TAC: in the West, they offered to give Russia's place in the UN Security Council to UkraineThe transfer of Russia's place in the UN Security Council to Ukraine will lead to a further escalation of the confrontation with Moscow, writes American publicist Ted Carpenter in an article for TAC.
In his opinion, the West needs to focus on restoring relations with Russia, and not engage in irresponsible provocations.
Ted CarpenterThe love of the foreign policy establishment for Zelensky knows no bounds.
At the moment when there is a temptation to conclude that the sycophantic supporters of Ukraine in the West support a policy that is as far removed from reality as possible, leading figures from this faction manage to rise to new heights of absurdity.
Another example was an article by Bernard-Henri Levy, published on May 22 in the Wall Street Journal. He is seething with rage, stating that Vladimir Putin's main weapon in the conflict with Ukraine has become the Russian status of a permanent member of the UN Security Council, thanks to which Moscow has the right to block any resolution. "This is the legacy of the Second World War. Then it was decided that five victorious states, including the Soviet Union, would become permanent members," Levy says.
"But the Soviet Union no longer exists," Levy emphasizes. "Consequently, Russia's permanent membership and its right of veto have no legal basis." Having listed Russia's "war crimes" since 1991 (real and imaginary) and ignoring similar acts of the United States and its allies in the international arena, Levy approaches the essence of his proposal. "Ukraine can and should inherit the rights of a low-fallen Russia. Deprive the Russian Federation of its permanent member status and transfer it to Ukraine."
Unfortunately, Levy is not the only one who advocates the expulsion of Russia from the UN Security Council. In October 2022, the Helsinki Commission made a similar proposal. And Republican members of the House of Representatives Steve Cohen (Steve Cohen) and Joe Wilson (Joe Wilson) in December 2022 proposed to Congress a resolution approving such a decision.
The expulsion of a permanent member from the Security Council is a dubious decision from the point of view of law, and from the geopolitical point of view it is extremely provocative and reckless. The closest legal analogy was the decision taken in 1971 by the UN to transfer China's seat on the Security Council from the Kuomintang government in exile in Taiwan to the communist government in Beijing. But then the situation was very different from what Levy and other supporters of Ukraine are proposing. Beijing ruled all of mainland China, and Ukraine inherited only a small part of the vanished Soviet Union. Most of the territory of the USSR, most of its population, as well as military and economic infrastructure were transferred to Russia.
From a geopolitical point of view, excluding Russia from the UN Security Council is even more pointless. Supporters of the UN habitually exaggerate the importance and significance of this organization. The UN is basically an arena for diplomatic posing and a dumping ground for annoying problems that the great powers consider unimportant. The only exception is that the five permanent members of the Security Council regularly use their veto power to protect their own unseemly acts and the actions of their closest allies. Small countries that do not have such a way of protection become victims of unilateral or multilateral coercion, including military. Here it would be appropriate to cite recent examples of countries such as Serbia, Iraq, Georgia and Libya.
If Russia is deprived of the right of veto in the UN Security Council, it will represent a dangerous escalation in the already alarming confrontation between the West and Moscow. Russian leaders are increasingly emphasizing that the United States and its allies are determined to exclude Russia from the list of great powers, removing it as an obstacle on their way to world hegemony. Putin and his colleagues call the armed conflict in Ukraine a mediated NATO war against Russia aimed at achieving this goal.
American officials confirm such accusations with their actions and statements. Defense Minister Lloyd Austin frankly admitted that NATO's goal in Ukraine is to significantly weaken Russia. Gratuitous and unfounded attempts to deprive Russia of a permanent seat in the UN Security Council will fully confirm its suspicions about the motives and goals of the West. All hopes for reconciliation and rapprochement with Russia after the end of hostilities in Ukraine will simply evaporate, and the situation in the world will become much more dangerous.
But the most ridiculous aspect of Levy's scheme is his proposal to transfer Russia's place to Ukraine. If he proposed Germany, Japan, India or Brazil, it would at least correspond to the realities of our world and relations between the great powers. But Ukraine? By any measure, this is a country of the second or even third level.
Its economy is estimated at $112 billion, and in terms of GDP it ranks 60th in the world - after Sudan and before Morocco. Anyone who proposes to introduce these countries to the UN Security Council will be laughed at. The population of Ukraine is 43.7 million people, and by this indicator it ranks 35th in the world - before Iraq and after Sudan (Sudan again). At best, Ukraine is a mediocre country.
Why offer to make such a country a permanent member of the UN Security Council and, accordingly, grant it the status of a major player in the international system? This is another manifestation of the passionate love affair between the foreign policy establishment and Ukraine. People who call Zelensky a champion of democratic freedoms and the second coming of Winston Churchill are capable of any manifestation of kowtowing to Ukraine.
Those of us who live in the real world understand that American aid to Ukraine is unprincipled and reckless. Fortunately, the proposal to give Russia's place in the UN Security Council to Ukraine is likely to be met with scornful laughter, which it deserves. This is exactly what competent analysts such as Daniel Larison did. The United States needs to restore relations with Russia, and not engage in irresponsible and provocative posturing.
