“WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women, and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law …”
This quote embraces noble goals and post-war intentions the founders of the United Nations included into its Charter in San Francisco on June 26, 1945. The Great American president Franklin Delano Roosevelt was an advocate of the establishment of the United Nations and personally wrote some of the Charter’s provisions. He died two months before the organization was established but he managed to do the most important thing: to convince everyone whose opinion was decisive for the creation of the UN that it was necessary to set up an international organization with the goal to prevent wars, maintain peace and contribute to the development of human race. The Soviet leader Josef Stalin was Roosevelt’s supporter and ally in the establishment of the organization and he ordered the Soviet delegation to act decisively supporting the efforts of the American president. It would be appropriate to say that two most outstanding geo-politicians of the 20th century promoted the idea of the United Nation Organization. Stalin did not object Roosevelt’s unofficial statements that it is necessary to disarm all the countries in the world except the US, the USSR, Britain and China. Only these four states would be allowed to have armed forces subordinate to the UN and to suppress any attempts of other countries to start a war or a military conflict. That does no imply the creation of NATO and other military alliances and coalitions. But unfortunately things wrong. Many of the politicians who came after Stalin and Roosevelt were smaller and rather outrageous. Let’s imagine what those two great politicians would say to each other today if they saw the current state of things? Their statements would probably sound like this: “How did we end up with Obama?” or “Everyone is doing just the opposite to what we agreed on in the end of the war. We were looking for peace and they are hungry for wars and conflicts”.
Chapter V “The Security Council” is the core of the UN Charter. Article 24 states that the UN members make the Security Council responsible for sustaining international peace and security. What have we been observing since the artificial collapse of the USSR? – A gradual erosion of the main targets and principles in the activities of the main international organization of human race up to replacing the functions of the Security Council with completely opposite tasks.
First the UN Security Council allowed NATO to start a military aggression against Yugoslavia, later it sanctioned the country’s occupation and division. After that it sanctioned the intervention to Afghanistan and the military operation against Iraq. Now the Council is helping the colonization of the Libyan Jamahiriya and the killing of its leader… It has become a common practice for the UN Security Council to ignore its own resolutions. The events in Libya are good example of such tactics. V. Putin has already expressed his indignation over the activities of Russia’s “partners” from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization: “Western coalition does not have the right to kill Libyan leader M. Gaddafi”. In my opinion, it would be fair if the Russian Prime Minister also slammed the passiveness of the Russian Foreign Ministry during the discussion of the Libyan issue by the UN Security Council, its “abstinence” from voting, which created a legal ground for Barbarian bombings of Libya.
Probably, responding to the indignation of the Russian Prime Minister over the actions of the US and NATO Muammar Gaddafi officially turned to Russia with the request to initiate an emergency session of the UN Security Council. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council Russia was obliged to do it even without any request from Libya, the victim of the aggression, especially in the situation, when the head of the Russian government expresses his indignation with the actions of the aggressor. Though somewhat later but the moment of truth has come for the Russian foreign policy…
I have no doubts that millions of Russian Muslims are attentively watching how this difficult issue is being settled. The character of the decision will in many ways define the development of the domestic political situation especially in North Caucasus. In other words, Gaddafi has “loaded” the Russian political elite with serious problems. He has also added problems to the Western politicians, especially to Sarkozy and Berlusconi. Several days ago the delegation of Russia’s academy of geopolitical problems headed by the Vice President of the Academy returned from Libya. The conclusions of their report were quite unexpected for me. Firstly, the military actions between Libyans are going on only on the screens of Western and Russian TV channels. The rest of the time, in pauses between NATO’s bombings the situation is quiet in Libya. Gaddafi has banned the troops to attack the cities and settlements to avoid new victims among the population and new destructions. That is why when some “amateurs” from mass media report the use of active cluster ammunitions I can’t help laughing because the aircraft of the Libyan governmental troops is in “dry dock” and the artillery does not have active cluster ammunitions at all. Secondly, Gaddafi does not allow his troops to shoot down NATO planes to prevent the escalation of military actions and aggravation of political psychosis in the West. Gaddafi has invented unexpected and efficient responsive measures: after every NATO’s bombardment he “encourages” every new arrival of African refugees to Italy and France. Thirdly, the representatives of the Libyan government told the members of our delegation that Gaddafi is ready to go to the elections held under serious international control and he is confident of his victory. Because “the opposition” is just a motley horde of members of radical extremist organizations, officials removed from the posts for corruption and thefts, foreign mercenaries plus NATO instructors and agents of security services.
Seriously speaking, what could Russia undertake?
First. To demand (on agreement with China, Germany, India and Brazil) calling an emergency session of the UN Security Council, raising the issue of undermining of the international peace by a number of UN member states and of military aggression by NATO. This is the case of pure aggression because nobody gave NATO license to create a no-fly zone over Libya, to kill the Libyan Leader and to destroy his palaces.
Second. One of the pressing issues now is the reform of some components of the UN, first of all of the Security Council. How? It is necessary to submit a proposal the UN General Assembly to form the Security Council under the new civilized principles. The permanent line-up of the UN Security Council should include the representatives of all global civilizations – China, India, Islamic world, African Union, Latin America, North America, Europe, Russia-CIS. It is also recommended to distinguish groups of the countries of cross-civilization identity and belonging to local civilizations. This new Security Council would be much more efficient and resume implementation of its key functions. Today, when three of five permanent members of the Security Council are also NATO members, it is nonsense. Of course, I am ready to hear the objections: and what if the CIS countries don’t nominate Russia as the Security Council’s member? There is another option of the CIS’ representation in the Security Council – “on rotary basis”. I think that if Kazakhstan or Belarus become permanent members of the Security Council they will perform their duties not worse than the Russian Federation is doing it today.