Israel's incursion into southern Lebanon in early May 1988 and called for withdrawal. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored attacks on Israel from Lebanese territory. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The United States vetoed a further draft on an Israeli attack on Lebanon in December 1988.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2814; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/40066; https://undocs.org/en/S/19868; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153952","notes":"The draft says only \"the recent invasion\"; speakers in S/PV.2814 name the villages of Maydoun (Meidoun) and Ain al-Tina.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":195,"un_id":195,"date":"1988-12-14","year":1988,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/20322","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2832","meeting_number":2832,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Lebanon)","topic":"Lebanon: Israeli attack of 9 December 1988","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Lebanon","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; ARG; NPL; SEN; YUG; ZMB","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBN; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"The 9 December 1988 raid struck a PFLP-GC base near Naameh; PFLP-GC is coded as side B of UCDP 234 (Israel vs Palestinian groups) in 1989 and within the Rejectionist Front in 1988. Match is tentative.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored the attack on Lebanese territory by Israeli naval, air and land forces on 9 December 1988, requested that Israel stop all attacks on Lebanese territory, and reaffirmed resolutions 425, 426 and 509 on Israeli withdrawal.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft criticized one party and ignored attacks from the other side of the border, and that by requesting that Israel cease all attacks regardless of provocation it would deny Israel its inherent right of self-defence.","aftermath":"No resolution on the attack was adopted.","context":"The draft would have deplored Israel's combined land, sea and air attack in Lebanon on 9 December 1988. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored attacks on Israel and would deny Israel the right of self-defence. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. No resolution on the attack was adopted.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2832; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/53063; https://undocs.org/en/S/20322; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153953","notes":"The draft does not name the target of the raid; the PFLP-GC is named in the debate (S/PV.2832), so the UCDP match is tentative. The aftermath has not been confirmed against a full list of resolutions.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"West Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zambia","member_iso3c":"ZMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":196,"un_id":196,"date":"1989-01-11","year":1989,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/20378","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2841","meeting_number":2841,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 4 January 1989 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/20364)--Letter dated 4 January 1989 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Bahrain to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/20367)","short_agenda":"1989 Letters from Libya and Bahrain (Libya)","topic":"Libya: US downing of two Libyan aircraft, January 1989","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Libya","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":4,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; COL; ETH; MYS; NPL; SEN; YUG","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"LBY; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"A single air engagement; UCDP codes no US-Libya armed conflict in 1989.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deplored the downing of two Libyan reconnaissance planes by US forces, called on the United States to suspend its military manoeuvres off the Libyan coast, called on all parties to refrain from force, and asked the United States and Libya to cooperate with the Secretary-General to settle their differences.","stated_reason":"The United States said its pilots acted lawfully in self-defence under Article 51 against armed fighter aircraft showing hostile intent, and that the text was inconsistent with freedom of navigation. France said the text was unbalanced, that its reference to the Definition of Aggression implied deliberate US intent, and that paragraph 2 questioned freedom of navigation. The United Kingdom said the draft was couched in the wrong terms and proceeded from wrong assumptions.","aftermath":"No resolution on the incident was adopted.","context":"The draft would have deplored the shooting down of two Libyan aircraft by US Navy fighters on 4 January 1989 and asked the United States to suspend manoeuvres off Libya. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the United States saying its pilots had acted in self-defence. The vote was 9 in favour, 4 against (Canada, France, the United Kingdom and the United States) and 2 abstentions (Brazil and Finland). No resolution on the incident was adopted.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2841; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/54679; https://undocs.org/en/S/20378; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/54658","notes":"Region coded Middle East for Libya (North Africa) by MENA convention. The date of the incident (4 January 1989) is from the agenda letters and the UK statement.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":197,"un_id":197,"date":"1989-02-17","year":1989,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/20463","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2850","meeting_number":2850,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Israeli practices during the intifada","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; COL; ETH; MYS; NPL; SEN; YUG","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli conduct during the first intifada; UCDP 234 is active in 1989.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored Israeli policies and practices against Palestinians in the territories occupied since 1967, in particular the opening of fire that killed and wounded civilians including children, deplored Israel's disregard of Council decisions, confirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies, called for maximum restraint, and asked the Secretary-General to follow the situation.","stated_reason":"The United States said it held that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies and opposed expulsions, collective punishment and live fire in non-life-threatening situations, but that the draft did not take into account the context of Palestinian violence and was unbalanced.","aftermath":"A further draft on the occupied territories was vetoed on 9 June 1989 (S/20677).","context":"The draft would have deplored Israel's use of fire against Palestinian civilians during the intifada. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored Palestinian violence. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The United States vetoed a further draft on the occupied territories in June 1989.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2850; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83389; https://undocs.org/en/S/20463; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153954","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":198,"un_id":198,"date":"1989-06-09","year":1989,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/20677","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2867","meeting_number":2867,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: deportations, settler attacks and school closures","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; COL; ETH; MYS; NPL; SEN; YUG","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli conduct during the first intifada; UCDP 234 is active in 1989.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored Israeli practices violating Palestinians' human rights, vigilante attacks on Palestinian towns and the desecration of the Koran, called on Israel to accept the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention, demanded an end to deportations, called for schools to reopen, and asked the Secretary-General to monitor the situation and recommend ways to protect Palestinian civilians.","stated_reason":"The United States said it agreed with much of the text, including the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention and opposition to deportations and school closures, but that the draft was unbalanced, made sweeping condemnations of Israel without reference to violence by the other side, and did not call on all parties to reduce tensions.","aftermath":"On 6 July 1989 the Council adopted resolution 636 (1989), which deplored Israel's continued deportation of Palestinian civilians, with the United States abstaining.","context":"The draft would have deplored Israeli practices in the occupied territories, demanded an end to deportations and asked the Secretary-General to recommend ways to protect civilians. The United States, which held the presidency, vetoed it, saying the text was unbalanced. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. A month later the Council adopted resolution 636 on deportations, with the United States abstaining.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2867; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/62618; https://undocs.org/en/S/20677; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153955; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2870","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":199,"un_id":199,"date":"1989-11-07","year":1989,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/20945/Rev.1","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2889","meeting_number":2889,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: siege of Beit Sahur and confiscation of property","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; COL; ETH; MYS; NPL; SEN; YUG","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Concerns Israeli conduct during the first intifada; UCDP 234 is active in 1989.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored Israeli practices in the occupied territory, in particular the siege of towns, the ransacking of homes at Beit Sahur and the confiscation of property, called on Israel to lift the siege and return the property, reaffirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies, and asked the Secretary-General to act.","stated_reason":"The United States said it opposed administrative detention, deportation, house demolitions and other collective punishment and had raised the blockade of Beit Sahur with Israel, but that the draft criticized Israel without regard to the security situation or to violence by Palestinians, and that it opposed the request for on-site monitoring by the Secretary-General as implying a permanent presence.","aftermath":"The United States vetoed a further draft on the occupied territories on 31 May 1990 (S/21326).","context":"The draft would have deplored Israel's siege of the West Bank town of Beit Sahur during a tax strike and the seizure of residents' property. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored Palestinian violence and objecting to on-site monitoring by the Secretary-General. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The United States vetoed a further draft on the occupied territories in May 1990.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2889; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/81327; https://undocs.org/en/S/20945/Rev.1; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153956","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":200,"un_id":200,"date":"1989-12-23","year":1989,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/21048","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2902","meeting_number":2902,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Panama","short_agenda":"Panama","topic":"Panama: US military intervention","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Panama","vetoed_by":"France; US; UK","n_vetoing":3,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":1,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":1,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":4,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; COL; ETH; MYS; NPL; SEN; YUG","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PAN; USA","ucdp_conflict_id":368,"ucdp_dyad_id":796,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"UCDP 368 codes the 1989 conflict between the Government of Panama and the Government of the United States.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have strongly deplored the intervention in Panama by US armed forces as a flagrant violation of international law and of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, demanded the immediate end of the intervention and the withdrawal of US forces, and asked the Secretary-General to report within 24 hours.","stated_reason":"The United States said it acted in self-defence and to protect the Panama Canal Treaties, consistent with Article 51 of the Charter and article 21 of the OAS Charter, and that the action was welcomed by the democratically elected Government and people of Panama. France said the text was unbalanced, ignored the events that preceded the intervention and could imply support for a regime France held illegitimate. The United Kingdom said the draft was seriously unbalanced, failed to welcome a democratically elected Government, and ignored the Noriega regime's violence and the fact that the United States used force as a last resort.","aftermath":"On 29 December 1989 the General Assembly adopted resolution 44/240, which strongly deplored the US intervention in Panama.","context":"The draft would have deplored the US invasion of Panama of 20 December 1989 and demanded withdrawal. France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed it, the United States saying it acted in self-defence and France and the United Kingdom saying the text ignored the nature of the Noriega regime. The vote was 10 in favour, 4 against (Canada, France, the United Kingdom and the United States) and 1 abstention (Finland). The General Assembly deplored the intervention six days later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2902; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/81836; https://undocs.org/en/S/21048; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/81789","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nepal","member_iso3c":"NPL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yugoslavia","member_iso3c":"YUG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":201,"un_id":201,"date":"1990-01-17","year":1990,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/21084","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2905","meeting_number":2905,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 3 January 1990 from the Charge d'Affairs ad interim of the permanent mission of Nicaragua to the United Nations adressed to the President of the Security Council (S/21066)","short_agenda":"1990 Letter from Nicaragua (Panama)","topic":"Panama: entry of US troops into Nicaraguan ambassador's residence","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Panama","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COL; CIV; CUB; YMD; ETH; MYS; COD","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"USA; PAN; NIC","ucdp_conflict_id":368,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns US troops entering the Nicaraguan ambassador's residence in Panama City on 29 Dec 1989, during the US invasion. UCDP codes the Panama-US conflict for 1989 only.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have declared the entry of US troops into the residence of the Nicaraguan ambassador in Panama City on 29 December 1989 a violation of diplomatic privileges and immunities under the Vienna Conventions and demanded respect for the inviolability of diplomatic premises.","stated_reason":"The United States said it had already admitted the error and expressed regret to Nicaragua, that the matter posed no threat to international peace and security, and that Nicaragua was using the Council for propaganda.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the matter.","context":"Seven non-aligned members tabled the draft, which would have declared the entry of US troops into the Nicaraguan ambassador's residence in Panama City a breach of diplomatic immunity. The United States vetoed it, saying it had already apologized and that the incident was not a matter for the Council. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2905; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/84124; https://undocs.org/en/S/21084; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/83288","notes":"The meeting record S/PV.2905 (p. 36) shows only the United States voting against; the United Kingdom abstained and France voted in favour. The joint US/UK/French veto that sources often cite for Panama was cast on 23 December 1989 on draft S/21048 about the US invasion, not on S/21084. Country codes: YMD used for Democratic Yemen (South Yemen, code withdrawn 1990); RUS used for the USSR; COD for Zaire. Vote taken 17 January 1990; the draft is dated 16 January 1990.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Democratic Yemen","member_iso3c":"YMD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":202,"un_id":202,"date":"1990-05-31","year":1990,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/21326","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.2926","meeting_number":2926,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Council commission on occupied territories","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"COL; CIV; CUB; ETH; MYS; YEM; COD","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":476,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict (territory: Palestine).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have set up a commission of three Council members to go at once to the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and report by 20 June 1990 on ways to protect Palestinian civilians.","stated_reason":"The United States said it preferred a special envoy of the Secretary-General, and that a Council commission would not help the peace process and could be used to stir up more dispute in the region.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote. The United States continued to press for a mission by an envoy of the Secretary-General.","context":"After the killing of seven Palestinian workers at Rishon LeZion on 20 May 1990, non-aligned members proposed that three Council members examine Israeli practices in the occupied territories. The United States vetoed the draft, saying it preferred an envoy of the Secretary-General and that a commission would not help the peace process. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The Council took no further action on the text.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.2926; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/91486; https://undocs.org/en/S/21326; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/153957","notes":"The meeting record S/PV.2926 is of poor quality, but the vote list (14-1-0, only the United States against) is legible. RUS used for the USSR; YEM for the Republic of Yemen (unified 22 May 1990); COD for Zaire.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cuba","member_iso3c":"CUB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Finland","member_iso3c":"FIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"USSR","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Yemen","member_iso3c":"YEM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Zaire","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":203,"un_id":203,"date":"1993-05-11","year":1993,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/25693","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3211","meeting_number":3211,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Cyprus","short_agenda":"Cyprus","topic":"Cyprus: UNFICYP financing","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Cyprus","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GBR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"GBR","countries_iso3c":"CYP","ucdp_conflict_id":323,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns UNFICYP, the force deployed for the Cyprus conflict. Nearest UCDP conflict is Cyprus-Turkey (1974). No armed conflict in 1993.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have made the costs of the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) expenses of the Organization under Article 17(2) of the Charter from its next mandate renewal, and would have restructured the force.","stated_reason":"Russia said it could not agree to move UNFICYP from voluntary to assessed financing, which would leave no peacekeeping operation funded on a voluntary basis.","aftermath":"On 27 May 1993 the Council adopted resolution 831 (1993) on the mandate, financing and restructuring of UNFICYP, which kept voluntary contributions and put the remaining costs on assessed contributions.","context":"The United Kingdom's draft would have moved the costs of UNFICYP to assessed contributions and restructured the force. Russia vetoed it, saying it opposed ending voluntary financing of the operation. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. On 27 May 1993 the Council adopted resolution 831 (1993), which kept voluntary contributions and put the remaining costs on assessed contributions.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3211; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/170094; https://undocs.org/en/S/25693; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/166994; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/831(1993)","notes":"The penholder is based on the UK representative's statement in S/PV.3211 that his delegation brought the draft to the Council. Draft dated 29 April 1993, vote 11 May 1993.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Cabo Verde","member_iso3c":"CPV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Djibouti","member_iso3c":"DJI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Hungary","member_iso3c":"HUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Morocco","member_iso3c":"MAR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":204,"un_id":204,"date":"1994-12-02","year":1994,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/1994/1358","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3475","meeting_number":3475,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina","short_agenda":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","topic":"Bosnia and Herzegovina: sanctions on goods crossing the Yugoslav border","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BIH; HRV; DJI; EGY; NGA; OMN; PAK; RWA; TUR","n_sponsors":9,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"BIH; HRV; SRB","ucdp_conflict_id":389,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns sanctions on Bosnian Serb forces. Matched to Bosnia-Herzegovina government vs Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have reconfirmed that the sanctions in earlier resolutions applied to all goods crossing the border between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, including goods bound for the UN Protected Areas in Croatia.","stated_reason":"Russia said tightening the sanctions on the Bosnian and Krajina Serbs was untimely and politically unacceptable because Belgrade was cooperating with the Contact Group and an economic agreement had just been signed in Zagreb and Knin.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote.","context":"Non-aligned members, with Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Turkey, sponsored the draft, which would have reconfirmed the sanctions on goods crossing from Yugoslavia into Bosnia and Herzegovina, including goods for the Krajina Serbs in Croatia. Russia vetoed it, saying Belgrade was cooperating with mediators and that tighter sanctions were politically unacceptable at that time. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (China). No revised text was put to a vote.