The contention seems to be around the session on Nicaragua. And I said to some of you this morning that all of the explanations and all of the reasonings that you have told me that we should not have a meeting on Nicaragua are the exact same responses you gave to us on Venezuela. You said it wasn’t a matter of peace and security. You said it was a regional issue. You said that it was best dealt with at the Human Rights Council.
Well we went to the Human Rights Council, and they wouldn’t hear it because Venezuela was on the Council. We had a meeting outside of the Human Rights Council in Geneva to try and bring attention. And now you look back at where we are with Venezuela: The estimated adult in Venezuela has lost 24 pounds. Ninety percent don’t know where their next meal’s coming from. Thousands are crossing the border every day trying to get medical help and supplies.
I will tell you we have dealt many times with the African Union on regional issues. I don’t know why we can’t deal with the OAS on regional issues. We have spoken with the OAS. We give full support and respect to the OAS, which is why the chair of the OAS is coming to brief us tomorrow.
But I will say, if you don’t think Nicaragua is an issue of peace and security, I would ask you to talk to the people of Nicaragua. I’d ask you to talk to the region and the countries having to accept the people of Nicaragua. I’d ask you to talk to the Catholic Church, where Ortega has turned – because of Nicaragua.
So my final question would be to you: how many people have to die before it becomes a matter of peace and security? I think we’ve already reached that point. It’s why the United States thought it was very important to have this meeting on Nicaragua – because we don’t want another Syria; we don’t want another Venezuela; and we think that it is a responsibility of this Security Council to do that.