GetWiki

{{Short description|1990 resolution on removal of Iraq from Kuwait by “all necessary means“}}{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2021}}

factoids

United Nations Security Council Resolution 678, adopted on 29 November 1990, after reaffirming resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674 and 677 (all 1990), the council noted that despite all the United Nations efforts, Iraq continued to defy the Security Council.

Details

The United Nations Security Council, invoking Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, offered Iraq one final chance to implement Resolution 660 (1990) which demanded that Iraq withdraw its forces unconditionally from Kuwait to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990, the day before the invasion of Kuwait began.On 29 November 1990, the Security Council passed Resolution 678 under the guidance of Canada, the USSR, United Kingdom and the United States,NEWS, Draft resolution / Canada, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.,digitallibrary.un.org/record/103521?ln=en, United Nations Digital Library, 1990, which gave Iraq until 15 January 1991 to withdraw from Kuwait and empowered states to use “all necessary means” to force Iraq out of Kuwait after the deadline. The Resolution requested Member States to keep the council informed on their decisions. This was the legal authorization for the Gulf War, as Iraq did not withdraw by the deadline.BOOK, Murphy, Sean D., Humanitarian intervention: the United Nations in an evolving world order, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996, 185, 978-0-8122-3382-7, Cuba’s position was nuanced as it had voted for or abstained on previous resolutions relating to the Iraqi invasion, but did not support Resolution 678 because of its authorization of “all necessary means.“BOOK, Domínguez, Jorge I., Cuban Studies 26, Volume 26, University of Pittsburgh Press, 1996, 104, 978-0-8229-3954-2, Resolution 678 was adopted by 12 votes with two opposing (Cuba and Yemen) and one abstention from the People’s Republic of China. The authority granted to Member States in this case contrasts with the disputed legality of U.S. actions in the invasion of Iraq of 2003.

Sticks and carrots

The United States government strenuously lobbied governments represented on the UN Security Council, including the Soviet Union, China, Malaysia and Yemen, to support a resolution authorizing UN members states to use “all necessary means” for removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait.Global Policy Forum, “Baker Twists Arms of Yemen, Colombia and Malaysia,”www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35359.html citing James A. Baker III, The Politics of Diplomacy: Revolution, War and Peace, 1989–1992 (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1995), pp. 317–320 China, which had usually vetoed such resolutions authorizing action against a state, abstained in exchange for a promise from the US government that sanctions would be eased,BOOK, Benewick, Robert, Wingrove, Paul, China in the 1990s, UBC Press, 1999, 2, 240, 978-0-7748-0671-8, and that the Chinese foreign minister would be received in the White House.New York Times, 2 December 1990 “Mideast Tensions: How U.S. Won Support to Use Mideast Forces The Iraq Resolution: A U.S.-Soviet Collaboration” Various members of the council were rewarded with economic incentives as a result of their ‘yes’ vote, and those who initially opposed the resolution were discouraged from voting ‘no’ with the idea of economic penalties, particularly by the United States.BOOK, Simons, Geoffrey Leslie, The scourging of Iraq: sanctions, law, and natural justice, Palgrave Macmillan, 1998, 2, 197–198, 978-0-312-21519-4, The US successfully obtained a commitment from the Saudi government to provide $1 billion to the Soviets in aid through the winter.New York Times, 2 December 1990 “Mideast Tensions: How U.S. Won Support to Use Mideast Forces The Iraq Resolution: A U.S.-Soviet Collaboration“After Yemen voted against the resolution, the US, World Bank and International Monetary Fund halted aid programs to Yemen, and Saudi Arabia expelled Yemeni workers.BOOK, Simons, Geoff, Iraq: From Sumer to Saddam, Palgrave Macmillan, 1996, 2, 358, 978-0-312-16052-4, Following the US government’s fruitless effort to persuade the Yemeni government to support the resolution, US diplomats bluntly informed Yemeni officials “That was the most expensive no vote you ever cast“—referring to ceasing more than $70 million of US government foreign aid to Yemen.New York Times, 2 December 1990 “Mideast Tensions: How U.S. Won Support to Use Mideast Forces The Iraq Resolution: A U.S.-Soviet Collaboration”

Criticism

International law experts, such as Professor Burns H. Weston, have argued that the UN security council resolution set a “dubious precedent” by backing away from the “peaceful and humanitarian purposes and principles” enshrined in the United Nations Charter, a cornerstone of international law. It did this by failing to vest in the UN the responsibility and the accountability for the military force that was deployed to the region but instead allowing the United States to manage world policy essentially in a unilateral manner.Weston, B. (1991), “Security Council Resolution 678 and Persian Gulf Decision Making: Precarious Legitimacy,” American Journal of International Law, 85(3), 516–535. doi:10.2307/2203110

See also

• Gulf War
• Iraq–Kuwait relations
• List of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 601 to 700 (1987–1991)

References

{{reflist}}

External links

• {{wikisource-inline|United Nations Security Council Resolution 678}}
• Text of the Resolution at undocs.org

{{UNSCR 1990}}