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3475; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/168205; https://undocs.org/en/S/1994/1358; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/167837","notes":"Among the countries concerned, SRB denotes the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Czech Republic","member_iso3c":"CZE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Djibouti","member_iso3c":"DJI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Oman","member_iso3c":"OMN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Rwanda","member_iso3c":"RWA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":205,"un_id":205,"date":"1995-05-17","year":1995,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/1995/394","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3538","meeting_number":3538,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: land expropriation in East Jerusalem","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BWA; HND; IDN; NGA; OMN; RWA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":478,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have confirmed that Israel's expropriation of land in East Jerusalem was invalid and called on Israel to rescind the expropriation orders.","stated_reason":"The United States said the Council should not take a position on Jerusalem, a permanent-status issue that the Declaration of Principles left to direct talks between the parties.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote. Israel suspended the expropriation orders shortly afterwards.","context":"The draft would have declared Israel's expropriation of land in East Jerusalem invalid and asked Israel to rescind the orders. The United States vetoed it, its first veto in five years, saying Jerusalem was a permanent-status issue left to the parties under the Declaration of Principles. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3538; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/180369; https://undocs.org/en/S/1995/394; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/179810; https://unispal.un.org/pdfs/A1C4AFD7804DBFC1852561D90075C070.pdf","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Botswana","member_iso3c":"BWA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Czech Republic","member_iso3c":"CZE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Honduras","member_iso3c":"HND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Oman","member_iso3c":"OMN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Rwanda","member_iso3c":"RWA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":206,"un_id":206,"date":"1996-11-19","year":1996,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/1996/952","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3714","meeting_number":3714,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Consideration of the question of the appointment of the Secretary-General","short_agenda":"Appointment of Secretary-General","topic":"UN Secretary-General: second term for Boutros-Ghali","region":"Global","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BWA; CHL; CHN; EGY; FRA; DEU; GNB; HND; IDN; RUS","n_sponsors":10,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Appointment of the Secretary-General.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that Boutros Boutros-Ghali be appointed Secretary-General for a second term from 1 January 1997 to 31 December 2001.","stated_reason":null,"aftermath":"After further consultations the Council adopted resolution 1090 (1996) on 13 December 1996, recommending Kofi Annan as Secretary-General.","context":"The draft would have recommended a second term for Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. In a closed meeting the vote was 14 in favour and 1 against; the Council's communiqué names only \"a permanent member\" as voting against. The United States had said publicly that it would block a second term. On 13 December 1996 the Council recommended Kofi Annan in resolution 1090 (1996).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3714; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/223906; https://undocs.org/en/S/1996/952; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/228554","notes":"S/PV.3714 is a communiqué of a closed meeting; the vote was by secret ballot, so no roll call exists. The communiqué says only that the negative vote was cast by a permanent member; the United States said publicly that it opposed a second term, which is the basis for listing USA. The members voting in favour are therefore not listed (the other 14 members in 1996 were BWA, CHL, CHN, EGY, FRA, DEU, GNB, HND, IDN, ITA, POL, KOR, RUS, GBR). No US statement of reasons is in the record, so no stated reason is given.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":207,"un_id":207,"date":"1997-01-10","year":1997,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/1997/18","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3730","meeting_number":3730,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Central America: efforts towards peace","short_agenda":"Central America","topic":"Guatemala: military observers for MINUGUA","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Guatemala","vetoed_by":"China","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ARG; CHL; COL; CRI; MEX; NOR; PRT; ESP; SWE; GBR; USA; VEN","n_sponsors":12,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GTM","ucdp_conflict_id":233,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns UN observers for the Guatemalan peace agreement of Dec 1996. UCDP codes Guatemala-URNG to 1995.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have authorized for three months the attachment of 155 military observers and medical staff to MINUGUA to verify the ceasefire agreement between the Government of Guatemala and the URNG.","stated_reason":"China said it supported the Guatemalan peace process but opposed the draft because Guatemala had for four years backed Taiwan's bid for UN membership and had invited Taiwanese authorities to the peace signing ceremony.","aftermath":"After talks between China and Guatemala, the Council adopted resolution 1094 (1997) on 20 January 1997, authorizing the military observers.","context":"The draft would have added 155 military observers to the UN mission in Guatemala to verify the ceasefire that ended the civil war. China vetoed it, citing Guatemala's support for Taiwan at the United Nations and its invitation to Taiwan to the peace signing. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. Ten days later the Council adopted resolution 1094 (1997), which authorized the observers.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3730; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/230239; https://undocs.org/en/S/1997/18; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/230183; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1094(1997); https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3732","notes":"The adoption of resolution 1094 (1997) on 20 January 1997 is confirmed by the UN Digital Library.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea-Bissau","member_iso3c":"GNB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":208,"un_id":208,"date":"1997-03-07","year":1997,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/1997/199","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3747","meeting_number":3747,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Har Homa settlement (first draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; PRT; SWE; GBR","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called on Israel to refrain from actions, including settlement activity, that change the facts on the ground in East Jerusalem and prejudge final-status talks, and to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.","stated_reason":"The United States said it opposed the Israeli decision to build at Har Homa but that the Council should not intervene in issues left to the parties' permanent-status negotiations.","aftermath":"The General Assembly took up the issue and adopted resolution 51/223 on 13 March 1997; a second draft was vetoed in the Council on 21 March 1997.","context":"France, Portugal, Sweden and the United Kingdom tabled the draft, which would have called on Israel to stop settlement activity in East Jerusalem after its decision to build at Har Homa/Jabal Abu Ghneim. The United States vetoed it, saying it opposed the decision but that the issue belonged to the parties' own negotiations. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The General Assembly then took up the matter, and a second Council draft was vetoed two weeks later.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3747; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/231895; https://undocs.org/en/S/1997/199; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/231834; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/51/223; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A%2FRES%2F51%2F223","notes":"The UN Digital Library record of General Assembly resolution 51/223 shows it as issued on 14 March 1997.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea-Bissau","member_iso3c":"GNB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":209,"un_id":209,"date":"1997-03-21","year":1997,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/1997/241","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3756","meeting_number":3756,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the occupied Arab territories","short_agenda":"Occupied Arab territories","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Har Homa settlement (second draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"EGY; QAT","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded that Israel stop building the Jabal Abu Ghneim settlement in East Jerusalem and all other settlement activity in the occupied territories.","stated_reason":"The United States said it did not support the construction but that the dispute could be resolved only by the parties and not by the Council or other outside bodies.","aftermath":"The General Assembly met in its tenth emergency special session from April 1997 and adopted resolution ES-10/2 on 25 April 1997.","context":"Egypt and Qatar tabled the draft, which would have demanded that Israel stop building at Jabal Abu Ghneim and halt all settlement activity. The United States vetoed it, its second veto on the issue that month, saying only the parties could settle the dispute. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Costa Rica). The General Assembly then convened its tenth emergency special session under the Uniting for Peace procedure.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3756; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/232366; https://undocs.org/en/S/1997/241; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/232360; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/2","notes":"The details of the General Assembly follow-up have not been confirmed against the Assembly's records.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea-Bissau","member_iso3c":"GNB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":210,"un_id":210,"date":"1999-02-25","year":1999,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/1999/201","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.3982","meeting_number":3982,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia","short_agenda":"FYR Macedonia","topic":"Macedonia: UNPREDEP renewal","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"North Macedonia","vetoed_by":"China","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"CAN; FRA; DEU; ITA; NLD; SVN; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"MKD","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Preventive deployment (UNPREDEP). No armed conflict in Macedonia in 1999; the 2001 conflict (UCDP 417) came later.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended the mandate of the UN Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP) in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for six months until 31 August 1999.","stated_reason":"China said peacekeeping operations should not be open-ended, that the situation in the country had stabilized and the mission's goal had been met, and that UN resources were needed for Africa and other regions.","aftermath":"UNPREDEP's mandate expired on 28 February 1999 and the force was withdrawn.","context":"The draft would have extended UNPREDEP, the UN preventive force in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, for six months. China vetoed it, saying the mission had met its goal and that peacekeeping should not be open-ended. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Russia). The mandate lapsed on 28 February 1999.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.3982; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1489513; https://undocs.org/en/S/1999/201; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1494415; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1186(1998)","notes":"Many observers linked China's veto to Skopje's recognition of Taiwan in January 1999; China did not say so in S/PV.3982, and the description of this veto does not reflect it.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bahrain","member_iso3c":"BHR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Canada","member_iso3c":"CAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gambia","member_iso3c":"GMB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Namibia","member_iso3c":"NAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":211,"un_id":211,"date":"2001-03-27","year":2001,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/2001/270","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4305","meeting_number":4305,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian Question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: protection mechanism and UN observer force","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":1,"sponsors":"BGD; COL; JAM; MLI; MUS; SGP; TUN","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called for an end to violence and a return to pre-September 2000 positions, and expressed the Council's readiness to set up a mechanism to protect Palestinian civilians, including a UN observer force.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft tried to prescribe the way forward to the parties, ignoring the need for the parties to find their own solutions, and that it was put to a vote before consensus had been reached.","aftermath":"A competing draft by France, Ireland, Norway, Ukraine and the United Kingdom was not put to a vote, and the Council took no further action.","context":"Seven non-aligned members tabled the draft, which would have called for an end to violence and stated the Council's readiness to set up a UN observer force to protect Palestinian civilians. The United States vetoed it, saying the text prescribed solutions to the parties and was put to a vote before consensus. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (France, Ireland, Norway and the United Kingdom); Ukraine, which held the presidency, did not take part. A rival European text was not put to a vote.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4305; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/436290; https://undocs.org/en/S/2001/270; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/436203","notes":"The record gives 9-1-4 and states that one member did not participate; Ukraine is the only member absent from the lists. That the European draft never came to a vote is inferred from the absence of a later vote.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bangladesh","member_iso3c":"BGD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Jamaica","member_iso3c":"JAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mali","member_iso3c":"MLI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritius","member_iso3c":"MUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Singapore","member_iso3c":"SGP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"not_participating","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":212,"un_id":212,"date":"2001-12-14","year":2001,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/2001/1199","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4438","meeting_number":4438,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Mitchell Report implementation and monitoring","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"EGY; TUN","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an end to violence, condemned acts of terror and extrajudicial executions, and encouraged a monitoring mechanism to help the parties carry out the Mitchell Report recommendations.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft sought to isolate one party, did not mention recent terrorist attacks on Israelis or those responsible, and would not help the situation on the ground.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote in the Council. The General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/8 on 20 December 2001.","context":"Egypt and Tunisia tabled the draft, which would have demanded an end to violence and backed a monitoring mechanism for the Mitchell Report recommendations. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored recent terrorist attacks on Israelis and sought to isolate one party. The vote was 12 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (Norway and the United Kingdom). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4438; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/454605; https://undocs.org/en/S/2001/1199; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/454755; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A%2FRES%2FES-10%2F8","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bangladesh","member_iso3c":"BGD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jamaica","member_iso3c":"JAM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mali","member_iso3c":"MLI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritius","member_iso3c":"MUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Singapore","member_iso3c":"SGP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":213,"un_id":213,"date":"2002-06-30","year":2002,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/2002/712","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4563","meeting_number":4563,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina","short_agenda":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","topic":"Bosnia and Herzegovina: UNMIBH and SFOR renewal (ICC dispute)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BGR; FRA; DEU; IRL; ITA; NOR; RUS; GBR","n_sponsors":8,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"BIH","ucdp_conflict_id":389,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns renewal of UNMIBH in post-war Bosnia. Matched to the Bosnian Serb conflict, inactive since 1995.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended the UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH) to 31 December 2002 and renewed the authorization of the multinational stabilization force (SFOR).","stated_reason":"The United States said it needed protection from International Criminal Court jurisdiction for its personnel in UN peacekeeping and authorized operations before the Rome Statute entered into force on 1 July 2002, and the draft gave none.","aftermath":"The Council adopted two short technical extensions, resolutions 1420 (2002) and 1421 (2002). On 12 July 2002 it adopted resolution 1422 (2002), which deferred ICC proceedings against personnel from non-party states in UN-authorized operations, and resolution 1423 (2002), which extended UNMIBH to 31 December 2002.","context":"The draft would have renewed the UN police mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the authorization of SFOR. The United States vetoed it, saying its personnel in UN and UN-authorized operations needed protection from the International Criminal Court, whose statute entered into force the next day. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (Bulgaria). After two short extensions, on 12 July 2002 the Council adopted resolution 1422 (2002) on deferral of ICC proceedings and resolution 1423 (2002) renewing the mission.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4563; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/468013; https://undocs.org/en/S/2002/712; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/468010; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1423(2002); https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1420(2002); https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1421(2002)","notes":"Resolutions 1420 (2002) of 30 June and 1423 (2002) of 12 July are confirmed by the UN Digital Library.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritius","member_iso3c":"MUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Singapore","member_iso3c":"SGP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":214,"un_id":214,"date":"2002-12-20","year":2002,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/2002/1385","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4681","meeting_number":4681,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: killing of UN staff and destruction of WFP warehouse","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"SYR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the killing of UN employees by Israeli forces, including a UN staff member in the Jenin refugee camp, and the destruction of a World Food Programme warehouse in Beit Lahiya.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was mainly about condemning the Israeli occupation and did little to protect UN staff and facilities, and that the sponsor had rejected its alternative language.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote.","context":"Syria tabled the draft, which would have condemned the killing of UN staff by Israeli forces and the destruction of a World Food Programme warehouse in Gaza. The United States vetoed it, saying the text was mainly about condemning the occupation and that the sponsor had rejected its proposed changes. The vote was 12 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (Bulgaria and Cameroon). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4681; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/482154; https://undocs.org/en/S/2002/1385; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/482117","notes":"Draft dated 19 December 2002; vote taken 20 December 2002.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mauritius","member_iso3c":"MUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Singapore","member_iso3c":"SGP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":215,"un_id":215,"date":"2003-09-16","year":2003,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2003/891","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4828","meeting_number":4828,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: threat to deport Yasser Arafat","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"PAK; ZAF; SDN; SYR","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded that Israel desist from any act of deportation and cease any threat to the safety of the elected President of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft did not condemn terrorism strongly, did not name Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and did not call for dismantling terrorist infrastructure.","aftermath":"The General Assembly, in its tenth emergency special session, adopted resolution ES-10/12 on 19 September 2003 with a similar demand.","context":"After Israel's cabinet decided in principle to remove Yasser Arafat, the draft would have demanded that Israel not deport him or threaten his safety. The United States vetoed it, saying the text did not condemn Hamas and other groups by name or call for dismantling their infrastructure. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Bulgaria, Germany and the United Kingdom). Three days later the General Assembly adopted a similar demand in resolution ES-10/12.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4828; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/502095; https://undocs.org/en/S/2003/891; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/502085; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/12","notes":"The record (S/PV.4824) says Israel's Security Cabinet decided 'late last week', after the suicide bombings of 9 September 2003, to remove Arafat in principle; the exact day is not given.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":216,"un_id":216,"date":"2003-10-14","year":2003,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2003/980","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4842","meeting_number":4842,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: wall in the occupied territory","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GIN; MYS; PAK; SYR","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have decided that Israel's construction of a wall in the occupied territories departing from the 1949 armistice line was illegal under international law and must be stopped and reversed.