Expelling Violent Aggressor-Nations from the United Nations
"The choice of an aggressor country for the leadership of the UN Security Council has been met with reflections on whether the UN can fulfill its fundamental principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter.""It forces us to face the bitter truth. The rules born from post-World War II trauma have less and less meaning."Paulina Piasecka, national security expert,Warsaw"We urge you to initiate a process to replace Russia on the UN Security Council as the fifth permanent member.""Russia is not a responsible international actor and is unbecoming of a seat on the UN Security Council.""Moreover, it has no right to this seat. Rather, it was provided to Russia in a deal after the dissolution of the Soviet Union."" Ukraine could and should be recognized to fill the USSR seat rather than Russia."Reps. Steve Cohen and Joe Wilson, a co-chair and the ranking member on the Helsinki Commission
The
globe's most infamous aggressor-state has a well-worn veto as a
permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. Imagine this,
that a nation committed to territorial expansion -- that has over the
last decade, attempted to reimpose on its neighbours the control that
Russia exerted on its near-abroad in the interests of USSR solidarity
and Russian power politics, ramping up its military excursions in
Georgia then turning its sights on Ukraine with a full invasion -- is
able to control sanctions against human-rights-abusing nations through
its veto, including Russia's own.
Both
Russia and China, and often in tandem, have deadlocked the UN's
Security Council's resolutions and sanctions and neither, opposed to
Western regimes and democracy, is likely to sway from their antagonistic
positions. The very absurdity of a warring nation marching into a
neighbour's sovereign territory, destroying its infrastructure, its
civilian enclaves, murdering thousands both combatants and civilians,
sitting in the world body as an arbiter of human rights and global peace
gives absurdity a bad name.
Russian
President Vladimir Putin has been charged with war crimes at the
International Criminal Court in the Hague. The General Assembly of the
United Nations condemned its invasion of Ukraine, calling for Russia to "immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw".
An order snubbed by Moscow of course, and though there are
international obligations on the part of those nations which signed on
to the ICC, it seems highly unlikely that should Mr. Putin appear in a
foreign country he would be arrested and turned over to the ICC.
There
are those calling the situation absurd beyond a vestige of reason, and
although the general body of the UN is far from clamouring for Russia's
expulsion in reflection of its threat to world peace and its obvious
territorial aggression in Eastern Europe, it isn't as simple as it might
appear. Expulsion from the world body would require the general
consensus of the Security Council to enable the General Assembly to act.
The
result of which is that the Security Council, tasked with identifying
threats to peace or to respond to acts of aggression is unable to do
either. Russia's veto has put a stopper in the Council's capacity to ask
conflict parties to settle differences peaceably. Terms of settlement
can b recommended, or the UN can send in its "blue berets" peacekeepers.
However, because of Russia's veto, everything is at a standstill.
It's
difficult to fathom that when the United States, France, Britain, China
and Russia were authorized by the world body as permanent Security
Council members, no one in authority had the sagacity to foresee such an
event, where the very cause of a violent conflict is able to readily
sidestep absorbing criticism and evade ordered withdrawal by dint of its
veto action.
Among the 15 members of the Security Council (the permanent members plus other nations voted to a multi-year term on the non-permanent membership of the Security Council) there
is a revolving presidency on a monthly basis. In February of 2022, when
Russia invaded Ukraine, it held the presidency of the Security Council,
a mouth-agape hypocrisy of classic dimensions, if not a belligerent
thumb in the eye of the Council.
A overhead view shows a United Nations Security Council meeting at U.N. headquarters in New York on Sept. 30. Ed Jones/AFP via Getty Images |
Labels: Hypocrisy, Russia Chairing UN Security Council, Russian Invasion of Ukraine, Territorial Ambition, United Nations
<< Home