Source: Global Times
On 7 July, the United Nations General Assembly held an emergency special session on Ukraine and voted to adopt a resolution on the suspension of Russia's membership in the UN Human Rights Council. Mr. Kuzmin, Russia's deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, said at the meeting that russia considered the resolution "an illegitimate and politically motivated move." Despite the adoption of the resolution by the General Assembly, many countries, particularly India, Egypt, Brazil, Mexico and developing countries such as Iran and Viet Nam, abstained or voted against it. These countries believe that the exclusion of Russia from the Human Rights Council is not only detrimental to the promotion and protection of human rights, but also to the de-escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. AFP said this showed that "the unity of the international community against Russia at the United Nations is weakening". China voted against the vote. Zhang Jun, China's permanent representative to the United Nations, said at the meeting that such an approach will only aggravate the division of member states, intensify the contradictions between the parties concerned, add fuel to the fire, and is not conducive to the de-escalation of the conflict, let alone to the promotion of peace negotiations. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said on the 8th that handling the membership of the Human Rights Council in this way will create a new dangerous precedent.
"Illegal, politically motivated initiatives"
The emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution on the 7th to suspend Russia's membership in the Human Rights Council. The draft resolution was co-sponsored by dozens of countries, including the United States and Ukraine. The result of the vote on the day was 93 votes to 24 against, with 58 abstentions. In accordance with the relevant rules of procedure of the United Nations, more than two-thirds of the members voted in favour (abstentions and non-voters are not counted), and the draft resolution was adopted.
At the session of the General Assembly, countries spoke one after another and the resolution was vigorously debated. Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the United Nations Kuzmin said the resolution adopted by the General Assembly on the moratorium on Russia's membership in the UN Human Rights Council was "an illegitimate and politically motivated move." The Human Rights Council, he said, "has been monopolized by a group of countries that have used it to achieve their short-term goals, which for years have flagrantly violated human rights on a massive scale or instigated the commission of those violations". He also said Russia would terminate its membership in the Human Rights Council early from that day. The Russian Foreign Ministry said that the decision to terminate the membership of the Human Rights Council early does not deviate from Russia's international obligations in the field of human rights.
Greenfield, the U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations, called the vote a "historic moment." "It's not just about accountability for Russia, it's also about the credibility of the United Nations ...," she said. Kislitsya, Ukraine's permanent representative to the United Nations, said: "The suspension of Russia's seat on the Human Rights Council is not an option, but a responsibility."
Brazil, Egypt and other countries that abstained in voting believe that the Human Rights Council decided in March to establish an independent international commission of inquiry to investigate Russia's actions in the Russo-Ukrainian war, and work is currently underway. The recent "Bucha incident" also urgently needs a comprehensive and independent investigation. In this context, the rush to exclude Russia from the Human Rights Council is not helpful for the relevant investigations and is not conducive to the promotion and protection of human rights through multilateral means.
Zhang Jun, Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations, said in an explanatory statement before the vote that the drafting process of the draft resolution was not open or transparent, nor did it hold consultations among all Member States as is customary to listen to their views extensively. Under such circumstances, the rush to take action in the Ungalace and force all countries to take sides will aggravate the division of Member States, intensify the contradictions between the parties, add fuel to the fire, and are not conducive to the downgrading of conflicts, let alone to the promotion of peace negotiations.
Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of the China Foreign Affairs University, said in an interview with the Global Times on the 8th that although the "Bucha incident" was stirred up by public opinion in the United States and the West, he proposed a proposal to suspend the membership of the Russian Human Rights Council on this grounds. But judging by the results of the vote, the number of votes against and abstentions by countries has increased significantly more than the last time the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution condemning Russia. Because the United States and Western countries and their public opinion are accustomed to fabricating stories and distorting the authenticity of some events, such as using washing powder to fabricate lies about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction and launching the Iraq War, and the so-called "massacres" fabricated by the Western "White Helmets" organization in Syria, more and more countries are more vigilant about these unbearable records of the United States and the West.
