Throw Russia from the UN. Is it possible and which will give the result

143 of the UN Member States voted for the relevant resolution. And these are almost all countries in Europe, most Latin America, Africa, Asia. Only five: Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Syria and Nicaragua. The issues were considered at a special session of the General Assembly, since the day before the UN Security Council rejected such a resolution - traditionally veto was imposed by Russia (which has such a right along with other permanent members 3 in China, USA, France, Great Britain).

She wanted to hold a secret ballot at the Assembly. Most Western politicians supported the decisions of the UN General Assembly. For example, the German Foreign Ministry noted: "What looks on the wrong side of history. Ukraine is also satisfied with the result. The Deputy Head of the Presidential Office of Ukraine Andriy Sibiga called Voting "Judicial Day" for Russia in the international arena.

And Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said: "It was a successful offensive operation on the diplomatic front to liberate the world from Russian destructive action. " "The voting map is indicative. The resolution was supported by 143 of the 193 members of the UN General Assembly. This is even more than during the condemnation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in March. There is progress," says political scientist Vladimir Fesenko.

He calls a breakthrough, for example, that Eritrea, who previously voted against a resolution with a condemnation of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, has abstained this time. Kuleba clarifies: "Several countries in Africa, which previously abstained during the vote or did not participate, now voted" for ". Angola, Bangladesh, Iraq, Madagascar, Senegal during the vote in March, a document on aggression was kept neutrality, and now supported the pro -Ukrainian resolution.

The neutral still remain China, South Africa, Pakistan, as well as a number of post -Soviet countries - Armenia, Uzbekistan. Azerbaijan and India did not vote. "This indirectly testifies to the desire to maintain a relative neutrality in this matter. The general and dominant position of the international community is obvious - the condemnation of Russia's invaders and the requirement to remove its troops from the territory of Ukraine," Fesenko said.

But the main question is that Russia will not listen to this resolution under the current conditions. After this meeting in the world again spoke that Russia was not a place in the UN Security Council. On the one hand, it is the only UN body whose decisions are binding on all members. On the other hand, a country that is an infringement of international law and the UN Charter does not allow a decision that contradicts its interests, constantly using the veto right.

"The Russian Federation has turned into a cancer in the body of the Security Council, and it must be removed before the entire UN system has metastases," - said a permanent representative of Ukraine at the UN Sergei Kyslytsia. The discussion on the efficiency of decision -making by the UN Security Council has been conducted since 2014, when Russia has occupied Crimea and took control of part of Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

After that, Russia did not allow the introduction of the UN peacekeeping contingent in the Donbas, and on February 25, 2022, it veted a resolution of the Security Council to end the invasion of Ukraine. But to exclude Russia from the process is not an easy task. Yes, there is a known case when the General Assembly voted for the expulsion of Russia from the UN Human Rights Council (it used to happen to Libya). But it was possible because this body does not appear in the UN Charter.

The Security Council is another matter. According to the UN Charter, a permanent member of the Security Council should refrain from threats to force. But if this happens, the order of punishment for such actions is not prescribed. In other words, it is unclear whether the violation of the statute is the basis of exclusion. To clarify, you need to rewrite the statute.

But even if it can be done - the UN General Assembly will vote in two -thirds of votes - then the changes will go into the Security Council, where Russia will traditionally be vetoed. However, Ukrainian diplomats and experts offer other ways that can help restrict Russian access to decision -making mechanisms both in the UN Security Council and in general in the organization.

"There are two main options," says the permanent representative of Ukraine at the United Nations in 1997-2001 and 2015-2019 Vladimir Yelchenko. -The first is to doubt whether this state is legally a place. The second is to name Russia The result will work something average. " The diplomat explains that Russia is not a legitimate member not only of the Council but also the UN. It takes the place of the country - the USSR, as the successor. In fact, the UN Charter still indicates Russia, but the USSR.

Russia appeared there after the President of the Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic of Boris Yeltsin. In 1991, the Russian Federation was to undergo a formal procedure for reconciling the UN, such as the Czech Republic and Slovakia, the countries of the former Yugoslavia, but this did not happen. And none of the Member States tried to clarify this moment.