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was unbalanced, did not condemn terrorism explicitly and did not reflect the mutual obligations in the Quartet road map.","aftermath":"The General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/13 on 21 October 2003 demanding that Israel stop and reverse construction of the wall, and in December 2003 requested an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice.","context":"The draft would have declared illegal the wall Israel was building in the occupied territories where it departed from the 1949 armistice line, and called for its removal. The United States, which held the presidency, vetoed it, saying the text was unbalanced and did not condemn terrorism. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Bulgaria, Cameroon, Germany and the United Kingdom). A week later the General Assembly adopted a similar demand, and in December 2003 it asked the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4842; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/503914; https://undocs.org/en/S/2003/980; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/504012; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/13; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A%2FRES%2FES-10%2F13","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Bulgaria","member_iso3c":"BGR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Cameroon","member_iso3c":"CMR","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Guinea","member_iso3c":"GIN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Syria","member_iso3c":"SYR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":217,"un_id":217,"date":"2004-03-25","year":2004,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/2004/240","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4934","meeting_number":4934,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: killing of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; LBY","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned Israel's killing of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and six other Palestinians in Gaza City, called for an end to extrajudicial executions and condemned all terrorist attacks against civilians.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was silent about terrorist attacks by Hamas, did not reflect the realities of the conflict and would not further peace.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote.","context":"Algeria and Libya tabled the draft, which would have condemned Israel's killing of Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin and called for an end to extrajudicial executions. The United States vetoed it, saying the text did not mention Hamas attacks on Israelis. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Germany, Romania and the United Kingdom). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4934; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/518214; https://undocs.org/en/S/2004/240; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/518295","notes":"Draft dated 24 March 2004; vote 25 March 2004.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":218,"un_id":218,"date":"2004-04-21","year":2004,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/2004/313","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.4947","meeting_number":4947,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Cyprus","short_agenda":"Cyprus","topic":"Cyprus: UN mission to implement the Annan Plan","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Cyprus","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GBR; USA","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"CYP","ucdp_conflict_id":323,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns UN tasks under the Annan Plan for Cyprus. Nearest UCDP conflict is Cyprus-Turkey (1974).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have replaced UNFICYP with a UN Settlement Implementation Mission in Cyprus (UNSIMIC) and imposed an arms embargo, to take effect only if the Annan Plan was approved and the Foundation Agreement entered into force.","stated_reason":"Russia said it vetoed on technical grounds because the sponsors forced a vote on the eve of the 24 April referendums without proper discussion and the Council should not appear to pressure the Cypriot voters.","aftermath":"Greek Cypriot voters rejected the Annan Plan on 24 April 2004. The Council extended UNFICYP in resolution 1548 (2004) on 11 June 2004.","context":"The United Kingdom and the United States tabled the draft, which would have set up a new UN mission and an arms embargo to support the Annan Plan if Cypriots approved it in the referendums of 24 April 2004. Russia vetoed it, saying the vote was rushed on the eve of the referendums and the Council should not appear to influence them. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. Greek Cypriot voters rejected the plan, and in June 2004 the Council renewed UNFICYP in resolution 1548 (2004).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.4947; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/519838; https://undocs.org/en/S/2004/313; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/519897; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1548(2004); https://undocs.org/en/S/2004/437","notes":"The referendum results are confirmed in the Secretary-General's report S/2004/437, para. 72: Greek Cypriot voters rejected the plan by 75.8% and Turkish Cypriot voters approved it by 64.9%. Resolution 1548 (2004) renewed UNFICYP; it did not follow up the vetoed text, so no follow-up resolution is given.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":219,"un_id":219,"date":"2004-10-05","year":2004,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2004/783","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.5051","meeting_number":5051,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Israeli military operation in northern Gaza","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; PAK; TUN","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an immediate end to Israeli military operations in northern Gaza and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the area, and called for safe access for UN and humanitarian staff.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was unbalanced because it condemned Israeli actions while omitting the Qassam rocket attacks on Israel.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote.","context":"The draft would have demanded that Israel halt its military operation in northern Gaza, including the Jabaliya camp, and withdraw. The United States vetoed it, saying the text ignored rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Germany, Romania and the United Kingdom). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.5051; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/532140; https://undocs.org/en/S/2004/783; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/532147","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Benin","member_iso3c":"BEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Philippines","member_iso3c":"PHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Romania","member_iso3c":"ROU","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":220,"un_id":220,"date":"2006-07-13","year":2006,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2006/508","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.5488","meeting_number":5488,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Israeli operations in Gaza after soldier's capture","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"QAT","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called for the release of the captured Israeli soldier and of detained Palestinian ministers and legislators, and for Israel to halt military operations in Gaza and withdraw its forces.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was untimely given new fighting with Hezbollah, placed demands on one side only and would have raised tensions.","aftermath":"No revised draft was put to a vote.","context":"After Israel launched an offensive in Gaza following the capture of Corporal Gilad Shalit, Qatar tabled a draft that would have called for the release of the soldier and of detained Palestinian officials, and for Israel to withdraw from Gaza. The United States vetoed it, saying the text was unbalanced and had been overtaken by the outbreak of fighting with Hezbollah. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Denmark, Peru, Slovakia and the United Kingdom). The Council took no further action on Gaza.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.5488; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/578681; https://undocs.org/en/S/2006/508; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/578801","notes":"Draft dated 12 July 2006; vote 13 July 2006.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Qatar","member_iso3c":"QAT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovakia","member_iso3c":"SVK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":221,"un_id":221,"date":"2006-11-11","year":2006,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/2006/878","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.5565","meeting_number":5565,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Beit Hanoun shelling","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"QAT","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned Israeli military operations in Gaza, including the attack on Beit Hanoun on 8 November 2006, condemned rocket fire into Israel, and called on Israel to cease its operations and withdraw.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was biased against Israel and politically motivated, and that it equated lawful Israeli military operations with rocket attacks on civilians.","aftermath":"The General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/16 on 17 November 2006, which called for a fact-finding mission on Beit Hanoun.","context":"After Israeli shelling killed 19 civilians in Beit Hanoun on 8 November 2006, Qatar tabled a draft that would have condemned the attack and called on Israel to withdraw from Gaza. The United States vetoed it, saying the text was biased and equated Israeli military action with rocket attacks. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Denmark, Japan, Slovakia and the United Kingdom). A week later the General Assembly adopted a resolution on Beit Hanoun.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.5565; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586446; https://undocs.org/en/S/2006/878; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586375; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/16","notes":"The UN Digital Library shows the General Assembly document as issued in April 2007. Draft dated 10 November 2006; vote 11 November 2006.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Qatar","member_iso3c":"QAT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovakia","member_iso3c":"SVK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Tanzania","member_iso3c":"TZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":222,"un_id":222,"date":"2007-01-12","year":2007,"month":1,"draft_symbol":"S/2007/14","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.5619","meeting_number":5619,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Myanmar","short_agenda":"Myanmar","topic":"Myanmar: human rights and political transition","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Myanmar","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GBR; USA","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"MMR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns political prisoners and human rights in Myanmar. It does not address a specific armed conflict, and Myanmar had several.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called on the Government of Myanmar to release political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi, end military attacks on civilians in ethnic minority areas, and start a broad political dialogue.","stated_reason":"Russia said the situation in Myanmar did not threaten international or regional peace and belonged to other UN bodies, and China said the matter was an internal affair that the Council should not take up.","aftermath":"The Council took no further formal action on Myanmar until it issued a presidential statement (S/PRST/2007/37) on 11 October 2007, after the crackdown on protests in September 2007.","context":"The United Kingdom and the United States tabled the draft, which would have called on Myanmar's government to free political prisoners and open a political dialogue. China and Russia vetoed it, saying the situation posed no threat to international peace and fell outside the Council's remit. The vote was 9 in favour, 3 against (China, Russia and South Africa) and 3 abstentions (Congo, Indonesia and Qatar). After the crackdown on protests in September 2007, the Council issued a presidential statement on Myanmar (S/PRST/2007/37) in October 2007.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.5619; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/590916; https://undocs.org/en/S/2007/14; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/590846; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.1662; https://undocs.org/en/S/PRST/2007/37","notes":"The draft was voted as orally revised (UNDP added to the fourth preambular paragraph). The penholder is not known separately from the sponsors (GBR, USA). S/PRST/2007/37 is dated 11 October 2007 and was issued at the 5757th meeting. This was the first veto cast by more than one permanent member since 23 December 1989 (S/21048, France, UK and US on Panama) and the first joint Chinese-Russian (Soviet) veto since 10 September 1972 (S/10784, Middle East). Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Qatar","member_iso3c":"QAT","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COG","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Slovakia","member_iso3c":"SVK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":223,"un_id":223,"date":"2008-07-11","year":2008,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2008/447","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.5933","meeting_number":5933,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Peace and security in Africa","short_agenda":"Peace and security in Africa (Zimbabwe)","topic":"Zimbabwe: sanctions after 2008 election violence","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Zimbabwe","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":5,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; BEL; CAN; HRV; FRA; ITA; LBR; NLD; NZL; SLE; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":12,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"ZWE","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns post-election violence in Zimbabwe. UCDP records no state-based armed conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have imposed an arms embargo on Zimbabwe and a travel ban and asset freeze on 14 named officials including President Robert Mugabe, and asked the Secretary-General to appoint a Special Representative on Zimbabwe.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft took the Council beyond its Charter mandate into internal affairs, and China said sanctions would interfere with mediation by the African Union and the Southern African Development Community.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no sanctions on Zimbabwe; the parties signed a power-sharing agreement under SADC mediation on 15 September 2008.","context":"After violence around the presidential run-off of June 2008, the draft would have placed an arms embargo on Zimbabwe and targeted sanctions on President Robert Mugabe and 13 other officials. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia saying the Council was overstepping its mandate and China saying sanctions would harm mediation by the African Union and SADC. The vote was 9 in favour, 5 against (China, Libya, Russia, South Africa and Vietnam) and 1 abstention (Indonesia). The Council took no further action, and the parties signed a power-sharing agreement in September 2008.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.5933; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/631684; https://undocs.org/en/S/2008/447; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/631683; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://webarchive.archive.unhcr.org/20230531144638oe_/https://www.refworld.org/docid/48cfa2fe19.html","notes":"UN News (15 September 2008) reports that Assistant Secretary-General Haile Menkerios attended the signing in Harare that day. The penholder is based on the meeting record: in S/PV.5933 France says it 'co-sponsored the draft resolution submitted by the United States'. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Croatia","member_iso3c":"HRV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Vietnam","member_iso3c":"VNM","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":224,"un_id":224,"date":"2009-06-15","year":2009,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/2009/310","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.6143","meeting_number":6143,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Georgia","short_agenda":"Georgia","topic":"Georgia: UNOMIG renewal","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Georgia","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUT; HRV; FRA; DEU; TUR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"GEO","ucdp_conflict_id":392,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Draft concerns UNOMIG, deployed for the Abkhazia conflict. UCDP codes Georgia-Abkhazia for 1992-93. The 2008 South Ossetia conflict (UCDP 393) is related but was not the mission's mandate.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended the mandate of the UN mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) for two weeks, to 30 June 2009, while recalling resolutions 1808 (2008), 1839 (2008) and 1866 (2009).","stated_reason":"Russia said the old mandate rested on realities that had ended with the August 2008 war, and that the draft's references to earlier texts affirmed Georgia's territorial integrity and denied Abkhazia's statehood.","aftermath":"The UNOMIG mandate expired at midnight on 15 June 2009 and the mission closed; no later resolution renewed it.","context":"The Group of Friends of Georgia and others sponsored the draft, which would have given the UN observer mission in Georgia a short technical extension to 30 June 2009. Russia, which had recognized Abkhazia in 2008, vetoed it, saying the text's references to earlier resolutions affirmed Georgia's territorial integrity. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (China, Libya, Uganda and Vietnam). The mandate lapsed and UNOMIG closed.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.6143; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/657911; https://undocs.org/en/S/2009/310; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/657455; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"The penholder is not known; the record refers to Group of Friends consultations. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Austria","member_iso3c":"AUT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Burkina Faso","member_iso3c":"BFA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Costa Rica","member_iso3c":"CRI","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Croatia","member_iso3c":"HRV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Libya","member_iso3c":"LBY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Turkey","member_iso3c":"TUR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uganda","member_iso3c":"UGA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Vietnam","member_iso3c":"VNM","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":225,"un_id":225,"date":"2011-02-18","year":2011,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2011/24","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.6484","meeting_number":6484,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Israeli settlements","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AFG; DZA; ARG; AUT; AZE; BHR; BGD; BLR; BEL; BOL; BWA; BRA; BRN; CHL; COM; CRI; CUB; CYP; PRK; DJI; ECU; EGY; FIN; GAB; GRC; GRD; GTM; GIN; GUY; ISL; IND; IDN; IRQ; IRL; JOR; KWT; LAO; LBN; LSO; LIE; LUX; MYS; MLI; MLT; MRT; MUS; MEX; MAR; NAM; NIC; NGA; NOR; OMN; PAK; PNG; PER; PHL; PRT; QAT; VCT; SAU; SEN; SRB; SVN; SOM; ZAF; SDN; SWE; CHE; TJK; TUN; TUR; TKM; ARE; URY; VEN; VNM; YEM; ZWE","n_sponsors":79,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"PSE; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have reaffirmed that Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and demanded that Israel cease all settlement activity.","stated_reason":"The United States said it opposed settlement activity but that it was unwise for the Council to try to resolve core issues between Israelis and Palestinians, which should be settled through direct negotiations.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no resolution on settlements until resolution 2334 (2016) on 23 December 2016, on which the United States abstained.","context":"The draft, co-sponsored by 79 states, would have declared Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory illegal and demanded a halt to all settlement activity. The United States vetoed it, saying it opposed settlements but that the Council should not try to settle issues meant for direct talks. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. In December 2016 the Council adopted resolution 2334 (2016) on settlements, with the United States abstaining.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.6484; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/698345; https://undocs.org/en/S/2011/24; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/698332; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"The issued draft S/2011/24 lists 79 sponsors, all of which are included. At the meeting the President called the list 'tentative', and the Palestinian observer spoke of 'more than 100' sponsors (S/PV.6484). The penholder is not known (Lebanon was the Arab member on the Council). Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","member_iso3c":"BIH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lebanon","member_iso3c":"LBN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":226,"un_id":226,"date":"2011-10-04","year":2011,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2011/612","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.6627","meeting_number":6627,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: condemnation of crackdown on protests","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; DEU; PRT; GBR","n_sponsors":4,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Syrian government vs insurgents.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the Syrian authorities' violence against civilians, demanded an end to it, and said the Council would review Syria's compliance within 30 days and consider options, including measures under Article 41 of the Charter.","stated_reason":"Russia said the text was one-sided against Damascus, threatened sanctions, and did not rule out foreign military intervention, citing the Libya precedent; China said it would not ease tension and breached the principle of non-interference.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no Syria resolution until resolution 2042 (2012) on 14 April 2012; a rival Russian-Chinese draft was not put to a vote.","context":"France, Germany, Portugal and the United Kingdom sponsored the draft, which would have condemned the Syrian crackdown on protesters and threatened further measures. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia saying the text was one-sided and could open the way to military intervention, as in Libya, and China saying it breached the principle of non-interference. The vote was 9 in favour, 2 against and 4 abstentions (Brazil, India, Lebanon and South Africa). It was the first of a series of vetoes on Syria.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.6627; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/712212; https://undocs.org/en/S/2011/612; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/712064; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"The penholder is not known. