How the UN resolution on Crimea and Trump’s tweet will restore Russian historical borders, by Scott

December 23, 2016

19 December 2016, the Assembly adopted, by a vote of 70 in favor to 26 against with 77 abstentions, the draft resolution titled “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)”.

The Western and Ukrainian media true to its practice to never say a word of truth reported this as “The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on human rights in Crimea.”

There is a hope that the NATO members pushing for this resolution would abandon this issue, but when did they ever behave reasonably?

Quoting the UN transcript: “Regarding the draft on the human rights situation in Crimea, the statement delivered by Ukraine’s delegate had compelled the Russian Federation to take the floor. He expressed hope that delegates would vote against the text, demonstrate their positions in principle and focus their attention on the human rights situation in all of Ukraine, including where the Government was waging warfare with its own means.”

“References to territorial integrity in the resolution concerning Ukraine went beyond the objective of that text.” per representative of Armenia

In it’s new “resolution” the UN General Assembly names the Russian Federation as the “occupying power in Crimea.” So, twenty five years after the biggest tragedy in our history, a forced dissolution of the USSR in the Russian historical borders, we Russians are being named “the occupiers” of our own Russian land, including those Russians who live on this land. It’s very important that in this “resolution” Russians are not named even once as the population of Crimean. Also, Russians are never named as the majority of population elsewhere on the territory of the Russian Federation.

The resolution was submitted by NATO occupied Ukraine and supported by all of the NATO members.

Brief history of the resolution on Crimea:

In November 2016, Russia Withdrew from ICC, the international criminal court, after this court frivolously accused Russia of war crimes in Crimea.

At the 46th meeting, on 8 November, the representative of Ukraine, on behalf of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America: draft resolution, introduced a draft resolution entitled “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)” (A/C.3/71/L.26). Subsequently, Albania, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malta, Montenegro, Norway and the Republic of Moldova joined in sponsoring the draft resolution.

On 15 November, the Secretary of the Committee read out a statement of the programme budget implications of the draft resolution.

At the same meeting, a statement was made by the representative of Ukraine. Subsequently, Iceland, the Marshall Islands and New Zealand joined in sponsoring the draft resolution.

On December 19th, 2016 the Assembly took up the report on the “Human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives” (document A/71/484/Add.3), containing four draft resolutions.

“Joint statement on human rights situation in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea”

Dec 19, 2016 Press statement

The following is some of the wording that has been used in this piece of legislature: the Referendum for re-unification with Russia called “discriminatory legislation,” demands for an “unconditional and immediate access of international and regional human rights mechanisms to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.” Calls for recognition of Crimea is “part of Ukraine and call upon Russia to end its occupation.”

The UN Assembly also encourage the Secretary-General in this regard to consult regularly with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights” Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, a representative of Saudi Arabia.

The document calls on Russia to provide access to international missions and non-governmental human rights organizations that were kicked out of the Russian territory for anti-government activities in years following the 2014 anti-government putsch in Ukraine.

The resolution thinks that “the international presence is necessary in Crimea to prevent further deterioration of the situation.” The document claims “violations of the rights of the inhabitants of Crimea,” without providing specific facts and explanations.

By this UN General Assembly effort, Russians are turned into “inhabitants” of Russia. I have been looking for another UN document that would use a term “inhabitants” in relation to the country’s population, but I couldn’t find any. In political literature, the term “inhabitants” is routinely used to describe the population of the Western colonies in Africa. It seems that the UN Western coalition has specifically designated the use of derogatory politically charged term as “inhabitants” to Russian people, naming them as “inhabitants” on the territory of Russia and simultaneously its “occupiers.”

Predictably, the Russian Foreign Ministry Sergei Lavrov called this document proposed by Kiev “a useless propaganda leaflet.”