To change the situation, you can contact the UN International Court of Justice with a simple question: does Russia legally take the place of the USSR? Yelchenko suggests that the decision may be in favor of Ukraine. However, the nuance is that this court does not have a special executive body - countries simply undertake to comply with its decisions. But Russia should not be expected - the Russian Federation does not recognize the jurisdiction of the UN International Court of Justice.

And it cannot be done. Then the control over the implementation of the court decisions is placed on the UN Security Council. And there, Russia is known to have a veto. If this option does not work, there is another. "The UN Charter has a provision that clearly stipulates what signs the state should have in order to be a member of the UN.

I mean that after the infamous decrees of Putin about the accession of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhya regions, not to mention Crimea , the legal personality of the Russian Federation as the state has changed, - Elchenko continues. - This is another state. That is, one can doubt whether the Russian state exists in the form that it was before? It is a purely legal approach to enlist the support of those countries that occupy a neutral or neutral-positive position regarding Russia.

You can simply ask the question of not recognizing Russia's powers, regardless of whether it has joined our territories or not. " Another way is to temporarily suspend Russia's membership in the UN. The General Assembly could not allow the Russian delegation to the meeting. The basis of such a step: aggression against Ukraine as a violation of the UN Charter. A similar story happened in 1962, when the General Assembly eliminated the participation of couples due to the existence of apartheid regime.

Twenty years later, a democratic election took place in the country, Nelson Mandela was elected president, and the problem disappeared. "At that time, the UN General Assembly recommended that the Security Council consider a number of issues regarding pairs - embargo, maritime blockade, a ban on flights, rupture dismantled - 143 votes for "the last resolution - is much more than two -thirds of the vote of UN members.

Therefore, if we make a question about the legality or illegality of Russia's stay among UN members, to formulate issues correct Safety to approve such a decision, "the ambassador says. He says that now a number of international lawyers, diplomats, and civil society representatives have created a special initiative group that works options for exclusion of Russia from the UN. This group is actively working in the United States, she has an initiative to create an appropriate petition.

It has already gained more than half a million votes worldwide. "Recently, I learned that members of the initiative group met with congressmen - asked to take the issue of exclusion of the Russian Federation from the UN for consideration of Congress. The reaction is positive. I think they will vote in our favor, we will receive support, and then Americans will ask this issue before the UN", " - provides a diplomat. In addition, you can announce the need to reform the UN Security Council.

For example, a US delegation proposed to develop a new veto: a country that wants to block the solution should publicly explain the reason. French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that veto a veto for mass crimes. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz advocated the expansion of the Security Council. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan remains on the abolition of the veto right. So far, none of the proposals has switched to a serious discussion.

However, restricting Russia's participation in the UN means to force it to enforce certain decisions. And this is the biggest problem. On the one hand, Russia is not afraid of exclusion from the UN and demonstrates it in every possible way, resorting to absurd initiatives. Experts say the Security Council is a profitable propaganda platform that he is trying to actively use.

For example, in April, at a meeting, Russia wanted to discuss "provocation of Ukrainian radicals in Bucha", and in August it was collected meetings because of a situation at the Zaporizhzhya NPP - allegedly because of "Ukrainian shelling". On the other hand, the Kremlin is still trying to maintain the image of a global world player, so it will try to prevent exception. Yelchenko says there are several ways to force Russia to execute UN decisions.

"There is a so -called General Assembly Resolution" United For Peace ". It was used in the case of Korea in 1953, when, contrary to the position of the Soviet Union, international troops were introduced into Korea, which stopped the war. This was divided, but there are precedents, " - explains the former permanent representative of Ukraine at the UN. "It will no longer be only the sanctions of the European Union or the United States. These will be international sanctions.

Yes, the process is long, but it is possible. I will say so, when we talked about similar steps two months ago, we smiled in response, said it was unrealistic, it was unrealistic After all, Russia is a nuclear state. When we are talking about it now, it is already considered as an option, "Yelchenko continues. At the same time, the diplomat believes that Ukraine needs much faster decisions. "Our chief negotiator is the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Unfortunately, everything is solved in one way or another. Diplomacy did not work. The UN did not work because there was a Russian Federation," he sums up. Yelchenko is convinced that Ukraine cannot rely on the UN as a panacea, which depends on the end of this war, and the world cannot allow Russia to act so on, because Russia is in this form - a threat of peace for decades.