The UN decision to intervene in Korea was not vetoed by the Soviet Union because at that time the Soviet Union was not a part of the UN. The Soviet Union had removed itself from the UN in protest.
No, The Soviet Union were boycotting the UN at the time, so they were unable to intervene in the voting.
No because they were currently boycotting the UN.
Other than some colonial conflicts in Africa in the 60's and 70's, Portugal has managed to remain neutral, although they were forced into WWI (1916 to 1918) due to un-restricted sub sinkings. They've managed to remain neutral ever since.
They assisted in the organisation of humanitarian aid and the reestablishment of government and law and order.
no it has not
Has the in ever intervened in a conflict involving australia
nope
by sending them to jail
No. There has been no need for the UN to intervene in Spain.
Yes, when Germany entered in a conflict with the United Kingdom in 1985 because of the german SEI (System for Economical Issues). The trading between them stopped completely. The UN intervened a year later.
It depends what you mean by "intervene". Unlike several other conflicts, UN peacekeepers were never deployed in the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict (which involved Armenia and Azerbaijan). However, the UN passed several resolutions on that conflict, which did create a ceasefire. Please see the Related Link to view the resolutions.
no
no
Anytime, any intervetion from UN.
Yes they have
The super powers did not intervene in Rwanda because it has become the custom to have the UN intervene instead. Unfortunately the UN usually sits on its hands and does very little.