I want to beg the difference with the Mr. Lavrov. Instead of just shrugging this draft resolution off as another NATO sponsored propaganda stunt, maybe it makes sense to look into its workings and to see if Russia can use this document and other like this to bring forward the issue of the violation of the territorial integrity of the USSR, and as a consequences, to declare the EU and NATO memberships of the territories of the former Soviet Union as being under occupation.

As pertinent to the paragraph:

“Reaffirming the responsibility of States to respect international law, including the principle that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State and from acting in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations, recalling its resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970, in which it approved the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming the principles contained therein…” page 1, A/C.3/71/L.26

There are known statements made by Gorbachev and Yeltsen that indicate that if the Belavezha Accords of the dissolution of the Soviet Union wasn’t signed, the US and other NATO members threatened the Communist government with nuclear strikes.

As pertinent to the paragraph of the draft that says the following:

“Recalling its resolution 68/262 of 27 March 2014 on the territorial integrity of Ukraine, in which it affirmed its commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, and relevant decisions of international organizations, specialized agencies and bodies within the United Nations system…”

The UN made a grave mistake by its failure to affirmed its commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of the USSR.

The UN has also failed to adopt a resolution condemning the dissolution of the USSR, failed to condemn the violation of the territorial integrity of the USSR, failed to affirmed its commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of the USSR within its internationally recognized borders at the time when parts of the USSR have been occupied by the EU and NATO.

Using A/C.3/71/L.26 as blueprint, Russia should condemn the temporary occupation of the parts of the territory of the former USSR, afterwards named Russian Federation, by the EU members and members of the aggressive military anti-Russian alliance known as NATO.

Russia should also reaffirm the non-recognition of the annexation of its territories.

Furthermore, Russia should condemn the imposition of the legal system of the European Union and the negative impact on the human rights situation of it’s territories occupied by the EU and NATO military forces.

Russia should condemn the reported serious violations and abuses committed against residents of its territories of Ukraine, Moldova, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Georgia, occupied by the EU and NATO, in particular extrajudicial killings, abductions, enforced disappearances, politically motivated prosecutions, discrimination, harassment, intimidation, violence, arbitrary detentions, torture and ill-treatment of detainees and their transfer from the named territories to the territory of EU and US, as well as reported abuses of other fundamental freedoms, including the freedoms of expression, religion or belief and association and the right to peaceful assembly.

Russia should expressing serious concern at the decision of the so-called European Council and other judicial entities of the occupiers, to declare the liberation movement of the Russian population on the occupied territories to be an extremist organization and to ban its activities.

The UN General Assembly has to recall the prohibition under the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the occupying Power to compel a protected person to serve in its armed or auxiliary forces, and for the occupied territories of Russia to become and to be a part of aggressive anti-Russian military alliance of Western country known as NATO.

Russian Federation should condemns the abuses, measures and practices of discrimination against the residents of the temporarily occupied territories of the Russian Federation, including Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, as well as Russians and persons belonging to other ethnic and religious groups, by the European Union occupation authorities.

Russia should express its outrage with the racist and Russophobic stance of the UN officials using the term “ethnic Ukrainians” that refer to an alleged existence of “Ukrainian ethnicity” that is somehow genetically different from Russian ethnicity.

Since it’s has been already genetically proven that there is no such genetic entity as “ethnic Ukrainian,” Russian authorities should demand a scientific independent evaluation of this claim and condemnation of the UN member as being racists and Nazis.

In conclusion: If there are any legal experts here, please help me to extend on my discovery. We would submit the final draft to the Russian Federation Mission to UN. Trying to think as a lawyer, I believe we have here an outline for the legal framework on declaring the dissolution of the USSR to be illegal. Next step will be demand for re-unification of territories of the Russian Federation and its people.

With this I want to remind you recent statement made by President Putin that Russia’s border is limitless, and that it doesn’t end anywhere.

The UN org News:

23 Dec 2016 the US president-elect made a promise that after his inauguration the UN will be reformed. Experts for some reason blame the UN resolution on Israel, but I think it’s because of the UN draft resolution on Crimea.

“As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th. “