If Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has her way, the failure of the UN Security Council vote to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad through diplomacy, with minimal sanctions and without military intervention, ironically will result in a strengthened and forceful attempt to remove the Syrian regime. It is alleged that the al-Assad family has shown no mercy to the Syrian people, who struggle for freedom and for a fair and just government.
At the Security Council assembly, Secretary Clinton and others stated repeatedly that the matter was well examined by the League of Arab States, and that it was the decisions of the Arab League that were being voted on. The Arab League has the jurisdiction, and if the vote had passed, the UN Security Council would have given the League its full support.
The vote for the diplomatic ouster of al-Assad, and for a return to barracks by the Syrian Army had the support of most members of the Security Council, but was vetoed by both Russia and China, who stated that interference by un-involved nations was fundamentally inconsistent with their national policies, and in any case, more should be required of the Free Syrian forces. The fact that the revolutionary army, the Free Syrian army, as the freedom seekers call it, is armed, may have made the difference. Russia and China insist that the Free Syrian army as well as the regime Syrian army must be obligated to throw down their arms.
The Syrian ambassador at the UN Security Council, Bashar al-Jaafari, affirmed that Syria is a victim of a crisis triggered by parties who do not want good for Syria. He pled for more time to end the struggle and for the Syrian government to address the issues. He called on his friends in the Arab community to support that plan. At one point, the ambassador suggested that this was yet another case of foreigners interfering, looking to sell arms for profit.