CNN: U.S. threatens to veto U.N. resolution on helping rape victims, over mentions of reproductive health
“The U.S. delegation to the United Nations has threatened to veto a resolution aiming to prevent rape as a weapon of war and to help its victims, because the resolution contains language about ‘sexual and reproductive health,’ sources confirmed to CNN. A U.N.-based source told CNN the U.S. seems to have a ‘red line’ when it came to mentioning sexual and reproductive health in a broad resolution that saw the U.S. breaking from its traditional allies and threatening to derail the measure. The proposal called on the global institution to reaffirm and renew its opposition to sexual violence. … The Guardian was first to report on U.S. issues with the resolution…” (Kosinski/Watkins, 4/22).

Deutsche Welle: Angelina Jolie and Germany’s Maas demand action on sexual violence
“German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and Angelina Jolie have penned a joint op-ed in the Washington Post calling on the international community to better support survivors of sexual violence and punish perpetrators who use rape as a weapon of war. Germany hopes its resolution aimed at tackling these concerns will be adopted at a United Nations Security Council session on Tuesday. But it’s facing some resistance from the United States, which has threatened to veto the text over some of the language surrounding reproductive health…” (4/23).

The Guardian: U.S. threatens to veto U.N. resolution on rape as weapon of war, officials say
“…[T]he draft resolution has already been stripped of one of its most important elements, the establishment of a formal mechanism to monitor and report atrocities, because of opposition from the U.S., Russia, and China, which opposed creating a new monitoring body. Even after the formal monitoring mechanism was stripped from the resolution, the U.S. was still threatening to veto the watered-down version, because it includes language on victims’ support from family planning clinics. … In cases of disagreement in the Security Council, member states often fall back on previously agreed text, but the U.S. has made it clear it would no longer accept language from a 2013 resolution on sexual violence. … A spokeswoman for the U.S. mission said it ‘does not comment on draft resolutions that are under active negotiation’…” (Borger, 4/22).

HuffPost: U.S. Threatens To Veto U.N. Resolution Aimed At Supporting Survivors Of Rape During War
“… ‘We are not even sure whether we are having the resolution [Tuesday], because of the threats of a veto from the U.S.,’ Pramila Patten, the U.N. special representative on sexual violence in conflict, told the [The Guardian] on Monday. According to Patten, the U.S. is unhappy with language in the resolution that refers to the provision of ‘comprehensive health care services including sexual and reproductive health’ to rape survivors. This language has been interpreted by the U.S. as a reference to abortion, CNN reported…” (Mosbergen, 4/23).