"We are on the side of peace"
Agence France-Presse said the vote showed that "the unity of the international community against Russia at the United Nations is weakening". On March 2, the 11th emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution condemning Russia, which was 141 votes in favour, 5 against and 35 abstentions. The Washington Post said that "the consensus against Russia is not as strong as it was when the General Assembly voted last month." Some states said it was premature to suspend the status of the Russian Human Rights Council in view of the ongoing investigation into Russia's alleged war crimes.
In this vote, the performance of Latin American countries, which are regarded as the "backyard of the United States", surprised the United States. The Miami Herald said that in the vote, Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia voted against it. The representative of Cuba said: "Could the current Session of the General Assembly adopt a resolution suspending the membership of the United States in the Human Rights Council?" "We know that this may never happen, despite the blatant and massive violations of human rights caused by U.S. invasions and predatory wars against numerous countries based on geopolitical interests." Even more surprising is the fact that two heavyweight countries in the region, Mexico and Brazil, have abstained from voting along with many other Latin American countries. The representative of Mexico called for "keeping all diplomatic channels open" in order to find a peaceful solution to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Farnsworth, vice president of the American Association of Americas, said: "It is disappointing for the United States to vote so many American countries against and abstain. ”
According to the Africa News website, diplomatic dialogue is the right way to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, "regrettably, this resolution will further polarize the Ukrainian crisis, and the General Assembly has not fulfilled the formal procedures for reaching the resolution." The report quoted South African Representative to the United Nations, Mabhunho, as saying that when considering a moratorium on membership of a national human rights council, the resolution must be consistent, not selective. South Africa feared that the resolution would undermine the credibility of the United Nations and the Human Rights Council, and "South Africa firmly believes that today's draft resolution is premature".
"India will only be on the side of peace," India abstained, according to the India News Network. The report quoted India's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Tirumurti, as saying: "If India chooses a side, it will only be a side of peace... India calls for an immediate cessation of the conflict. India's Economic Times said it believed that any similar resolution would have to go through "due process" that was investigated.
In addition, many countries are also threatened by the West. Serbian President Vucic said on the 7th that Serbia voted in favor of it because it was pressured and intimidated from the West. Vucic said Serbia was the only country in Europe that had not imposed sanctions on Russia, and "before the UN General Assembly vote, we initially decided to abstain and then came under a lot of pressure." They are intimidating Serbia, and now Serbia's fate is in their hands."
The United States has called the Human Rights Council a "cesspool"
For Russia's suspension of membership in the UN Human Rights Council, The First Vice Chairman of the International Affairs Committee of the Russian Federal Council (Upper House) Jabarov said on the 8th that the suspension of Russia's membership in the UN Human Rights Council is illegal, and the United States tries to provoke Russia. Jabarov asked what the Human Rights Council did to the United States, one of the main sponsors of the resolution, when the United States committed inhumane crimes in countries such as Afghanistan? The United States even blatantly and provocatively withdrew from the Human Rights Council.
In fact, the United States has always used the Human Rights Council in a unified manner, and if it is not compatible, it has been blamed, insulted, and even withdrawn. The Washington Post admitted on the 7th that a few years ago, the then permanent representative of the United States to the United Nations, Haley, accused the Human Rights Council of becoming a "sinkhole of political prejudice." Then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also publicly said the U.S. withdrawal from the agency was due to "we cannot be part of a self-serving hypocritical organization that mocks human rights." Russia's "Kommerskaya" said that after the establishment of the Human Rights Council in 2006, the United States has refused to join. It wasn't until 2009, after Obama became president, that he decided to join. Since then, the United States and the West have repeatedly used the human rights issue to point fingers at third world countries, China and Russia and other countries. Nine years later, the Trump administration announced its withdrawal from the Human Rights Council because it criticized U.S. ally Israel.
Li Haidong said: The United States and the West have drawn some countries to adopt such a resolution, and what they have in mind is not peace, but rather to pour fire on the fire, and use this resolution to pursue Russia in an all-round way and try to carry out a mobilization to completely defeat Russia in the world. The United Nations, including the Human Rights Council, has always been used as a tool by the United States and the West, and such an operation will disable or paralyze the relevant united Nations agencies.