Madam Chair, I have a follow-up to my previous question. The member's answer, as I understood it, was that we have to respect the existing recognition of sovereignty for an autocratic regime that is slaughtering its people, because apparently the UN charter says we have to. I disagree with that interpretation. There are plenty of legal bases for believing we can and should respond, including the fact that we have been attacked.
However, more fundamentally, does the member not think we have a moral obligation to stand with the innocent, and that when we see before our eyes thousands of people being slaughtered simply for peacefully protesting, do we not have at some point a moral obligation to say that the processes at the United Nations are not working, that we will not allow Vladimir Putin to veto action and that the moral, the just and the right thing is to stand with those people who are being slaughtered rather than to look away on the basis of a legal technicality?