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","member_iso3c":"BIH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Lebanon","member_iso3c":"LBN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":227,"un_id":227,"date":"2012-02-04","year":2012,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2012/77","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.6711","meeting_number":6711,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: support for Arab League plan","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BHR; COL; EGY; FRA; DEU; JOR; KWT; LBY; MAR; OMN; PRT; QAT; SAU; TGO; TUN; TUR; ARE; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":19,"penholder":"MAR","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Syrian government vs insurgents.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have endorsed the Arab League decision of 22 January 2012, including its plan for a political transition in Syria, and demanded that the Syrian government stop attacks on civilians and withdraw forces from towns.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft sent a biased signal and ignored its amendments asking the opposition to distance itself from armed extremists, and China said it would complicate the issue and pressing a vote while members disagreed would not help.","aftermath":"The General Assembly adopted resolution 66/253 A on 16 February 2012 (137 in favour, 12 against and 17 abstentions) backing the Arab League plan; the Council later adopted resolutions 2042 (2012) and 2043 (2012) in April 2012 on the Annan plan and an observer mission.","context":"Morocco introduced the draft, with Arab and Western sponsors; it would have backed the Arab League's plan for a political transition in Syria. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia saying the text was biased and did not ask the armed opposition to stop violence, and China saying a vote while members disagreed would not help. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against. The General Assembly endorsed the Arab League plan 12 days later, and in April 2012 the Council turned to the Annan plan.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.6711; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/720646; https://undocs.org/en/S/2012/77; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/720648; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A%2FRES%2F66%2F253A","notes":"The penholder is based on the meeting record: in S/PV.6711 Morocco says it acted 'in assuming its responsibility as the Arab member of the Security Council' and thanks 'the Council members that joined us in sponsoring the draft resolution'. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Azerbaijan","member_iso3c":"AZE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guatemala","member_iso3c":"GTM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Morocco","member_iso3c":"MAR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":228,"un_id":228,"date":"2012-07-19","year":2012,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2012/538","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.6810","meeting_number":6810,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: UNSMIS renewal under Chapter VII","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; DEU; PRT; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":"GBR","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Syrian government vs insurgents.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, under Chapter VII, would have renewed the UN Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) for 45 days and threatened sanctions under Article 41 if the Syrian authorities did not withdraw heavy weapons from towns within 10 days.","stated_reason":"Russia said it could not accept a Chapter VII text that would open the way to sanctions and later to external military involvement in Syria; China said the sponsors refused further consultations and revisions.","aftermath":"On 20 July 2012 the Council adopted resolution 2059 (2012), a separate text that renewed UNSMIS for a final 30 days without Chapter VII measures.","context":"The draft would have extended the UN observer mission in Syria and, under Chapter VII, threatened sanctions if Damascus did not pull heavy weapons out of towns. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia saying it would open the way to sanctions and military intervention and China saying the sponsors had refused further talks. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against and 2 abstentions (Pakistan and South Africa). The next day the Council renewed the mission for a final 30 days in resolution 2059 (2012).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.6810; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/731940; https://undocs.org/en/S/2012/538; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/731938; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2059(2012)","notes":"The United Kingdom as penholder is inferred from its statement in the record ('our efforts'). Resolution 2059 (2012), listed as the follow-up resolution, was a separate, shorter text that did not revise S/2012/538. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Azerbaijan","member_iso3c":"AZE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guatemala","member_iso3c":"GTM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Morocco","member_iso3c":"MAR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Portugal","member_iso3c":"PRT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Togo","member_iso3c":"TGO","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":229,"un_id":229,"date":"2014-03-15","year":2014,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/2014/189","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7138","meeting_number":7138,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 28 February 2014 from the Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/2014/136)","short_agenda":"2014 Letter from Ukraine (Ukraine)","topic":"Ukraine: Crimea referendum","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Ukraine","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; AUS; AUT; BEL; BGR; CAN; HRV; CYP; CZE; DNK; EST; FIN; FRA; GEO; DEU; GRC; HUN; ISL; IRL; ITA; JPN; LVA; LIE; LTU; LUX; MLT; MNE; NLD; NZL; NOR; POL; PRT; MDA; ROU; SVK; SVN; ESP; SWE; TUR; UKR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":42,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"UKR","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Crimea referendum, March 2014. UCDP records no Russia-Ukraine state-based conflict in 2014; conflict 13243 starts in 2022.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have declared that the referendum planned in Crimea for 16 March 2014 could have no validity and urged states not to recognize any change in Crimea's status on its basis.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft ran against the principle of self-determination of peoples and that it could not accept its premise that the referendum was illegitimate.","aftermath":"The General Assembly adopted resolution 68/262 on 27 March 2014, affirming Ukraine's territorial integrity and calling the referendum invalid; the Council adopted nothing.","context":"The United States, with 41 co-sponsors, submitted the draft, which would have declared the planned Crimea referendum invalid and urged states not to recognize its result. Russia vetoed it, citing the right of peoples to self-determination. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (China). On 27 March 2014 the General Assembly adopted resolution 68/262 on the matter.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7138; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/767358; https://undocs.org/en/S/2014/189; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/767020; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"The United States as penholder is inferred from the Russian statement ('draft resolution submitted by the United States'). Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chad","member_iso3c":"TCD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lithuania","member_iso3c":"LTU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Luxembourg","member_iso3c":"LUX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Rwanda","member_iso3c":"RWA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":230,"un_id":230,"date":"2014-05-22","year":2014,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/2014/348","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7180","meeting_number":7180,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: referral to the International Criminal Court","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; AND; AUS; AUT; BEL; BWA; BGR; CAN; CAF; CHL; CIV; HRV; CYP; CZE; COD; DNK; EST; FIN; FRA; GEO; DEU; GRC; HUN; ISL; IRL; ITA; JPN; JOR; LVA; LBY; LIE; LTU; LUX; MLT; MHL; MEX; MCO; MNE; NLD; NZL; NOR; PAN; POL; PRT; QAT; KOR; MDA; ROU; WSM; SMR; SAU; SEN; SRB; SYC; SVK; SVN; ESP; SWE; CHE; MKD; TUR; UKR; ARE; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":65,"penholder":"FRA","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Syrian government vs insurgents.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have referred the situation in Syria since March 2011 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.","stated_reason":"Russia said France had pushed the text to a vote knowing it would fail, and that a referral would harm unity among the permanent members and the search for a political settlement; China said ICC action should respect state judicial sovereignty and the principle of complementarity, and would not help a political solution.","aftermath":"The Council made no further attempt at an ICC referral for Syria; the General Assembly later created an investigative mechanism by resolution 71/248 (21 December 2016).","context":"France led the draft, which 65 states co-sponsored; it would have referred the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia saying the referral would harm Council unity and peace efforts and China citing state judicial sovereignty. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against. No further referral was attempted in the Council.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7180; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/771368; https://undocs.org/en/S/2014/348; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/771366; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A%2FRES%2F71%2F248","notes":"France as penholder is based on the Russian statement ('the motives that led France to initiate the draft'). Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Argentina","member_iso3c":"ARG","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Australia","member_iso3c":"AUS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chad","member_iso3c":"TCD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lithuania","member_iso3c":"LTU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Luxembourg","member_iso3c":"LUX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Rwanda","member_iso3c":"RWA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":231,"un_id":231,"date":"2015-07-08","year":2015,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2015/508","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7481","meeting_number":7481,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina","short_agenda":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","topic":"Bosnia and Herzegovina: Srebrenica genocide anniversary","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Bosnia and Herzegovina","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"JOR; LTU; MYS; NZL; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":"GBR","countries_iso3c":"BIH","ucdp_conflict_id":389,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Draft commemorates Srebrenica (1995), part of the Bosnian Serb conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have marked the twentieth anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, condemned the crime as genocide, and called for reconciliation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.","stated_reason":"Russia said the text was confrontational and politically motivated, placed blame on one people, and would deepen divisions in Bosnian society.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no Srebrenica text; the General Assembly adopted resolution 78/282 designating 11 July as an international day of remembrance on 23 May 2024.","context":"The United Kingdom submitted the draft, which would have condemned the 1995 Srebrenica massacre as genocide on its 20th anniversary. Russia vetoed it, saying it singled out the Serbs and would divide Bosnian society. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Angola, China, Nigeria and Venezuela). The Council took no further action.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7481; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/796479; https://undocs.org/en/S/2015/508; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/796197; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A%2FRES%2F78%2F282","notes":"Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Chad","member_iso3c":"TCD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lithuania","member_iso3c":"LTU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":232,"un_id":232,"date":"2015-07-29","year":2015,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2015/562","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7498","meeting_number":7498,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 28 February 2014 from the Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/2014/136)","short_agenda":"2014 Letter from Ukraine (Ukraine)","topic":"Ukraine: tribunal for downing of flight MH17","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Ukraine","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AUS; BEL; CAN; FRA; DEU; IRL; ISR; ITA; LTU; MYS; NLD; NZL; PHL; ROU; ESP; UKR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":18,"penholder":"MYS","countries_iso3c":"UKR","ucdp_conflict_id":13306,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"MH17 was shot down over Donetsk oblast on 17 Jul 2014. Matched to Ukraine vs Novorossiya (DPR, LPR), active 2014-2022, so the 2015 veto year joins.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft, under Chapter VII, would have set up an international criminal tribunal to prosecute those responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine on 17 July 2014.","stated_reason":"Russia said a tribunal was premature, ill-defined and legally untenable while investigations were still under way, and that the issue was being exploited for political ends.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action; the Joint Investigation Team states pursued prosecution in a Dutch national court, which convicted three men in absentia in November 2022.","context":"Malaysia presented the draft on behalf of the states in the Joint Investigation Team; it would have created an international tribunal for the downing of flight MH17. Russia vetoed it, saying a tribunal was premature before the investigations ended. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Angola, China and Venezuela). The Joint Investigation Team states later pursued the case in a Dutch court.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7498; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/798358; https://undocs.org/en/S/2015/562; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/798355; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/17/dutch-court-convicts-three-mh17-suspects-acquits-one","notes":"Malaysia as penholder is inferred from its presentation of the draft on behalf of the Joint Investigation Team. On 17 November 2022 the Hague District Court convicted Girkin, Dubinskiy and Kharchenko in absentia and acquitted Pulatov (news reports and the Australian foreign minister's statement; no UN source). Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Chad","member_iso3c":"TCD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Chile","member_iso3c":"CHL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Jordan","member_iso3c":"JOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Lithuania","member_iso3c":"LTU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Nigeria","member_iso3c":"NGA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":233,"un_id":233,"date":"2016-10-08","year":2016,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2016/846","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7785","meeting_number":7785,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: Aleppo ceasefire and flight ban","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AND; AUS; AUT; BEL; BGR; CAN; CRI; HRV; CYP; CZE; DNK; EST; FIN; FRA; GEO; DEU; GRC; HUN; ISL; IRL; ITA; LVA; LTU; LUX; MLT; MEX; MCO; MAR; NLD; NOR; POL; PRT; QAT; ROU; SMR; SAU; SEN; SVK; SVN; ESP; SWE; TUR; UKR; ARE; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":46,"penholder":"FRA; ESP","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Syrian government vs insurgents (Aleppo).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an end to all aerial bombardment and military flights over Aleppo and a renewed cessation of hostilities with full humanitarian access.","stated_reason":"Russia said France had put the text to a vote after one round of consultations, and that its ban on all military flights over Aleppo, including the western part of the city, was unworkable and would shield fighters.","aftermath":"At the same meeting a rival Russian draft (S/2016/847) failed (4 in favour, 9 against and 2 abstentions).","context":"France and Spain tabled the draft, which would have demanded a halt to air strikes and military flights over Aleppo. Russia vetoed it, saying the flight ban was unworkable and the vote was rushed. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against (Russia and Venezuela) and 2 abstentions (Angola and China). A rival Russian draft failed at the same meeting.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7785; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/844691; https://undocs.org/en/S/2016/846; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/844666; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"France and Spain as penholders are based on China's statement ('draft resolution submitted by France and Spain'). Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":234,"un_id":234,"date":"2016-12-05","year":2016,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/2016/1026","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7825","meeting_number":7825,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: seven-day truce in Aleppo","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"EGY; NZL; ESP","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":"EGY; NZL; ESP","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Syrian government vs insurgents (Aleppo).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have required all parties to halt attacks in Aleppo for seven days, renewable, to allow humanitarian aid to reach civilians.","stated_reason":"Russia said the vote broke the practice of waiting 24 hours after a draft is put in final form ('in blue') and would undercut US-Russian talks on eastern Aleppo; China said the parties needed more consultations and that forcing a vote would not help.","aftermath":"On 19 December 2016 the Council adopted resolution 2328 (2016) on UN monitoring of evacuations from eastern Aleppo.","context":"Egypt, New Zealand and Spain tabled the draft, which would have imposed a seven-day truce across Aleppo to let aid in. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia saying the vote broke procedure and would disrupt its talks with the United States. The vote was 11 in favour, 3 against (China, Russia and Venezuela) and 1 abstention (Angola). Two weeks later the Council adopted resolution 2328 (2016) on monitoring evacuations from Aleppo.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7825; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/850392; https://undocs.org/en/S/2016/1026; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/850380; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Angola","member_iso3c":"AGO","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malaysia","member_iso3c":"MYS","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"New Zealand","member_iso3c":"NZL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Spain","member_iso3c":"ESP","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Venezuela","member_iso3c":"VEN","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":235,"un_id":235,"date":"2017-02-28","year":2017,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2017/172","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7893","meeting_number":7893,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: sanctions over chemical weapons use","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; AUS; AUT; BEL; BGR; CAN; HRV; CYP; CZE; DNK; EST; FIN; FRA; DEU; GRC; ISL; IRL; ISR; ITA; JPN; LVA; LIE; LTU; LUX; MLT; MNE; NLD; NZL; NOR; POL; PRT; QAT; ROU; SAU; SVK; ESP; SWE; TUR; UKR; ARE; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":42,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Chemical weapons use in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have imposed sanctions, including an asset freeze and travel ban on listed Syrian individuals and entities and a ban on supplying helicopters to the Syrian government, over chemical weapons attacks found by the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft rested on a flawed anti-government concept and on JIM findings it doubted, and China said it would harm the ceasefire and the Geneva peace talks.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no sanctions; a chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun in April 2017 led to another vetoed draft (S/2017/315).","context":"The draft would have imposed sanctions on Syrian individuals and entities linked to chemical attacks and banned helicopter sales to the government. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia questioning the investigators' findings and China saying the draft would hurt the peace talks. The vote was 9 in favour, 3 against (Bolivia, China and Russia) and 3 abstentions (Egypt, Ethiopia and Kazakhstan). No sanctions followed.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7893; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/861188; https://undocs.org/en/S/2017/172; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/861103; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"The penholder is not confirmed; secondary sources name France and the United Kingdom as drafters. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":236,"un_id":236,"date":"2017-04-12","year":2017,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/2017/315","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.7922","meeting_number":7922,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: Khan Shaykhun chemical attack investigation","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":"FRA; GBR; USA","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Chemical weapons use in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017 and required the Syrian government to give investigators access, including flight plans and air bases, and to cooperate with the OPCW and the JIM.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft named the guilty party before an independent investigation and that its concerns had been ignored.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no text on the attack; the JIM later attributed it to the Syrian government in its October 2017 report.","context":"France, the United Kingdom and the United States tabled the draft, which would have condemned the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack and required Syria to cooperate with investigators. Russia vetoed it, saying it assigned blame before any investigation. The vote was 10 in favour, 2 against (Bolivia and Russia) and 3 abstentions (China, Ethiopia and Kazakhstan). The Council adopted nothing on the attack.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.7922; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1289166; https://undocs.org/en/S/2017/315; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1286373; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://undocs.org/en/S/2017/904","notes":"The penholders are based on the Russian reference to the 'troika' draft and on the sponsor list. