|
The MoA Week In Review – OT 2021-074
Last week's posts at Moon of Alabama:
—
Other issues:
Assange:
> In 2017, as Julian Assange began his fifth year holed up in Ecuador’s embassy in London, the CIA plotted to kidnap the WikiLeaks founder, spurring heated debate among Trump administration officials over the legalityand practicality of such an operation. Some senior officials inside the CIA and the Trump administration even discussed killing Assange, going so far as to request “sketches” or “options” for how to assassinate him. Discussions over kidnapping or killing Assange occurred “at the highest levels” of the Trump administration, said a former senior counterintelligence official. “There seemed to be no boundaries.” <
Fake cyber threat:
Brexit:
Covid-19:
Use as open thread …
I see a link to Lavorv’s UNGA speech transcript has yet to be provided: in Russian. That it was presented yesterday but not reported on much anywhere is troubling, IMO. Full machine translation follows:
Dear Mr. Chairman,
Dear Mr. Secretary-General,
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am glad to have the opportunity to speak from the rostrum of the UN General Assembly. The fact that we are meeting again in this room symbolizes a collective determination to restore normal communication, interrupted after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
By and large, we have no other choice: broad cooperation among the United Nations is particularly needed at a time when the number of issues on the global agenda continues to grow. The range of cross-border threats is expanding. Numerous regional hotbeds of tension are a serious destabilizing charge. The right of the strong is increasingly being tried to be used against the force of law. There is no agreement among the leading powers on the principles of the world order.
It is obvious for Russia that it is possible to effectively counter challenges and threats only through joint efforts in strict accordance with the universally recognized norms of international law, primarily the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. The World Organization must play a central coordinating role in global politics, fully unleashing its unique potential for universal multilateralism and legitimacy.
Recently, we have seen persistent attempts to belittle the role of the UN in solving the key problems of our time, to “push” it into the background or to turn it into an obedient tool for promoting someone’s selfish interests. Such attempts are clearly manifested in the concept of the so-called “rules-based order”, which the West persistently introduces into political circulation in opposition to international law.
No one, of course, opposes the rules as such. After all, the UN Charter is a set of rules. But rules approved by all countries of the world. Similarly, any new rules governing interstate communication should be agreed on universal platforms, primarily here. When they are installed in private, bypassing the World Organization, they cannot have all-encompassing legitimacy.
By translating discussions on key issues into formats convenient for itself, the West would like to exclude from the process of developing global solutions those who have their own, different point of view. Not so long ago, in this logic, Germany and France announced the creation of an “alliance of multilateralists”, although it would seem, what other structure could be more multilateral than the UN? However, Berlin and Paris felt that there were many “conservatives” in the UN who restrained the efforts of the “advanced vanguard”. They proclaimed the European Union as the ideal of “effective multilateralism”, and all others were invited to look up to it.
A recent example is the idea put forward by the US Administration of convening a “summit of democracies”. Participants, of course, Washington will determine itself, arrogating to itself the right to determine the degree of compliance of a country with democratic standards. In fact, this initiative – quite in the spirit of the Cold War – proclaims a new ideological “crusade” against all dissenters. Moreover, this line is carried out against the background of the words voiced in President Joe Biden’s speech that the United States does not want to divide the world into opposing blocs. In fact, the “summit of democracies” will be a step towards splitting the world community into “friends” and “others”.
It is also significant that, declaring the priority of democracy in its relations with any partners, Washington is concerned exclusively with the state of affairs within the countries concerned. As soon as it comes to the establishment of democracy in the sphere of international relations, the United States, and all its allies, lose interest in the conversation:no one, they say, can encroach on the authority of NATO and the EU. Those are the rules.
Recently, President Biden announced his refusal to use military methods in order to, as he put it, “remake other countries.” We expect that the United States will take the next step and abandon not only force, but also any other methods of imposing its model of development.
