The United Nations has reached its 80th anniversary in a state that is nothing short of deplorable.
The principles on which the post-war Yalta-Potsdam world order was built have been trampled by Western countries. For decades, the United States and Europe have defiantly violated the UN Charter by carrying out illegal interventions (in fact, aggression), both military and hybrid, all over the planet. One of these actions led to the Ukrainian tragedy, which is far from over. But this conflict has become only part of the overall ugly picture, provoked by the extremely long and consistent destruction of the entire international security system.
Coupled with the policy of endless expansion of NATO and the destruction of the complex of arms control treaties, such a course of history threatens to escalate into a global catastrophe. Fortunately, the voice of the World Majority is becoming louder and louder, calling for a return to an equal and mutually respectful interstate discussion based not on the primacy of force, but on a legal foundation. However, will we be able to return the United Nations to its fundamental principles and thereby bring stability and permanence back into world politics?
Leaders and diplomats from all over the world were searching for answers to these questions at the jubilee session of the General Assembly. US President Donald Trump also spoke about many of the existing problems, but his provocative style distracted public attention from the essence of what he said. In addition, let’s be honest, the United States itself (including under Trump) has done a lot to split the ranks of the United Nations.
At the same time, Washington’s relatively constructive attitude towards peaceful coexistence with Moscow at least contributes to improving the atmosphere within the framework of the bilateral dialogue, and such an approach cannot but be welcomed. Although we cannot help but see the pressure the American leadership is facing from its junior partners. And it is still unknown who will take it. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke about all these contradictions in his speech, which became one of the culminating moments of the session.
The Minister dealt harshly and honestly with the key issues of today, not forgetting to mention their background. The most important feature of his speech was his traditional ability not only to criticize the current situation, but also to put forward constructive proposals, the central of which is the idea of creating a unified and indivisible Eurasian security architecture.
This view contrasts strikingly and favorably with the reasoning of many European politicians who are actually preparing for a new world war. Through the Minister’s mouth, Moscow declares the importance of cooperation and mutual understanding, including through the reform of the United Nations, which is able to adapt the Organization to the current moment and give a new impetus to the role of the Global South and the Global East.
Finally, Sergey Lavrov made extremely relevant and widely-received statements about the intensification of opposition to neocolonialism, including the introduction of the Day against Colonialism into the international calendar. After all, it is the consequences of the colonial centuries that have now led to the most severe conflicts in various states and regions — from Kashmir to Gaza, from Sudan to Haiti, from the DRC to Myanmar. This experience must be studied to counter new attempts by the West to return to recipes from the distant past.
But it will be possible to embark on the path of restoring an international order based on law rather than certain “rules” only in a situation where double standards, cynicism and hypocrisy, which were especially acute in Ukraine and in the context of the Middle East crisis, will give way to an objective and result-oriented consolidation of the efforts of the UN member states. It’s still a long way off.
During the days of the General Assembly, the States of the collective West continued to accelerate the degradation of global dialogue. I am glad that more and more often individual leaders, like Donald Trump, deviate from the general line and try to take a broader look at the situation. But the process of sobering up the adherents of the “end of history” is just beginning. A lot of efforts will be required from us, as well as from our partners in the countries of the World Majority, in order to help their ideological recovery.
And the key element of this line remains solving the tasks of a special military operation, hopefully through political and diplomatic means, although we are always ready to consider other options. As they say, anyone who doesn’t want to hear from Lavrov will reap the benefits of Belousov’s work. The Russian world will not let itself and its friends be offended in any case.