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":237,"un_id":237,"date":"2017-10-24","year":2017,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2017/884","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8073","meeting_number":8073,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: chemical weapons Joint Investigative Mechanism renewal","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; AUS; AUT; BEL; BGR; CAN; HRV; CYP; CZE; DNK; EST; FIN; FRA; DEU; GRC; HUN; ISL; IRL; ISR; ITA; JPN; LVA; LIE; LTU; LUX; MLT; MNE; NLD; NOR; POL; PRT; QAT; KOR; ROU; SVK; SVN; ESP; TUR; UKR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":41,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Chemical weapons use in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have renewed the mandate of the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) for one year.","stated_reason":"Russia said the vote was premature because the JIM's report on Khan Shaykhun was due on 26 October and the text was meant to embarrass Russia; it said it would discuss renewal after the report.","aftermath":"Before the vote a Russian motion to postpone the meeting until 7 November failed (4 in favour, 8 against and 3 abstentions). Rival US and Russian renewal drafts were put to a vote on 16 November 2017.","context":"The United States submitted the draft, which would have renewed the chemical weapons Joint Investigative Mechanism for a year, weeks before its mandate ran out. Russia vetoed it, saying the vote should wait for the mechanism's report due two days later. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against (Bolivia and Russia) and 2 abstentions (China and Kazakhstan). Earlier in the meeting a Russian motion to postpone the vote failed.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8073; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1311037; https://undocs.org/en/S/2017/884; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1310864; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"The United States as penholder is based on the Russian statement ('submitted by the United States'). Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":238,"un_id":238,"date":"2017-11-16","year":2017,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/2017/962","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8105","meeting_number":8105,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: chemical weapons Joint Investigative Mechanism renewal","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; ITA; JPN; SWE; UKR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":7,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Chemical weapons use in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have renewed the mandate of the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism for one year, with some changes to its working methods.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft would entrench what it called systemic flaws in the JIM's work, such as remote investigation and reliance on Fact-Finding Mission data.","aftermath":"A Russian procedural motion to vote on the US text first was rejected. Russia withdrew its draft S/2017/933, and its revised draft S/2017/968 then failed (4 in favour, 7 against and 4 abstentions).","context":"The United States tabled a draft that would have renewed the Joint Investigative Mechanism for a year, days before its mandate expired. Russia vetoed it, saying the text kept flaws in the mechanism's methods. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against (Bolivia and Russia) and 2 abstentions (China and Egypt). A Russian alternative failed at the same meeting.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8105; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1319231; https://undocs.org/en/S/2017/962; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1318896; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto","notes":"The United States as penholder is based on the record, which refers to a US draft. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":239,"un_id":239,"date":"2017-11-17","year":2017,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/2017/970","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8107","meeting_number":8107,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: chemical weapons Joint Investigative Mechanism, 30-day extension","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"JPN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"JPN","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Chemical weapons use in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended the Joint Investigative Mechanism for 30 days and asked the Secretary-General and the OPCW Director-General to propose a revised structure and methodology within 20 days.","stated_reason":"Russia said no extension was possible until the JIM's fundamental shortcomings were fixed, and that it had told members it could not support a short technical extension.","aftermath":"The JIM's mandate expired on 17 November 2017 and was not renewed; On 27 June 2018 the OPCW Conference of the States Parties (decision C-SS-4/DEC.3) mandated the Technical Secretariat to identify perpetrators of chemical attacks in Syria. The Investigation and Identification Team was set up under that decision and issued its first report in April 2020.","context":"Japan tabled a draft that would have extended the Joint Investigative Mechanism for 30 days while members negotiated changes. Russia vetoed it, saying no extension was possible before the mechanism's flaws were fixed. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against (Bolivia and Russia) and 1 abstention (China). The mechanism's mandate lapsed that day.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8107; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1322755; https://undocs.org/en/S/2017/970; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1319274; https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto; https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/ec94s05%28e%29.pdf","notes":"The reference to the OPCW Investigation and Identification Team (June 2018) is not documented in the sources cited. Sponsors are those printed on the draft document; any added orally at the meeting are not included.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":240,"un_id":240,"date":"2017-12-18","year":2017,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/2017/1060","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8139","meeting_number":8139,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: status of Jerusalem","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"EGY","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"EGY","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":false,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Status of Jerusalem.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have affirmed that any decisions purporting to alter the character, status or demographic composition of Jerusalem have no legal effect and must be rescinded, and called on all states not to set up diplomatic missions in the city, in line with resolution 478 (1980).","stated_reason":"The United States said it vetoed the draft in defence of its sovereign right to decide where to place its embassy and of its role in the peace process, and that its recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital did not prejudge final-status talks.","aftermath":"Nothing further was adopted in the Council. The General Assembly resumed its tenth emergency special session and adopted resolution ES-10/19 on the status of Jerusalem on 21 December 2017.","context":"After the United States recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital on 6 December 2017, Egypt, on behalf of the Arab Group, tabled a draft that would have declared such decisions void and asked states not to open embassies in the city. The United States vetoed it, its first veto in more than six years, saying the text intruded on its sovereign right to decide where to place its embassy. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. On 21 December 2017 the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/19 at its tenth emergency special session.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8139; https://undocs.org/en/S/2017/1060; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/19; https://news.un.org/en/story/2017/12/639772-middle-east-security-council-fails-adopt-resolution-jerusalem","notes":"Egypt is given as penholder because it drafted and tabled the text on behalf of the Arab Group (S/PV.8139); no source uses the term penholder.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Egypt","member_iso3c":"EGY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Italy","member_iso3c":"ITA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Senegal","member_iso3c":"SEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ukraine","member_iso3c":"UKR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Uruguay","member_iso3c":"URY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":241,"un_id":241,"date":"2018-02-26","year":2018,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2018/156","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8190","meeting_number":8190,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Yemen)","topic":"Yemen: sanctions renewal (Iran arms embargo findings)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Yemen","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"GBR","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"GBR","countries_iso3c":"YEM; IRN","ucdp_conflict_id":230,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Yemen government vs Ansarallah and others.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have renewed the Yemen sanctions measures and the mandate of the Panel of Experts for a year and taken note of the Panel's finding that Iran had failed to prevent transfers of ballistic missiles and drone technology to the Houthis in breach of the arms embargo.","stated_reason":"Russia said it backed most of the text but could not accept unconfirmed conclusions of the Panel of Experts that needed verification in the sanctions committee, and opposed using a technical renewal for political ends.","aftermath":"At the same meeting the Council unanimously adopted a Russian draft (S/2018/157) as resolution 2402 (2018), a technical renewal of the sanctions and Panel mandate that did not mention Iran.","context":"The United Kingdom tabled a draft that would have renewed the Yemen sanctions regime and noted the Panel of Experts' finding that Iran had breached the arms embargo by not stopping missile transfers to the Houthis. Russia vetoed it, saying the Panel's conclusions were unverified. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against (Bolivia and Russia) and 2 abstentions (China and Kazakhstan). The Council then unanimously adopted a Russian text that renewed the sanctions without the Iran language, as resolution 2402 (2018).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8190; https://undocs.org/en/S/2018/156; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1473784","notes":"The draft's exact wording on Iran is summarized from statements in S/PV.8190 and has not been confirmed paragraph by paragraph. The United Kingdom is given as penholder as sole author of the Yemen sanctions text; no source uses the term penholder.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Equatorial Guinea","member_iso3c":"GNQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":242,"un_id":242,"date":"2018-04-10","year":2018,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/2018/321","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8228","meeting_number":8228,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: chemical weapons attribution mechanism","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Accountability and investigations","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; AUS; BGR; CAN; DNK; EST; FIN; FRA; DEU; ITA; LVA; LTU; MNE; NLD; NOR; PER; POL; QAT; MDA; SVN; SWE; MKD; TUR; UKR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":26,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Chemical weapons use in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have set up a United Nations Independent Mechanism of Investigation for one year to identify those responsible for chemical weapons use in Syria, and backed access for the OPCW fact-finding mission to Douma, where a chemical attack was reported on 7 April 2018.","stated_reason":"Russia said the text revived the former OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism with the same flawed working methods, without Council approval of staff, mandatory site visits or a Council decision on responsibility.","aftermath":"At the same meeting two Russian drafts failed: S/2018/175 on a new mechanism (6 in favour, 7 against and 2 abstentions) and S/2018/322 backing the OPCW mission to Douma (5 in favour, 4 against and 6 abstentions). No resolution on an attribution mechanism followed.","context":"After reports of a chemical attack in Douma, the United States tabled a draft that would have created an independent UN mechanism to attribute responsibility for chemical attacks in Syria. Russia vetoed it, saying the mechanism copied the working methods of the Joint Investigative Mechanism, which Russia called flawed. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against (Bolivia and Russia) and 1 abstention (China). Two Russian drafts failed to win nine votes at the same meeting.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8228; https://undocs.org/en/S/2018/321; https://undocs.org/en/S/2018/175","notes":"Sponsors: the issued draft lists 26 sponsors, all of which are included; at the meeting the President named only Canada, France, Netherlands, Peru, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States, so co-sponsors may have been added later. The United States is given as penholder because speakers call it the American draft; no source uses the term penholder.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Equatorial Guinea","member_iso3c":"GNQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":243,"un_id":243,"date":"2018-06-01","year":2018,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/2018/516","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8274","meeting_number":8274,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: protection of Palestinian civilians in Gaza","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"KWT","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"KWT","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":477,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Palestine conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deplored Israel's use of excessive and indiscriminate force against Palestinian civilians in Gaza, demanded that Israel refrain from such actions, deplored rocket fire from Gaza, and asked the Secretary-General to propose measures for the international protection of Palestinian civilians.","stated_reason":"The United States said the text gave a one-sided view of events in Gaza and did not mention Hamas, which it held mainly responsible for the violence and the conditions in Gaza.","aftermath":"At the same meeting a rival US draft (S/2018/520) that blamed Hamas failed (1 in favour, 3 against and 11 abstentions). On 13 June 2018 the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/20 on the protection of Palestinian civilians.","context":"Kuwait, for the Arab Group, tabled the draft after Israeli forces killed dozens of Palestinian protesters at the Gaza fence in May 2018. The United States vetoed it, saying the text was one-sided and ignored Hamas. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Ethiopia, the Netherlands, Poland and the United Kingdom). A US alternative received one vote, its own, and the General Assembly later adopted a similar text as resolution ES-10/20.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8274; https://undocs.org/en/S/2018/516; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/20; https://www.un.org/unispal/document/draft-security-council-resolution-on-protecting-civilians-in-gaza-s2018516-vetoed","notes":"Kuwait is given as penholder as author on behalf of the Arab Group; no source uses the term penholder.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bolivia","member_iso3c":"BOL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Equatorial Guinea","member_iso3c":"GNQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ethiopia","member_iso3c":"ETH","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kazakhstan","member_iso3c":"KAZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Netherlands","member_iso3c":"NLD","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sweden","member_iso3c":"SWE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":244,"un_id":244,"date":"2019-02-28","year":2019,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2019/186","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8476","meeting_number":8476,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela","short_agenda":"Venezuela","topic":"Venezuela: elections and humanitarian access","region":"Americas","issue_area":"Political crises and human rights","situation":"Venezuela","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"VEN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Political crisis in Venezuela. UCDP records no armed conflict in 2019.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have expressed concern that the May 2018 presidential election in Venezuela was neither free nor fair, called for a political process leading to new presidential elections with international observers, and called for unhindered humanitarian access.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft sought an unconstitutional change of government and would have the Council remove one president and install another; China said it ran against non-interference in Venezuela's internal affairs.","aftermath":"At the same meeting a Russian draft (S/2019/190) calling for dialogue failed (4 in favour, 7 against and 4 abstentions). The Council adopted nothing on Venezuela.","context":"The United States, which had recognized Juan Guaidó as interim president in January 2019, tabled a draft that would have declared the 2018 Venezuelan presidential election not free or fair and called for new elections and humanitarian access. China and Russia vetoed it, Russia saying it aimed at regime change. The vote was 9 in favour, 3 against (China, Russia and South Africa) and 3 abstentions (Côte d'Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea and Indonesia). A rival Russian text failed to win nine votes.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8476; https://undocs.org/en/S/2019/186","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Dominican Republic","member_iso3c":"DOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Equatorial Guinea","member_iso3c":"GNQ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":245,"un_id":245,"date":"2019-09-19","year":2019,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2019/756","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8623","meeting_number":8623,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: Idlib ceasefire","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEL; DEU; KWT","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":"BEL; DEU; KWT","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Syrian government vs insurgents (Idlib).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have decided that all parties in Idlib cease hostilities from 21 September 2019 and demanded that counter-terrorism operations comply with international law.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft would shield terrorists in Idlib and omitted a provision that the ceasefire does not apply to operations against Council-listed terrorist groups; China said forcing a vote on a divided text was not constructive given progress on the ground.","aftermath":"At the same meeting a Russian-Chinese draft (S/2019/757) with an exemption for counter-terrorism operations failed (2 in favour, 9 against and 4 abstentions). No Council resolution on Idlib followed.","context":"Belgium, Germany and Kuwait, the penholders on humanitarian issues in Syria, proposed a ceasefire in Idlib during a Syrian government offensive. China and Russia vetoed the draft, Russia saying it lacked an exemption for operations against terrorist groups. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention (Equatorial Guinea). A Russian-Chinese alternative received two votes.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8623; https://undocs.org/en/S/2019/756","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Dominican Republic","member_iso3c":"DOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Equatorial Guinea","member_iso3c":"GNQ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":246,"un_id":246,"date":"2019-12-20","year":2019,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/2019/961","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8697","meeting_number":8697,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: cross-border humanitarian aid","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEL; DEU; KWT","n_sponsors":3,"penholder":"BEL; DEU; KWT","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Humanitarian access in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have renewed the authorization for UN cross-border aid deliveries into Syria under resolution 2165 (2014) for six months plus a further six months through Bab al-Salam, Bab al-Hawa and Al Yarubiyah, dropping Al-Ramtha.","stated_reason":"Russia said the mechanism was outdated because the Syrian government had regained most of its territory and aid could go through government-controlled routes; China said aid should respect Syrian sovereignty and come mainly from within Syria.","aftermath":"At the same meeting a Russian draft (S/2019/962) to keep two crossings for six months failed (5 in favour, 6 against and 4 abstentions). On 10 January 2020 the Council adopted resolution 2504 (2020) (11 in favour, none against and 4 abstentions), which renewed Bab al-Salam and Bab al-Hawa for six months.","context":"Belgium, Germany and Kuwait sought to renew cross-border aid into Syria through three crossings for up to a year. China and Russia vetoed the draft, Russia saying the mechanism no longer fit conditions on the ground. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against. After a Russian alternative failed, on 10 January 2020 the Council adopted resolution 2504 (2020), which kept two crossings open for six months.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8697; https://undocs.org/en/S/2019/961; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2504(2020); https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8700","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Côte d'Ivoire","member_iso3c":"CIV","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Dominican Republic","member_iso3c":"DOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Equatorial Guinea","member_iso3c":"GNQ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kuwait","member_iso3c":"KWT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Peru","member_iso3c":"PER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Poland","member_iso3c":"POL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":247,"un_id":247,"date":"2020-07-07","year":2020,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2020/654","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/2020/657","meeting_number":null,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: cross-border humanitarian aid","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEL; DEU","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":"BEL; DEU","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Humanitarian access in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have renewed the authorization for UN cross-border aid into Syria under resolution 2165 (2014) for 12 months, until 10 July 2021, through Bab al-Salam and Bab al-Hawa.","stated_reason":"Russia said the mechanism was a temporary measure that should be phased out and offered its own text keeping only Bab al-Hawa for six months; China said the text ignored its amendments on the effect of unilateral coercive measures on Syria.","aftermath":"A Russian draft (S/2020/658) keeping only Bab al-Hawa for six months failed on 8 July 2020 (4 in favour, 7 against and 4 abstentions). Belgium and Germany then tabled S/2020/667, which was also vetoed, on 10 July.","context":"Belgium and Germany sought a 12-month renewal of cross-border aid into Syria through two crossings from Turkey. China and Russia vetoed the draft in a written vote held under COVID-19 procedures, Russia calling for the mechanism to be phased out and China citing the effect of sanctions on Syria. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against. A Russian text with one crossing failed to win nine votes.