The “rules-based order” is based on double standards. When it is beneficial to the West, the right of peoples to self-determination is elevated to an absolute. And then, in violation of the Security Council resolution and without any referendums, they recognize as an independent state the artificially created entity of Kosovo, previously forcibly detached from the European state – Serbia. No one is confused that the Malvinas are 12 thousand km from Great Britain, and under the control of Paris and the same London still, contrary to the decisions of the UN and the International Court of Justice, there are former colonial possessions that no one is going to liberate. When the right to self-determination contradicts the geopolitical interests of the West – as in the case of the free expression of the will of the inhabitants of Crimea in the referendum on reunification with Russia in 2014 – it is forgotten, and illegal sanctions are imposed for the implementation of this right. The reason is simple: the Crimeans were fleeing from the ultra-radicals who committed a coup in Ukraine, which was supported by the West. That is, “their own” came to power in Kiev, and they – according to Western rules – should be taken under protection and fenced out.
In line with the same “rules-based order,” the United States maintains an archaic trade embargo against Cuba and seeks to dictate its will to the peoples of Venezuela and Nicaragua – in flagrant violation of the charter principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. The use of unilateral restrictive measures undermines the prerogatives of the Security Council and runs counter to the recent call by the UN Secretary-General for their suspension at least for the duration of the pandemic.
The efforts of a number of countries to rewrite the history of the Second World War are also aimed at eluciting the UNocentric world order. Members of the EU and NATO refuse to support the resolutions of the General Assembly on the inadmissibility of the glorification of Nazism, reject proposals to condemn the practice of destroying monuments to the liberators of Europe from the “brown plague”.
The imposition of a “rules-based order” instead of unconditional compliance with international law is fraught with dangerous relapses of bloc policy, the creation of dividing lines between a group of Western countries and other states. However, recent events have shown that voluntarist rules can be applied within the Western camp, if someone there becomes too independent. At least many of the world’s media regarded the epic with the supply of submarines to Australia as a reaction to the talk of “strategic autonomy” of Europe, which intensified after the hasty withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan. The situation of chaos around this exit is also an illustration of the rules on which the West would like to build its world order.
We are convinced that it is time to learn from the dangerous consequences of the policy of undermining the UN-centric architecture, which was formed following the Second World War and has repeatedly served as a reliable insurance against catastrophic scenarios. In the face of global challenges, the world community needs unity, not a new split. Russia firmly stands for the rejection of any confrontation and stereotypes, for joining forces to solve the key tasks of development and survival of mankind. We have enough tools for that. First of all, it is the UN and its Security Council, which must be adapted to the realities of a polycentric world order, expanding its composition at the expense of the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
The permanent members of the UN Security Council, who have a special responsibility to the Organization in accordance with the Charter, can and should stimulate the establishment of genuine collective action. Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed to convene a summit of the “big five” for an honest conversation on the problems of global stability.
They also associate high expectations with the prospects for the Russian-American dialogue on the future of arms control, the beginning of which was agreed at the Russian-American summit in Geneva. With good will, access to mutually acceptable solutions is quite real. The whole world was encouraged by the new US Administration’s agreement to our proposal to extend the START Treaty without any conditions. Of great importance was the reaffirmation in the joint statement of the presidents of Russia and the United States of their commitment to the principle that there can be no winners in a nuclear war and it should never be unleashed.
A responsible approach is also in demand in other areas of strategic stability. After Washington’s withdrawal from the INF Treaty, Russia made a unilateral commitment not to deploy such land-based missiles – both nuclear- and non-nuclear–based – in regions where similar American-made systems would not be deployed. We continue to expect the reaction of NATO members to our proposal to declare a similar moratorium, supported – I emphasize this in particular – by mutual verification measures.
Among the new global challenges and threats is the intention of individual states to militarize the Internet and unleash a race of cyberarmaments. Russia is in favour of agreeing on ways to ensure international information security at the UN. Here, too, the criterion should not be someone’s “special rules”, but universal agreements that allow for transparent, facts-based, consideration of any concerns. This is the aim of our initiatives to develop common norms for responsible behavior of States in the use of ICTs and to prepare a universal convention against cybercrime.
Along with the digital space, some countries see space as a sphere of confrontation. We consider this a dangerous trend and propose to prohibit the deployment of any types of weapons in outer space, as well as the use of force or the threat of force there. The Russian-Chinese draft of the relevant treaty remains on the negotiating table of the Conference on Disarmament.
Russia has consistently taken initiatives on other issues that require joint action.
