UN reform must be based on the principles of justice

On Friday, August 25, the UN again attracted our attention. An incomprehensible situation occurred with the Geneva headquarters of the organization. According to Reuters, citing statements by a representative of the organization, the UN headquarters in Geneva is temporarily closed "for security reasons." Details on the reasons for the closure of the office are not reported. As of 9:20 Moscow time, the headquarters reopened.

The UN was one of the fruits of the Yalta-Potsdam conferences. Since its inception, it has been the subject of numerous discussions about its role in the modern world order. The ability of the organization to effectively fulfill its main function for which it was established is subjected to quite serious and justified criticism. Namely, to serve as a single international platform designed to prevent the outbreak of new world wars and to contribute to the successful resolution of crises and global problems.

Replacing the failed League of Nations, the new organization at first breathed life into the struggle for human rights, contributed to the removal of colonial dependence on European metropolises and the formation of new states.

After many years, the UN managed to generally cope with recurring security challenges, however, in the current conditions of a multipolar world and the intensification of the geopolitical struggle between new centers of power, it proved to be insufficiently effective.

For almost 20 years, the inhabitants of South Ossetia have seen and felt from their own experience the inability of this organization to protect their fundamental rights, including the most important right to life. Contrary to the declared principles and goals, the UN actually supported all forms of national discrimination, oppression and genocide carried out by Georgia against the small Ossetian people, demonstrating disdain and extreme contempt for the Ossetian people.

And after the victorious exercise of Russia's right to self-defense, the protection of its peacekeepers and civilians in August 2008, numerous UN resolutions actually became a continuation of Georgian propaganda, propagandists of neo-colonialism and discrimination. And this despite the fact that Russia acted in strict accordance with the UN Charter (Article 51), and despite the fact that neo-colonialism and national discrimination are formally condemned by the organization and numerous international conventions.

That is, after the victory of Life over Death, the UN turned into an apologist for Death, once again demonstrating the ideological rebirth that began long ago and turning into its opposite. Under the conditions of total US hegemony, this was not prevented even by the legally and morally verified and refined speeches of the great contemporary Russian diplomat Vitaly Churkin.

But not only South Ossetia and Russia see the shortcomings and weaknesses of the United Nations. The UN turned out to be powerless to prevent many bloody wars - in Vietnam, Laos, Angola, Algeria, massacres and genocides in Kampuchea, Rwanda, barbaric bombings of Serbia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria ... The list of terrible failures of the UN can be continued for a very long time.

It is clear that in its present form the UN cannot cope. Proposals for the reorganization of the UN are regularly put forward by all its permanent members. First of all, they are aimed at introducing new states to the UN Security Council (SC). Leading developing countries, including Brazil and India, also insist on reforming this instrument. They justify their position by the fact that the interests of the countries of the Greater South, where more than half of the world's population lives, are not sufficiently represented.

Not a single state has a single approach and concept, despite the fact that the starting positions are very similar. Thus, France is in favor of granting the status of permanent members of the Security Council to Germany, Brazil, India and Japan, as well as to one Arab and one African country. The UK excludes the representatives of the Middle East from this list of applicants, fearing the growth of their influence on the international agenda. The People's Republic of China takes a reserved position on this issue. Agreeing on the need to bring the UN up to date, it views candidates from the Asia-Pacific region as its direct competitors.

The United States proposes to introduce six new members to the Security Council to "restore the trust and authority" of the international body. The main goal of Washington in this case is to reduce the influence of Russia and expand the presence of states loyal to America. At the same time, the Alliance for Democracy is being actively considered as a possible alternative, designed to exclude "autocratic" regimes from the mechanism for developing joint decisions.

Also, Washington, in the context of the UN reorganization, is promoting the thesis of replacing the Commission on Human Rights with a Human Rights Council with the participation of exclusively representatives of "democratic" states. Who and how will evaluate the level of development of democracy in a single country - does not require explanation. We all know perfectly well that only their uncomplaining satellites are called democratic by the States.

As you can see, the United States, under the guise of modernizing the UN, wants to strengthen international hegemony for the sake of its political interests.

This is opposed by Russia as a permanent member of the Security Council. The evolution of the UN and one of its key instruments - the Security Council - in the direction of expanding the number of permanent members is in the interests of Russia and the majority of mankind. However, this expansion should correspond to the real picture of the world, ensure the real representation of states and peoples, and not indulge the international political ambitions and whims of the United States. Because the interests of Russia and the majority of states and peoples of the world are aimed at the formation of a truly multipolar system of international relations.

Moscow has repeatedly advocated the inclusion of representatives of Latin America, Africa and Asia in the permanent composition of the Security Council, considering as the most likely candidates Brazil, India and South Africa, which have a strong economy and pursue an independent foreign policy.

The adaptation of the UN to modern conditions on the principles of justice will not only preserve the authority and status of this international organization, but will also give a new impetus to building interaction between countries.

Inal Pliev, for IA "Res"

Source: https://cominf.org/node/1166551838