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/657; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/661; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/654; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/671","notes":"No S/PV meeting record: the vote was held in writing under the procedure in S/2020/253; the meeting record given is the letter that records the outcome (S/2020/657).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Dominican Republic","member_iso3c":"DOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Estonia","member_iso3c":"EST","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Saint Vincent and the Grenadines","member_iso3c":"VCT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Vietnam","member_iso3c":"VNM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":248,"un_id":248,"date":"2020-07-10","year":2020,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2020/667","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/2020/681","meeting_number":null,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: cross-border humanitarian aid","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BEL; DEU","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":"BEL; DEU","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Humanitarian access in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have renewed the authorization for UN cross-border aid into Syria for six months, until 10 January 2021, through Bab al-Salam and Bab al-Hawa.","stated_reason":"Russia said the new text kept the same one-sided approach as the earlier draft and that crossings should be closed step by step; China said the mechanism should be adjusted to conditions on the ground and stressed Syrian sovereignty.","aftermath":"A Russian amendment (S/2020/668) failed (2 in favour, 7 against and 6 abstentions), and a second Russian draft (S/2020/683) failed (4 in favour, 7 against and 4 abstentions). On 11 July 2020 the Council adopted a Belgian-German text as resolution 2533 (2020) (12 in favour, none against and 3 abstentions: China, the Dominican Republic and Russia), which renewed only Bab al-Hawa for 12 months.","context":"After their first draft was vetoed, Belgium and Germany cut the proposed renewal of cross-border aid to six months and kept two crossings. China and Russia vetoed again in a written vote, Russia saying the text had not changed in substance. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against. On 11 July the Council adopted resolution 2533 (2020), which kept only Bab al-Hawa open for a year.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/681; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/693; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/667; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/669; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/688; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/698; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2533(2020)","notes":"No S/PV meeting record: the vote was held in writing under the procedure in S/2020/253; the meeting record given is the letter that records the outcome (S/2020/681), dated 10 July 2020 and issued 13 July.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Dominican Republic","member_iso3c":"DOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Estonia","member_iso3c":"EST","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Saint Vincent and the Grenadines","member_iso3c":"VCT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Vietnam","member_iso3c":"VNM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":249,"un_id":249,"date":"2020-08-31","year":2020,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/2020/852","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/2020/865","meeting_number":null,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts","short_agenda":"Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts","topic":"Counter-terrorism: prosecution, rehabilitation and reintegration","region":"Global","issue_area":"Other thematic","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"IDN","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"IDN","countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Counter-terrorism (thematic).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have called on member states to develop strategies to prosecute, rehabilitate and reintegrate terrorists, including foreign terrorist fighters and family members who travelled with them.","stated_reason":"The United States said the text was worse than no resolution because it did not mention the repatriation of foreign terrorist fighters and their families to their countries of origin or nationality.","aftermath":"Nothing further was adopted on the subject in the Council.","context":"Indonesia, which held the presidency, proposed a draft on the prosecution, rehabilitation and reintegration of terrorists, including foreign terrorist fighters. The United States vetoed it in a written vote held under COVID-19 procedures, saying the draft left out repatriation. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. By November 2026 the Council had adopted no other resolution on the subject.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/865; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/870; https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/852","notes":"No S/PV meeting record: the vote was held in writing under the procedure in S/2020/253; the meeting record given is the letter that records the outcome (S/2020/865). That no later resolution on this theme was adopted has not been confirmed in a source.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Belgium","member_iso3c":"BEL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Dominican Republic","member_iso3c":"DOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Estonia","member_iso3c":"EST","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Germany","member_iso3c":"DEU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Indonesia","member_iso3c":"IDN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Saint Vincent and the Grenadines","member_iso3c":"VCT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Africa","member_iso3c":"ZAF","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Vietnam","member_iso3c":"VNM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":250,"un_id":250,"date":"2021-12-13","year":2021,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/2021/990","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8926","meeting_number":8926,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Maintenance of international peace and security","short_agenda":"Maintenance of international peace and security","topic":"Climate and security: climate risk in conflict prevention","region":"Global","issue_area":"Other thematic","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AFG; ALB; AND; ATG; ARM; AUS; AUT; BHS; BEL; BLZ; BIH; BWA; BGR; BFA; CPV; CAN; TCD; COM; CRI; CIV; HRV; CYP; CZE; DNK; DJI; DMA; DOM; ECU; GNQ; EST; FJI; FIN; GAB; GEO; DEU; GHA; GRC; GRD; GTM; GIN; GUY; HTI; HND; HUN; ISL; IRL; ISR; ITA; JAM; JPN; JOR; LVA; LBN; LSO; LIE; LTU; LUX; MDV; MLI; MLT; MHL; MRT; MUS; MEX; FSM; MCO; MNE; NAM; NRU; NLD; NZL; NER; NGA; MKD; NOR; PLW; PAN; PNG; POL; PRT; QAT; KOR; MDA; ROU; RWA; LCA; VCT; WSM; SMR; SEN; SYC; SLE; SGP; SVK; SVN; SLB; ESP; SDN; SWE; CHE; TLS; TON; TTO; TUN; TUV; UGA; UKR; ARE; GBR; TZA; USA; URY; VUT","n_sponsors":113,"penholder":"IRL; NER","countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Climate and security (thematic).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have asked the Secretary-General to integrate climate-related security risk into UN conflict-prevention strategies and to report on the security implications of climate change in country situations on the Council's agenda.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft would create a generic link between climate change and international security, politicize a scientific and socioeconomic issue, and divert the Council from the real causes of conflict.","aftermath":"Nothing further was adopted on climate and security in the Council.","context":"Ireland and Niger tabled the first Council draft on climate change and security, with 113 co-sponsors. Russia vetoed it, saying it would tie climate to security and politicize the issue. The vote was 12 in favour, 2 against (India and Russia) and 1 abstention (China). By November 2026 the Council had adopted no resolution on climate and security.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8926; https://undocs.org/en/S/2021/990","notes":"Ireland and Niger are given as penholders because the record says they presented the draft; no source uses the term penholder. That no later resolution was adopted has not been confirmed in a source.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Estonia","member_iso3c":"EST","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Niger","member_iso3c":"NER","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Saint Vincent and the Grenadines","member_iso3c":"VCT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Tunisia","member_iso3c":"TUN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Vietnam","member_iso3c":"VNM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":251,"un_id":251,"date":"2022-02-25","year":2022,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2022/155","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.8979","meeting_number":8979,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Letter dated 28 February 2014 from the Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/2014/136)","short_agenda":"2014 Letter from Ukraine (Ukraine)","topic":"Ukraine: Russian invasion","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Ukraine","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; AND; ATG; AUS; AUT; BHS; BRB; BEL; BLZ; BIH; BWA; BGR; CAN; CHL; COL; CRI; HRV; CYP; CZE; DNK; DOM; ECU; EST; FJI; FIN; FRA; GMB; GEO; DEU; GRC; GRD; GTM; HTI; HUN; ISL; IRL; ITA; JAM; JPN; KIR; KWT; LVA; LSO; LBR; LIE; LTU; LUX; MLT; MHL; FSM; MCO; MNE; NLD; NZL; NER; MKD; NOR; PLW; PAN; PNG; PRY; PER; POL; PRT; KOR; MDA; ROU; WSM; SMR; SGP; SVK; SVN; ESP; SUR; SWE; CHE; TLS; TTO; TUR; UKR; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":82,"penholder":"USA; ALB","countries_iso3c":"UKR; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":13243,"ucdp_dyad_id":14117,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Russia-Ukraine interstate conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have deplored Russia's aggression against Ukraine, decided that Russia must immediately withdraw its forces, and reversed its recognition of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.","stated_reason":"Russia said the text was anti-Russian and anti-Ukrainian and left out the events in Ukraine since 2014, including what it called the situation in Donbas.","aftermath":"On 27 February 2022 the Council adopted resolution 2623 (2022) (11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions), a procedural decision not subject to veto, which called an emergency special session of the General Assembly. On 2 March 2022 the Assembly adopted resolution ES-11/1 (141 in favour, 5 against and 35 abstentions).","context":"The United States and Albania tabled the draft, with 82 sponsors; it would have deplored Russia's invasion of Ukraine and demanded the withdrawal of its forces. Russia, which held the presidency, vetoed it, saying the text was one-sided. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (China, India and the United Arab Emirates). Two days later the Council adopted resolution 2623 (2022), which sent the matter to an emergency special session of the General Assembly, and the Assembly adopted resolution ES-11/1 on 2 March 2022.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.8979; https://undocs.org/en/S/2022/155; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3958806; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2623(2022); https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-11/1","notes":"The penholders (United States and Albania) are based on statements in S/PV.8979 (Mexico: 'submitted by Albania and the United States'); the catalogue lists 82 sponsors in total. The draft predates resolution 76/262, so no General Assembly debate under that resolution applies.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":252,"un_id":252,"date":"2022-05-26","year":2022,"month":5,"draft_symbol":"S/2022/431","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9048","meeting_number":9048,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Non-proliferation/Democratic People's Republic of Korea","short_agenda":"Non-proliferation/DPRK","topic":"North Korea: sanctions after ballistic missile launches","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":"North Korea","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"PRK","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"DPRK missile programme. No armed conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/76/PV.77","ga_date":"2022-06-08","draft_purpose":"The draft would have tightened sanctions on North Korea after its launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile on 24 March 2022, including lower caps on its oil imports and a ban on supplying it with tobacco.","stated_reason":"China said new sanctions would raise tension and harm North Korea's response to COVID-19, and Russia said more sanctions were a dead end and that it had asked for a presidential statement.","aftermath":"The Council took no further action on the draft; the General Assembly held its first debate under resolution 76/262 on 8 and 10 June 2022.","context":"The United States tabled a draft that would have added sanctions on North Korea after a series of ballistic missile launches, and China and Russia vetoed it in the first vetoes since the adoption of General Assembly resolution 76/262. China cited the risk of escalation and harm to North Korea's pandemic response, and Russia said more sanctions would not work. The vote was 13 in favour and 2 against. The General Assembly debated the veto on 8 and 10 June 2022.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9048; https://undocs.org/en/S/2022/431; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3975193; https://undocs.org/en/A/76/PV.77; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29","notes":"The General Assembly debate continued at A/76/PV.82 on 10 June 2022.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":253,"un_id":253,"date":"2022-07-08","year":2022,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2022/538","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9087","meeting_number":9087,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: cross-border humanitarian aid","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"IRL; NOR","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":"IRL; NOR","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Humanitarian access in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/76/PV.95","ga_date":"2022-07-21","draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended for 12 months the authorization for UN cross-border aid deliveries into north-west Syria through the Bab al-Hawa crossing.","stated_reason":"Russia said it had made clear from the start that it would not accept a 12-month extension and blamed the co-penholders, Ireland and Norway, for not finding a compromise.","aftermath":"A Russian draft (S/2022/541) for a six-month extension failed the same day (2 in favour, 3 against and 10 abstentions). On 12 July 2022 the Council adopted resolution 2642 (2022) (12 in favour, none against and 3 abstentions: France, the United Kingdom and the United States), which extended the mechanism for six months.","context":"Ireland and Norway tabled a draft that would have renewed the Bab al-Hawa cross-border aid mechanism for a year. Russia vetoed it, saying it would accept only a shorter renewal. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (China). A Russian six-month draft failed the same day, and four days later the Council adopted resolution 2642 (2022), a six-month renewal.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9087; https://undocs.org/en/S/2022/538; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3980445; https://undocs.org/en/A/76/PV.95; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2642(2022)","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":254,"un_id":254,"date":"2022-09-30","year":2022,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2022/720","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9143","meeting_number":9143,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Maintenance of peace and security of Ukraine","short_agenda":"Ukraine","topic":"Ukraine: referendums and annexation of four regions","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Occupation, territory and settlements","situation":"Ukraine","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; USA","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":"USA; ALB","countries_iso3c":"UKR; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":13243,"ucdp_dyad_id":14117,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Russia-Ukraine interstate conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"emergency special session","ga_meeting":"A/ES-11/PV.12","ga_date":"2022-10-10","draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the referendums Russia organized in the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine, declared them invalid, and called on states not to recognize any change in the status of those regions.","stated_reason":"Russia said the Council had never before condemned one of its own members, called the draft a provocation meant to make it use the veto, and said the referendum results showed the will of the regions' residents.","aftermath":"The General Assembly took up the matter in its resumed eleventh emergency special session. On 12 October 2022 it adopted resolution ES-11/4 (143 in favour, 5 against and 35 abstentions), which declared the referendums and attempted annexation invalid. The Council took no further action.","context":"The United States and Albania tabled a draft that would have condemned Russia's referendums in four occupied Ukrainian regions; the vote came on the day Russia announced their annexation. Russia vetoed it, calling the draft a provocation and saying the votes reflected local will. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Brazil, China, Gabon and India). On 12 October 2022 the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-11/4 at its emergency special session.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9143; https://undocs.org/en/S/2022/720; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3989532; https://undocs.org/en/A/ES-11/PV.12; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-11/4","notes":"No stand-alone debate under resolution 76/262 was held; under that resolution the requirement falls away when the Assembly meets in an emergency special session on the same situation, and the veto was taken up in the resumed eleventh emergency special session (A/ES-11/PV.12 to PV.14, 10 to 12 October 2022). The General Assembly meeting given is the first of those meetings.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"India","member_iso3c":"IND","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ireland","member_iso3c":"IRL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Kenya","member_iso3c":"KEN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mexico","member_iso3c":"MEX","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Norway","member_iso3c":"NOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":255,"un_id":255,"date":"2023-07-11","year":2023,"month":7,"draft_symbol":"S/2023/506","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9371","meeting_number":9371,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Syria)","topic":"Syria: cross-border humanitarian aid","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Syria","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA; CHE","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":"BRA; CHE","countries_iso3c":"SYR","ucdp_conflict_id":299,"ucdp_dyad_id":11973,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Humanitarian access in the Syrian conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/77/PV.90","ga_date":"2023-07-19","draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended for nine months the authorization for UN cross-border aid deliveries into north-west Syria through the Bab al-Hawa crossing.","stated_reason":"Russia said Western states disregarded the interests of Syrians and tried to provoke a veto, and that it would accept only a six-month extension.","aftermath":"A Russian draft (S/2023/507) for a six-month extension failed the same day (2 in favour, 3 against and 10 abstentions). The Council authorization lapsed, and the UN later continued deliveries through Bab al-Hawa with the consent of the Syrian government.","context":"Brazil and Switzerland, the penholders, proposed a nine-month renewal of the Bab al-Hawa cross-border aid mechanism, which Russia vetoed. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (China). Russia then proposed a six-month renewal, which failed (2 in favour, 3 against and 10 abstentions). The Council authorization lapsed, and the General Assembly debated the veto on 19 July 2023.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9371; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/506; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4015126; https://undocs.org/en/A/77/PV.90; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/526","notes":"Russia's preference for six months is taken from the competing draft S/2023/507 voted at the same meeting.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":256,"un_id":256,"date":"2023-08-30","year":2023,"month":8,"draft_symbol":"S/2023/638","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9408","meeting_number":9408,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in Mali","short_agenda":"Mali","topic":"Mali: sanctions and Panel of Experts renewal","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Sanctions","situation":"Mali","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"FRA; ARE","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":"FRA; ARE","countries_iso3c":"MLI","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Mali sanctions regime tied to the 2015 peace agreement. Several UCDP conflicts in Mali in 2023 (11347, 14113, 16038), none clearly the subject; left missing.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/78/PV.3","ga_date":"2023-09-11","draft_purpose":"The draft would have renewed the Mali sanctions regime set up by resolution 2374 (2017) and extended the mandate of its Panel of Experts until 30 September 2024.","stated_reason":"Russia said the Panel of Experts had become a tool of foreign influence in Mali and was no longer needed, and proposed instead to disband the Panel and make a final extension of the sanctions.","aftermath":"A Russian draft (S/2023/639) to disband the Panel and extend the sanctions one final time failed the same day (1 in favour, 1 against and 13 abstentions). The sanctions regime and the Panel lapsed on 31 August 2023, as set by resolution 2649 (2022); Mali had asked for the regime to end (S/2023/605).","context":"France and the United Arab Emirates proposed a one-year renewal of the Mali sanctions regime, which Mali's transitional government had asked to end, and of its Panel of Experts. Russia vetoed the draft, saying the Panel served foreign interests. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (China). A Russian alternative failed, and the sanctions regime ended.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9408; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/638; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4020066; https://undocs.org/en/A/78/PV.3; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/605","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":257,"un_id":257,"date":"2023-10-18","year":2023,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2023/773","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9442","meeting_number":9442,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza humanitarian pauses (Brazilian draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BRA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"BRA","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"emergency special session","ga_meeting":"A/ES-10/PV.39","ga_date":"2023-10-26","draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the Hamas attacks of 7 October 2023 and violence against civilians, called for humanitarian pauses to allow aid into Gaza, and urged Israel to rescind its order for civilians to leave northern Gaza.