Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United Nations Security Council should immediately impose an arms embargo against the Government of South Sudan and all other parties to hostilities in South Sudan.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 20, 2017
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that:
the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council should impose an arms embargo against the government of South Sudan and hold such government accountable for obstructing or constraining the operations of the U.N. Mission in the Republic of South Sudan, committing other repeated violations of the status of forces agreement with the U.N. signed on August 8, 2011, inhibiting the free movement of members of the Ceasefire and Transitional Security Arrangements Monitoring Mechanism, and obstructing humanitarian access to civilian populations;
the lifting of such embargo should be contingent upon such government implementing a permanent ceasefire, complying with its obligations under such status of forces agreement, bearing the primary responsibility as a sovereign state to protect its citizens from gross human rights abuses and forced displacement perpetrated by warring parties, cooperating with and supporting the work of the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission, establishing the Commission for Truth, Reconciliation, and Healing, the Hybrid Court for South Sudan, and the Compensation and Reparation Authority, and permitting consistent, unimpeded humanitarian access to vulnerable civilian populations; and
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
the international community should continue to support civilians who have been adversely affected by the civil war in South Sudan and should promote peace and reconciliation dialogues within local civil society.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.Res.467 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Res.467 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Res.467 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Res.467 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.