Why is the UN biased?

Syrians are not the only ones to be shocked by the text of the Security Council's resolution 1636 on Syria. The Arab and Muslim world are upset too because the resolution is based on Chapter 7 of the UN charter that allows the use of force against a member country.

Arabs and Muslims also want to know who killed former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri, but this does not mean giving the US the right to isolate Syria politically and economically or to interfere militarily and repeat what it did in Iraq without any mandate from the international community.

It is quite upsetting to remember that Chapter 7 has never been used in the history of the UN except in the case of Iraq. And now it is been used against Syria while there is another errant state in the region. Israel has never been threatened by the same Chapter 7.

Syrian Foreign Minister Farouq Al Shara'a rightly reminded the Security Council that it did nothing when Israel refused to receive the UN commission investigating the Jenin camp genocide. In contrast, Syria welcomed the commission and allowed it to question senior officials and was willing to continue its cooperation in the future despite the negative remarks by Detlev Mehlis against the country.

What we saw on Monday proves the bias of the Security Council and will increase scepticism among Arabs and Muslims about the council's double standards.

Today, Arab and Muslim nations have no doubt that the Security Council has different standards when it comes to handling a case involving an Arab nation. At the same time, friends of Syria around the world appreciate its cooperation in the investigation of Hariri's murder and call on the Syrian Government to handle the case with maximum care and vigilance for the interest of the country and the whole region.

Syria should save the region from another war planned in the US.