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft did not mention Israel's right of self-defence and that the Council should let ongoing diplomacy by the United States and others play out.","aftermath":"Two Russian amendments calling for a ceasefire failed before the vote. After a US draft was vetoed on 25 October, the Council adopted resolution 2712 (2023) on 15 November 2023 (12 in favour, none against and 3 abstentions), which called for humanitarian pauses in Gaza.","context":"Brazil, which held the presidency, tabled a draft that would have called for humanitarian pauses in Gaza after the 7 October attacks. The United States vetoed it, saying it did not mention Israel's right of self-defence. The vote was 12 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (Russia and the United Kingdom). The General Assembly took up the veto in its resumed tenth emergency special session and adopted resolution ES-10/21 on 27 October, and the Council later adopted resolution 2712 (2023).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9442; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/773; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4024576; https://undocs.org/en/A/ES-10/PV.39; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2712(2023); https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/21","notes":"No stand-alone debate under resolution 76/262 was held; the veto was taken up in the resumed tenth emergency special session (A/ES-10/PV.39 to PV.44, 26 October to 2 November 2023), which under resolution 76/262 replaces the debate. Brazil is given as penholder as sole sponsor and drafter; no source uses the term penholder.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":258,"un_id":258,"date":"2023-10-25","year":2023,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2023/792","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9453","meeting_number":9453,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza humanitarian pauses (US draft)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Humanitarian access and protection","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"emergency special session","ga_meeting":"A/ES-10/PV.39","ga_date":"2023-10-26","draft_purpose":"The draft would have condemned the Hamas attacks, affirmed the right of states to self-defence, and called for humanitarian pauses and other measures to allow aid into Gaza.","stated_reason":"Russia said the text did not call for a ceasefire or condemn attacks on civilians in Gaza and would serve as a licence for an Israeli ground offensive, and China said it set aside members' consensus and did not reflect calls for a ceasefire.","aftermath":"A Russian draft (S/2023/795) calling for a humanitarian ceasefire failed the same day (4 in favour, 2 against and 9 abstentions). On 15 November 2023 the Council adopted resolution 2712 (2023) (12 in favour, none against and 3 abstentions).","context":"The United States tabled a draft that would have called for humanitarian pauses in Gaza and affirmed the right of states to self-defence. China and Russia vetoed it, saying it did not call for a ceasefire. The vote was 10 in favour, 3 against (China, Russia and the United Arab Emirates) and 2 abstentions (Brazil and Mozambique). A Russian ceasefire draft failed the same day, and three weeks later the Council adopted resolution 2712 (2023).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9453; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/792; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4025288; https://undocs.org/en/A/ES-10/PV.39; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2712(2023)","notes":"No stand-alone debate under resolution 76/262 was held; the veto was taken up in the resumed tenth emergency special session (A/ES-10/PV.39 to PV.44, from 26 October 2023), which began the day after this veto.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":259,"un_id":259,"date":"2023-12-08","year":2023,"month":12,"draft_symbol":"S/2023/970","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9499","meeting_number":9499,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza humanitarian ceasefire","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"AFG; AND; AGO; ATG; ARG; AZE; BHS; BHR; BGD; BRB; BLR; BEL; BLZ; BEN; BOL; BIH; BWA; BRA; KHM; CAF; TCD; CHL; CHN; COL; COM; COG; CRI; CUB; COD; DJI; DOM; EGY; SLV; ERI; ETH; FJI; FIN; GMB; GRD; GUY; ISL; IDN; IRQ; IRL; JAM; JOR; KAZ; KEN; KWT; KGZ; LAO; LBN; LSO; LBY; LUX; MYS; MDV; MLT; MRT; MEX; MAR; NAM; NZL; NIC; NGA; NOR; OMN; PAK; PER; PHL; POL; PRT; QAT; RUS; KNA; LCA; VCT; SMR; SAU; SEN; SYC; SLE; SGP; SVN; SOM; ZAF; ESP; LKA; SDN; SUR; TJK; THA; TLS; TTO; TUR; UGA; ARE; UZB; VEN; VNM; YEM; ZWE","n_sponsors":102,"penholder":"ARE","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"emergency special session","ga_meeting":"A/ES-10/PV.45","ga_date":"2023-12-12","draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, and humanitarian access.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft was rushed and unbalanced, did not condemn the Hamas attack of 7 October, and would not have changed conditions on the ground.","aftermath":"On 12 December 2023 the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/22 (153 in favour, 10 against and 23 abstentions), which demanded a humanitarian ceasefire. On 22 December 2023 the Council adopted resolution 2720 (2023) on humanitarian aid.","context":"The United Arab Emirates tabled a draft, co-sponsored by 102 states, that would have demanded a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza after the Secretary-General invoked Article 99 of the Charter to bring the situation to the Council. The United States vetoed the draft, saying it did not condemn Hamas and was unbalanced. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). Four days later the General Assembly adopted a ceasefire demand in resolution ES-10/22.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9499; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/970; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4029950; https://undocs.org/en/A/ES-10/PV.45; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/22","notes":"Treating resolution 2720 (2023) as the follow-up text is a judgement: it was a different UAE draft on aid and did not demand a ceasefire. No stand-alone debate under resolution 76/262 was held; the veto was taken up in the resumed tenth emergency special session (A/ES-10/PV.45 to PV.48, from 12 December 2023).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":260,"un_id":260,"date":"2023-12-22","year":2023,"month":12,"draft_symbol":null,"draft_note":"Oral amendment","meeting_record":"S/PV.9520","meeting_number":9520,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: amendment to Gaza aid draft (suspension of hostilities)","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":10,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":4,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"RUS","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"ARE","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/78/PV.51","ga_date":"2024-01-09","draft_purpose":"The oral amendment, proposed by Russia, would have changed operative paragraph 2 of draft S/2023/1029 to call for 'an urgent suspension of hostilities to allow safe and unhindered humanitarian access and for urgent steps towards a sustainable cessation of hostilities', the wording of an earlier version of the draft, in place of a call to 'create the conditions for a sustainable cessation of hostilities'.","stated_reason":"The United States said it did not support the amendment because the draft as it stood already called for urgent steps on humanitarian access and was a strong step forward.","aftermath":"At the same meeting the Council adopted the unamended draft S/2023/1029 as resolution 2720 (2023) (13 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions: Russia and the United States).","context":"Russia proposed an oral amendment to the United Arab Emirates' draft on aid to Gaza, to restore earlier wording that called for an urgent suspension of hostilities. The United States vetoed the amendment, saying the draft as it stood was a strong step forward. The vote was 10 in favour, 1 against and 4 abstentions (Albania, Japan, Switzerland and the United Kingdom). The Council then adopted the unamended text as resolution 2720 (2023), and the General Assembly debated the veto on 9 January 2024.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9520; https://undocs.org/en/A/78/PV.51; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/2023/1029; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2720(2023)","notes":"The sponsor of the oral amendment, which has no document symbol, is Russia; the penholder given is the UAE as drafter of the underlying text S/2023/1029. The General Assembly debate continued at A/78/PV.52 the same day.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Albania","member_iso3c":"ALB","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Brazil","member_iso3c":"BRA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Gabon","member_iso3c":"GAB","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ghana","member_iso3c":"GHA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Arab Emirates","member_iso3c":"ARE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":261,"un_id":261,"date":"2024-02-20","year":2024,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2024/173","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9552","meeting_number":9552,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza immediate humanitarian ceasefire","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"DZA","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/78/PV.59","ga_date":"2024-03-04","draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza to be respected by all parties, the release of all hostages, unhindered humanitarian access, and rejected the forced displacement of Palestinians.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft would put sensitive hostage negotiations at risk and would not achieve a lasting peace, and said it would offer its own text for a temporary ceasefire.","aftermath":"China and Russia vetoed a US draft (S/2024/239) on 22 March 2024. On 25 March 2024 the Council adopted resolution 2728 (2024) (14 in favour, none against and 1 abstention: the United States), which demanded an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan.","context":"Algeria, on behalf of the Arab Group, tabled a draft that would have demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza. The United States vetoed it, saying it would endanger hostage talks. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (the United Kingdom). After a US draft also failed, the Council adopted resolution 2728 (2024) on 25 March 2024.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9552; https://undocs.org/en/S/2024/173; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4038545; https://undocs.org/en/A/78/PV.59; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2728(2024)","notes":"The Arab Group framing is taken from statements in A/78/PV.61 and S/PV.9552. The General Assembly debate continued on 5 March 2024 (A/78/PV.60 and PV.61).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":262,"un_id":262,"date":"2024-03-22","year":2024,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/2024/239","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9584","meeting_number":9584,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza ceasefire linked to hostage deal","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":3,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/78/PV.66","ga_date":"2024-04-08","draft_purpose":"The draft would have determined the need for an immediate and sustained ceasefire to protect civilians and allow aid, tied to an agreement on the release of hostages.","stated_reason":"China said the text was ambiguous, did not demand an immediate ceasefire and set preconditions for one, and Russia said the text was unacceptable and would cover the Council in shame.","aftermath":"On 25 March 2024 the Council adopted resolution 2728 (2024), a text drafted by the elected members, which demanded an immediate ceasefire for Ramadan (14 in favour, none against and 1 abstention).","context":"The United States tabled a draft that would have linked a ceasefire in Gaza to a hostage deal. China and Russia vetoed it; China said it did not demand an immediate ceasefire. The vote was 11 in favour, 3 against (Algeria, China and Russia) and 1 abstention (Guyana). Three days later the Council adopted the elected members' draft as resolution 2728 (2024).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9584; https://undocs.org/en/S/2024/239; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4042000; https://undocs.org/en/A/78/PV.66; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2728(2024); https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9586","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"no","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":263,"un_id":263,"date":"2024-03-28","year":2024,"month":3,"draft_symbol":"S/2024/255","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9591","meeting_number":9591,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Non-proliferation/Democratic People's Republic of Korea","short_agenda":"Non-proliferation/DPRK","topic":"North Korea: sanctions Panel of Experts renewal","region":"Asia","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":"North Korea","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"PRK","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"DPRK sanctions Panel of Experts. No armed conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/78/PV.68","ga_date":"2024-04-11","draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended until 30 April 2025 the mandate of the Panel of Experts assisting the Security Council committee on sanctions against North Korea, established by resolution 1718 (2006).","stated_reason":"Russia said the sanctions regime had lost its relevance and failed to improve the situation on the Korean peninsula, and that Western states were using it to pressure Pyongyang while militarizing the region.","aftermath":"The Panel of Experts' mandate expired on 30 April 2024. The sanctions measures remained in force as of November 2026.","context":"The United States tabled a draft that would have renewed for a year the Panel of Experts that monitors sanctions on North Korea. Russia vetoed it, saying the sanctions were outdated and used to pressure Pyongyang. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (China). The General Assembly debated the veto on 11 April 2024, and the Panel's mandate ended on 30 April 2024.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9591; https://undocs.org/en/S/2024/255; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4042794; https://undocs.org/en/A/78/PV.68; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2680(2023)","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":264,"un_id":264,"date":"2024-04-18","year":2024,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/2024/312","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9609","meeting_number":9609,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Admission of new members","short_agenda":"Admission of new Members","topic":"Membership: Palestine","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"UN membership and appointments","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":12,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"DZA","countries_iso3c":"PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Membership application; no armed conflict concerned.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/78/PV.74","ga_date":"2024-05-01","draft_purpose":"The draft would have recommended to the General Assembly that the State of Palestine be admitted to membership of the United Nations.","stated_reason":"The United States said premature action in New York would not achieve statehood, that statehood should come through negotiations between the parties, and that the Committee on the Admission of New Members had not reached unanimity on whether Palestine met the criteria.","aftermath":"On 10 May 2024 the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/23 (143 in favour, 9 against and 25 abstentions). The resolution determined that Palestine qualifies for membership, gave it additional rights in the Assembly and asked the Council to reconsider the matter. The Council did not take the matter up again in 2024.","context":"Algeria, on behalf of the Arab Group, tabled a draft that would have recommended the admission of Palestine as a UN member. The United States vetoed it, saying statehood should come through direct negotiations. The vote was 12 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions (Switzerland and the United Kingdom). The General Assembly debated the veto on 1 May 2024 and on 10 May adopted resolution ES-10/23 on Palestine's membership rights.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9609; https://undocs.org/en/S/2024/312; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4044742; https://undocs.org/en/A/78/PV.74; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/23","notes":"The statement that the Council did not take the matter up again in 2024 has not been confirmed in a primary source. The General Assembly debate continued at A/78/PV.75 the same day.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":265,"un_id":265,"date":"2024-04-24","year":2024,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/2024/302","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9616","meeting_number":9616,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Non-proliferation","short_agenda":"Non-proliferation","topic":"Outer space: weapons of mass destruction","region":"Global","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":null,"vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":13,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":1,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"ALB; ATG; ARG; AUS; BHS; BGD; BEL; BIH; BGR; CPV; CAN; COL; CRI; HRV; CYP; CZE; DNK; DJI; EST; FIN; FRA; GEO; DEU; GRC; HND; HUN; ISL; IRL; ISR; ITA; JPN; KEN; LVA; LSO; LBR; LIE; LTU; LUX; MHL; FSM; MNE; NLD; NZL; MKD; NOR; PLW; PAN; PRY; POL; PRT; KOR; MDA; ROU; SMR; SGP; SVK; SVN; ESP; SWE; TLS; TUR; UKR; ARE; GBR; USA","n_sponsors":65,"penholder":"USA; JPN","countries_iso3c":null,"ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Weapons of mass destruction in outer space (thematic).","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/78/PV.78","ga_date":"2024-05-06","draft_purpose":"The draft would have affirmed the obligation of states under the Outer Space Treaty not to place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit and called on states not to develop such weapons for that purpose.","stated_reason":"Russia said the ban was already in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty and that by singling out weapons of mass destruction the sponsors avoided a ban on placing any weapons in space.","aftermath":"Before the vote a Russian-Chinese amendment (S/2024/323) calling on states not to place any weapons in outer space failed (7 in favour, 7 against and 1 abstention). On 20 May 2024 a Russian draft on the same theme (S/2024/383) failed by the same vote.","context":"The United States and Japan, with 65 sponsors in total, tabled a draft that would have reaffirmed the ban on placing weapons of mass destruction in orbit. Russia vetoed it, saying it omitted a ban on all weapons in space. The vote was 13 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention (China). A Russian-Chinese amendment and a later Russian draft on all weapons in space both failed (7 in favour, 7 against and 1 abstention).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9616; https://undocs.org/en/S/2024/302; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4045253; https://undocs.org/en/A/78/PV.78; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9630","notes":null,"detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":266,"un_id":266,"date":"2024-11-18","year":2024,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/2024/826","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9786","meeting_number":9786,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Reports of the Secretary-General on the Sudan and South Sudan","short_agenda":"Sudan and South Sudan","topic":"Sudan: cessation of hostilities and protection of civilians","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Sudan","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"SLE; GBR","n_sponsors":2,"penholder":"GBR; SLE","countries_iso3c":"SDN","ucdp_conflict_id":309,"ucdp_dyad_id":17497,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Sudan government (SAF) vs RSF.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/79/PV.42","ga_date":"2024-11-26","draft_purpose":"The draft would have called on the warring parties in Sudan to cease hostilities, agree humanitarian pauses, protect civilians and allow humanitarian access, and to implement the commitments of the Jeddah Declaration.","stated_reason":"Russia said the draft imposed outside views on Sudan and treated the Sudanese government as one party among others, when the government alone was responsible for protecting civilians and controlling the borders.","aftermath":"The Council adopted no follow-up text on Sudan in 2024; the General Assembly debated the veto on 26 November 2024.","context":"The United Kingdom and Sierra Leone tabled a draft that would have called for a cessation of hostilities and protection of civilians in Sudan. Russia vetoed it, saying the text undermined the authority of the Sudanese government. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. The General Assembly debated the veto on 26 November 2024.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9786; https://undocs.org/en/S/2024/826; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4066685; https://undocs.org/en/A/79/PV.42; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29","notes":"The penholders (the United Kingdom, with Sierra Leone as co-penholder) are inferred from the sponsorship; that no follow-up text was adopted in 2024 has not been confirmed.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":267,"un_id":267,"date":"2024-11-20","year":2024,"month":11,"draft_symbol":"S/2024/835","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9790","meeting_number":9790,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza immediate ceasefire","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; ECU; GUY; JPN; MLT; MOZ; KOR; SLE; SVN; CHE","n_sponsors":10,"penholder":"DZA; ECU; GUY; JPN; MLT; MOZ; KOR; SLE; SVN; CHE","countries_iso3c":"ISR; PSE","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"emergency special session","ga_meeting":"A/ES-10/PV.57","ga_date":"2024-12-04","draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, and separately the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, along with unhindered humanitarian access.","stated_reason":"The United States said it could not support an unconditional ceasefire that was not linked to the release of hostages and that the draft would tell Hamas it need not return to negotiations.","aftermath":"The General Assembly took up the veto in its resumed tenth emergency special session and on 11 December 2024 adopted resolution ES-10/25 (159 in favour, 9 against and 11 abstentions), which demanded a ceasefire in Gaza.","context":"The 10 elected members tabled a draft that would have demanded an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and the release of hostages. The United States vetoed it, saying a ceasefire had to be linked to the release of hostages. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. On 11 December 2024 the General Assembly adopted a ceasefire demand in resolution ES-10/25.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9790; https://undocs.org/en/S/2024/835; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4067111; https://undocs.org/en/A/ES-10/PV.57; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/ES-10/25","notes":"No stand-alone debate under resolution 76/262 was held; the veto was taken up in the resumed tenth emergency special session (A/ES-10/PV.57 to PV.59, from 4 December 2024).