Today, twenty years after the horrific terrorist attacks in New York, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s call to form a broad anti-terrorist coalition – without “double standards” on the basis of international law – is more relevant than ever. We also expect a reaction to the Russian initiative to elaborate a Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Chemical and Biological Terrorism.
Only on the basis of international law, by involving all stakeholders and taking into account their interests, can progress be made in the settlement of regional conflicts. In Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen and other “hot spots”, all external players are required to understand the cultural and civilizational specifics of society, refuse to politicize humanitarian aid, and assist in the formation of broadly representative authorities that include all the main ethno-confessional and political forces of the respective countries. Guided by this approach, Russia is constructively participating in promoting the Afghan settlement through the “extended troika” and the “Moscow format”, contributes to the stabilization of the situation in Syria within the framework of the “Astana process”, works with all Libyan parties in order to implement political reforms.
The processes taking place in the Middle East region should not overshadow the task of achieving a sustainable Palestinian-Israeli settlement on a universally recognized international legal framework that envisages the establishment of an independent, viable Palestinian State coexisting in peace with Israel. We support the restart of direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians and the intensification of the role of the Quartet of international mediators in coordination with the League of Arab States.
Russia will continue to contribute to the normalization of relations between Iran and its Arab neighbors. Together with our partners, we are working to resume as soon as possible the full implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action to resolve the situation around the Iranian nuclear program. A comprehensive approach is required for the long-term stabilization of the entire region. This is the aim of the updated Russian Concept for Ensuring Collective Security in the Persian Gulf, recently circulated as a document of the Security Council and the UN General Assembly.
In the context of the search for ways to overcome regional crises, we are ready to share Russia’s unique experience of peaceful coexistence of different civilizations, religions and cultures. We expect significant practical results from the World Conference on Intercultural and Interfaith Dialogue, which will be held in St. Petersburg on May 16-18, 2022, its holding was supported by UN Secretary-General A. Guterres and the leadership of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
Today, the importance of the humanitarian socio-economic and environmental dimensions of the UN’s activities is increasing many times. It is important to avoid the temptation to make these areas the subject of geopolitical games and unfair competition.
COVID-19 is our common enemy. We support the mutual recognition of vaccines approved by national supervisory authorities in the interest of lifting restrictions on international travel of citizens as soon as possible.
It is crucial not to weaken efforts to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We hope that the decisions of the UN Summit on Food Systems held the other day will help to achieve the SDGs.
We support the strengthening of the central role of the UN in shaping the environmental agenda on the basis of equality and respect for each other’s interests, including taking into account socio-economic realities. Otherwise, it will be difficult to mobilize all states to achieve global climate goals.
To find a balance of interests, it is necessary to adjust the work of all structures that affect the effectiveness of global governance, to make maximum use of the potential of such an inclusive association as the Group of Twenty, which includes both “old” and “new” dynamically developing world centers – such as BRICS and their like-minded people. We took with interest the Global Development Initiative of Chinese President Xi Jinping, which is consonant with our approaches.
Russia and its allies and partners support the strengthening of complementary network alliances through the development of integration processes within the CIS, EAEU, CSTO, SCO. A significant positive charge is the initiative of Russian President Vladimir Putin to form a Greater Eurasian Partnership with the involvement of ASEAN, which plays a central role in determining the norms of behavior in the Asia-Pacific region.
In general, the regional dimension of the development of the world is becoming increasingly decisive. Much depends on whether we can constructively translate the growing rivalry between the regions. Who is more important: Europe or Asia? Pacific or Indian Ocean? Will a “Latin American European Union” be created? Why make Africa an arena of confrontation?
The UN Charter has Chapter VIII on relations with regional organizations. On this basis, the Secretary-General meets such organizations annually to exchange views on global politics. We consider it useful to take the next step in this format and use it to prepare proposals for harmonizing regional aspirations in order to respond as effectively as possible globally to the challenges of the time.
We are all “in the same boat.” It is in our common interest that it firmly hold itself on the waves of world politics. We are different, but this should not prevent us from working for the benefit of our peoples and all mankind. Only in this way can we fulfill the lofty mission of the United Nations – to save the present and future generation from war, disease and hunger, to build a more peaceful, stable and democratic future for all.
In conclusion, I offer the hashtag: “OurRussorUNU.”
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 26 2021 20:32 utc | 55
|