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Ecuador","member_iso3c":"ECU","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Japan","member_iso3c":"JPN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Malta","member_iso3c":"MLT","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Mozambique","member_iso3c":"MOZ","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Switzerland","member_iso3c":"CHE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":268,"un_id":268,"date":"2025-02-24","year":2025,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2025/116","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9866","meeting_number":9866,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Maintenance of peace and security of Ukraine","short_agenda":"Ukraine","topic":"Ukraine: amendment to US draft (just peace)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Ukraine","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DNK; FRA; GRC; SVN; GBR","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"UKR; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":13243,"ucdp_dyad_id":14117,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Russia-Ukraine interstate conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/79/PV.60","ga_date":"2025-03-06","draft_purpose":"The amendment, proposed by Denmark, France, Greece, Slovenia and the United Kingdom, would have reworded operative paragraph 1 of US draft S/2025/112 to read: 'Implores a swift end to the conflict and further urges a just, lasting and comprehensive peace between Ukraine and Russia, in line with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of the sovereign equality and territorial integrity of States'.","stated_reason":"Russia said the European amendments distorted the US text into an anti-Russian ultimatum, and that the Charter reference singled out territorial integrity while leaving out human rights and self-determination.","aftermath":"The Council then adopted the unamended US draft S/2025/112 as resolution 2774 (2025) (10 in favour, none against and 5 abstentions: Denmark, France, Greece, Slovenia and the United Kingdom). The amendment S/2025/114 and two Russian amendments (S/2025/117 and S/2025/118) failed to win nine votes. Earlier the same day the General Assembly adopted resolutions ES-11/7 and ES-11/8.","context":"Denmark, France, Greece, Slovenia and the United Kingdom proposed an amendment that would have tied the call for peace in a US draft on the war in Ukraine to the UN Charter and to the sovereign equality and territorial integrity of states. Russia vetoed it, saying it stressed territorial integrity and ignored self-determination. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (Pakistan, Panama and the United States). The Council then adopted the unamended US draft as resolution 2774 (2025).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9866; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4077297/files/S_PV.9866-EN.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4077111; https://www.un.org/pga/wp-content/uploads/sites/109/2025/03/Summary-of-veto-debate_Maintenance-of-Peace-and-Security-of-Ukraine.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A/79/PV.60; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29","notes":"The penholder of the amendment is not stated; the United Kingdom introduced it on behalf of the five sponsors. The account rests on the verbatim record S/PV.9866.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":269,"un_id":269,"date":"2025-02-24","year":2025,"month":2,"draft_symbol":"S/2025/115","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9866","meeting_number":9866,"vetoed_item":"amendment","agenda":"Maintenance of peace and security of Ukraine","short_agenda":"Ukraine","topic":"Ukraine: amendment to US draft (territorial integrity)","region":"Europe","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Ukraine","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":9,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":5,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DNK; FRA; GRC; SVN; GBR","n_sponsors":5,"penholder":null,"countries_iso3c":"UKR; RUS","ucdp_conflict_id":13243,"ucdp_dyad_id":14117,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Russia-Ukraine interstate conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/79/PV.60","ga_date":"2025-03-06","draft_purpose":"The amendment, proposed by Denmark, France, Greece, Slovenia and the United Kingdom, would have added a third preambular paragraph to US draft S/2025/112 reaffirming the Council's commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, extending to its territorial waters.","stated_reason":"Russia said the European amendments distorted the US text into an anti-Russian ultimatum and that, by stressing territorial integrity alone, they ignored human rights and the right of self-determination, which it said Kyiv had violated.","aftermath":"The Council then adopted the unamended US draft S/2025/112 as resolution 2774 (2025) (10 in favour, none against and 5 abstentions: Denmark, France, Greece, Slovenia and the United Kingdom). The amendment S/2025/114 and two Russian amendments (S/2025/117 and S/2025/118) failed to win nine votes. Earlier the same day the General Assembly adopted resolutions ES-11/7 and ES-11/8.","context":"Denmark, France, Greece, Slovenia and the United Kingdom proposed an amendment that would have added a paragraph reaffirming Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity to a US draft calling for a swift end to the 'Russian Federation-Ukraine conflict'. Russia vetoed it, saying the European texts turned the US draft into an anti-Russian ultimatum. The vote was 9 in favour, 1 against and 5 abstentions (China, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama and the United States); nine votes is the minimum needed for adoption. The Council then adopted the unamended US draft as resolution 2774 (2025).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9866; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4077297/files/S_PV.9866-EN.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4077111; https://www.un.org/pga/wp-content/uploads/sites/109/2025/03/Summary-of-veto-debate_Maintenance-of-Peace-and-Security-of-Ukraine.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A/79/PV.60; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29","notes":"The penholder of the amendment is not stated; the United Kingdom introduced it on behalf of the five sponsors. The account rests on the verbatim record S/PV.9866. The General Assembly debate covered both vetoes of 24 Feb 2025 (S/2025/115 and S/2025/116) in one meeting.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":270,"un_id":270,"date":"2025-06-04","year":2025,"month":6,"draft_symbol":"S/2025/353","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.9929","meeting_number":9929,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza ceasefire and humanitarian access","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; DNK; GRC; GUY; PAK; PAN; KOR; SLE; SVN; SOM","n_sponsors":10,"penholder":"DZA; DNK; GRC; GUY; PAK; PAN; KOR; SLE; SVN; SOM","countries_iso3c":"PSE; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"emergency special session","ga_meeting":"A/ES-10/PV.60","ga_date":"2025-06-12","draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza respected by all parties, recalled the demand for the release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups, and demanded the lifting of all restrictions on the entry of humanitarian aid and its distribution at scale, including by the UN.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft failed to condemn Hamas or call for it to disarm and leave Gaza, drew a false equivalence between Israel and Hamas, would undermine ceasefire talks led by the US, Egypt and Qatar, and ignored the faults of the prior aid system.","aftermath":"No Council action followed directly. On 12 June 2025 the General Assembly, in its resumed tenth emergency special session, adopted resolution ES-10/27 (149 in favour, 12 against and 19 abstentions), which demanded a ceasefire. On 17 November 2025 the Council adopted resolution 2803 (2025), which endorsed the US Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict.","context":"The 10 elected members tabled a draft that would have demanded a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the release of hostages and the lifting of all limits on aid. The United States vetoed it, saying it did not condemn Hamas or require it to disarm and would undercut ceasefire talks. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. On 12 June 2025 the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/27 at its tenth emergency special session.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.9929; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4083305/files/S_PV.9929-EN.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4083296; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4077111; https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?p=A/ES-10/PV.60; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4083529","notes":"No separate General Assembly debate under the veto initiative was held; the General Assembly meeting given (A/ES-10/PV.60, 12 June 2025) belongs to the resumed tenth emergency special session. The draft was prepared by the ten elected members collectively (Slovenia introduced it); no single penholder is named.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":271,"un_id":271,"date":"2025-09-18","year":2025,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2025/583","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.10000","meeting_number":10000,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question","short_agenda":"Middle East, including Palestinian question","topic":"Israel/Palestine: Gaza ceasefire, hostages and humanitarian access","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Israel and Palestine","vetoed_by":"US","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":0,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":1,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":14,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":0,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"DZA; DNK; GRC; GUY; PAK; PAN; KOR; SLE; SVN; SOM","n_sponsors":10,"penholder":"DZA; DNK; GRC; GUY; PAK; PAN; KOR; SLE; SVN; SOM","countries_iso3c":"PSE; ISR","ucdp_conflict_id":234,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":true,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/80/PV.15","ga_date":"2025-10-01","draft_purpose":"The draft would have demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups, and that Israel lift all restrictions on the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza and ensure its distribution.","stated_reason":"The United States said the draft failed to condemn Hamas or recognize Israel's right to defend itself, drew a false equivalence between Israel and Hamas, treated the hostages as an afterthought and relied on a famine analysis it called flawed.","aftermath":"No Council resolution followed directly. A ceasefire under the US plan took effect in October 2025. On 17 November 2025 the Council adopted resolution 2803 (2025) (13 in favour, none against and 2 abstentions: China and Russia), which endorsed the Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict.","context":"After the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification reported famine in Gaza governorate in August 2025, the 10 elected members tabled a second draft that would have demanded a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all hostages and an end to Israeli limits on aid. The United States vetoed the draft, saying it did not condemn Hamas or recognize Israel's right to self-defence. The vote was 14 in favour and 1 against. In November 2025 the Council endorsed the US plan for Gaza in resolution 2803 (2025).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.10000; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4088925/files/S_PV.10000-EN.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4088725; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4077111; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4093209; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://www.un.org/pga/wp-content/uploads/sites/110/2025/10/Summary-of-the-15th-plenary-meeting-of-the-General-Assembly-during-its-80th-session-under-agenda-item-64-entitled-Use-of-the-veto.pdf; https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2803(2025)","notes":"The General Assembly debate spanned A/80/PV.15 and A/80/PV.16 on 1 October 2025, according to the UNU table and the title of the summary by the President of the General Assembly; this has not been confirmed against the meeting records. The aftermath is partly supported by S/RES/2803 (2025), which welcomes the 'Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity of 13 October 2025' and the parties' role in facilitating the ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. The exact start date of the ceasefire is not stated. The penholders are the ten elected members collectively (Denmark introduced the draft).","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Algeria","member_iso3c":"DZA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Guyana","member_iso3c":"GUY","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Sierra Leone","member_iso3c":"SLE","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Slovenia","member_iso3c":"SVN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"South Korea","member_iso3c":"KOR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true}]},{"veto_id":272,"un_id":272,"date":"2026-04-07","year":2026,"month":4,"draft_symbol":"S/2026/273","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.10130","meeting_number":10130,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation in the Middle East","short_agenda":"Middle East (Strait of Hormuz)","topic":"Iran: maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Use of force and ceasefires","situation":"Iran","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"BHR; JOR; KWT; QAT; SAU; ARE","n_sponsors":6,"penholder":"BHR","countries_iso3c":"IRN","ucdp_conflict_id":14609,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"direct","ucdp_match_note":"Iranian attacks on shipping after US and Israeli strikes on Iran in 2026. Matched to Iran-Israel. UCDP v26.1 ends in 2025, so the 2026 conflict-year is not yet coded; check against v27.1.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/80/PV.79","ga_date":"2026-04-16","draft_purpose":"The draft would have determined that Iran's attacks and threats against shipping near the Strait of Hormuz threatened international peace and security, demanded that Iran stop them, and strongly encouraged interested States to coordinate defensive efforts, including escorts of merchant vessels, to secure navigation through the Strait.","stated_reason":"Russia said the text blamed Iran alone and ignored the US and Israeli strikes on Iran that it called the root cause, and that the call for protective measures could be read as approving the use of force; China said the draft was one-sided, mentioned armed escorts and could be misused to legitimize unauthorized military action.","aftermath":"No Council resolution on the Strait of Hormuz followed. China and Russia circulated a rival draft calling on all parties to halt military activities; no vote on it is recorded. The General Assembly held a veto debate on 16 April 2026.","context":"Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates tabled a draft that would have condemned Iranian attacks on shipping near the Strait of Hormuz and encouraged states to coordinate defensive efforts, including naval escorts. In March 2026 the Council had adopted resolution 2817 (2026) on Iranian attacks on Gulf states, with China and Russia abstaining. China and Russia vetoed the new draft, saying it ignored the US and Israeli strikes on Iran and could be used to justify force. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against and 2 abstentions (Colombia and Pakistan).","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.10130; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4108176/files/S_PV.10130-EN.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4107740; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4131902; https://www.ungeneva.org/en/news-media/news/2025/06/106978/five-countries-elected-serve-un-security-council; https://assemblyforpeace.unu.edu/?p=29; https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/04/1167261","notes":"The General Assembly debate spanned A/80/PV.79 and A/80/PV.80 on 16 April 2026, according to the UNU table and UN media; this has not been confirmed against the meeting records. Whether the Russian-Chinese rival draft was ever voted on is not confirmed beyond press reports. Bahrain as penholder is inferred from its statement that it led negotiations on the text; no source uses the term penholder.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bahrain","member_iso3c":"BHR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Democratic Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Latvia","member_iso3c":"LVA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":273,"un_id":273,"date":"2026-09-17","year":2026,"month":9,"draft_symbol":"S/2026/740","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.10224","meeting_number":10224,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"Non-proliferation","short_agenda":"Non-proliferation","topic":"Iran: sanctions Panel of Experts renewal","region":"Middle East","issue_area":"Non-proliferation and disarmament","situation":"Iran","vetoed_by":"China; Russia","n_vetoing":2,"veto_china":1,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":2,"vote_abstain":2,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"IRN","ucdp_conflict_id":null,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"none","ucdp_match_note":"Iran sanctions Panel of Experts. No armed conflict.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":"veto initiative debate","ga_meeting":"A/81/PV.16","ga_date":"2026-10-01","draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended until September 2027 the mandate of the Panel of Experts assisting the 1737 Iran sanctions committee, created by resolution 1929 (2010) and revived by the September 2025 snapback, and asked it to report on Iran's compliance with the reinstated sanctions.","stated_reason":"China and Russia said the reinstatement ('snapback') of the pre-2015 Iran sanctions was invalid, and that resolution 2231 (2015), and with it Council consideration of the Iranian nuclear issue, expired on 18 October 2025, so the draft had no legal basis.","aftermath":"No further Council action on the Panel followed; the United States said it would keep working within the 1737 Committee to set up a panel, name a chair and update the sanctions list.","context":"The United States proposed extending for a year the Panel of Experts that monitors the UN sanctions on Iran, which were reinstated in September 2025 through the 'snapback' procedure of resolution 2231 (2015). China and Russia vetoed the draft, saying the snapback was invalid and that the Council's consideration of the Iranian nuclear issue ended when resolution 2231 expired in October 2025. The vote was 11 in favour, 2 against and 2 abstentions (Pakistan and Somalia), the same split as in the procedural vote needed to adopt the agenda. The General Assembly debated the veto on 1 October 2026.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.10224; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4128549/files/S_PV.10224-EN.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4128531; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4131902; https://media.un.org/avlibrary/en/asset/d363/d3639019; https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/10/1168505; https://press.un.org/en/2026/ga12792.doc.htm","notes":"The General Assembly meeting symbol A/81/PV.16 is inferred from the title in the UN audiovisual library ('16th plenary meeting, 81st session', 1 October 2026); the meeting record is not yet in the UN Digital Library, and the debate may have continued into a second meeting. The expiry date in the draft is a placeholder ('XX September 2027'). The penholder is based on the UK statement in S/PV.10224.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bahrain","member_iso3c":"BHR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Democratic Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Latvia","member_iso3c":"LVA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]},{"veto_id":274,"un_id":274,"date":"2026-10-30","year":2026,"month":10,"draft_symbol":"S/2026/868","draft_note":null,"meeting_record":"S/PV.10260","meeting_number":10260,"vetoed_item":"draft","agenda":"The situation concerning Western Sahara","short_agenda":"Western Sahara","topic":"Western Sahara: MINURSO renewal","region":"Africa","issue_area":"Peace operations","situation":"Western Sahara","vetoed_by":"Russia","n_vetoing":1,"veto_china":0,"veto_russia":1,"veto_france":0,"veto_us":0,"veto_uk":0,"council_size":15,"vote_yes":11,"vote_no":1,"vote_abstain":3,"vote_not_participating":0,"sponsors":"USA","n_sponsors":1,"penholder":"USA","countries_iso3c":"ESH; MAR","ucdp_conflict_id":331,"ucdp_dyad_id":null,"ucdp_active":null,"ucdp_match":"past","ucdp_match_note":"Western Sahara (MINURSO). UCDP codes Morocco-POLISARIO for 1975-89.","cow_war_num":null,"followup_resolution":null,"ga_type":null,"ga_meeting":null,"ga_date":null,"draft_purpose":"The draft would have extended MINURSO until 31 October 2027, renamed it the UN Mission in Western Sahara (MINUSO) from 1 November 2026, asked for proposals to cut its uniformed personnel, and made Morocco's autonomy proposal the only basis for negotiations, calling autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty the most feasible solution.","stated_reason":"Russia said the text dropped the referendum and the principle of self-determination, framed a settlement only in terms of Morocco's autonomy plan, and that the United States, having recognized Moroccan sovereignty, could not act as an impartial penholder.","aftermath":"A Russian draft for a one-year technical renewal of MINURSO (S/2026/870) then failed (3 in favour: China, Russia and Somalia; 1 against: the United States; 11 abstentions). MINURSO's mandate lapsed on 31 October 2026. No further Council action had been recorded by 6 November 2026.","context":"The United States, as penholder, tabled a draft that would have renewed the UN mission in Western Sahara for a year, renamed it without the word 'referendum' and made Morocco's autonomy plan the only basis for talks. Russia vetoed it, saying the text abandoned self-determination and favoured one party. The vote was 11 in favour, 1 against and 3 abstentions (China, Pakistan and Somalia). A Russian draft for a technical renewal then received three votes, and the mission's mandate expired on 31 October 2026.","sources":"https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.10260; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4131906/files/S_PV.10260-EN.pdf; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4131814; https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4131902; https://press.un.org/en/2026/sc16498; https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2026/10/western-sahara-vote-on-a-draft-resolution-renewing-minursos-mandate-4.php","notes":"The General Assembly debate after this veto has not been confirmed as of 6 November 2026; under resolution 76/262 it is due within 10 working days (by about 13 November 2026). Whether the Council took any step on MINURSO after 30 October has not been fully confirmed; the UN Digital Library showed no new resolution up to 5 November. Some press reports call the US vote on S/2026/870 a veto, but that draft failed for lack of nine votes, as the President stated. Among the countries concerned, ESH denotes Western Sahara; Morocco (MAR) is also listed.","detail":true,"votes":[{"member":"Bahrain","member_iso3c":"BHR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"China","member_iso3c":"CHN","permanent":true,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Colombia","member_iso3c":"COL","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Democratic Republic of the Congo","member_iso3c":"COD","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Denmark","member_iso3c":"DNK","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"France","member_iso3c":"FRA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Greece","member_iso3c":"GRC","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Latvia","member_iso3c":"LVA","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Liberia","member_iso3c":"LBR","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Pakistan","member_iso3c":"PAK","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"Panama","member_iso3c":"PAN","permanent":false,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"Russia","member_iso3c":"RUS","permanent":true,"vote":"no","veto":true},{"member":"Somalia","member_iso3c":"SOM","permanent":false,"vote":"abstain","veto":false},{"member":"United Kingdom","member_iso3c":"GBR","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false},{"member":"United States","member_iso3c":"USA","permanent":true,"vote":"yes","veto":false}]}]