In recent times there have been rumblings and mumblings about the usefulness of the UN (click here for one summary of its relatively toothless stance a year ago)... is it something of a unicorn? An incredible story until it comes to dealing with actual real life? Indy nails it at the end of his usual whip-sharp summary of the organisation; it may have the presence of a fable, but fables keep us reminded of where lines are drawn...
What prompted this post on a Monday? Well, relevant to the article linked above, one recalls the anniversary of the start of the current Russo-Ukrainian War... it was on February 20th 2014, that Putin ordered the invasion of Crimea. Then there were ongoing 'rumblings' in three other regions; Donetsk, Donbas, and Luhansk. The UN has called upon the world's nations to not recognise these areas (as per being under Russian rule). It might have been easy to think that last year's all-out assault on February 24th was the start of the war. It may not have been in the headlines, like so many conflicts ongoing, but this situation has been trundling along for all these years (and, indeed, back centuries). These last twelve months have been a sustained escalation.
It might be wondered why there was no Peacekeeping Force present in Ukraine before this incursion. The Secretary General's address to the press last year gives insight into that. There has been no peace to keep - outright war negates the purpose of the UNPF. Putting them there would have essentially been annexing them to the Ukraine military.
As time has progressed, some nations have sought to support Ukraine's militaristic pursuit with the supply of arms. In December, a brief statement from the High Representative of Disarmament Affairs (🧐) pointed out the care that must be taken to mitigate any potential for escalation of hostilities and for such supplies to get misdirected...
The UN's primary involvement - beyond words - has been the ongoing assessment regarding the potential 'war crimes', (defined as acts contravening their Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Late last year, the General Assembly asked members to set up a "Register of Damages" (from Russian aggression against Ukraine); reading all the arguments put forward in response to that tabling makes interesting reading. The UN also provides a bullet-point summary of key happenings, with links to relevant reports. Plus, there are additional links for donations to various agencies.
Addendum;
The above post was scheduled three weeks back. Much has taken place since, and even in the last few days, with the Munich Security Conference, where the subject of support for Ukraine was high on the agenda.
As I am taking the historical view this year, chiefly noting how mankind goes in circles and never quite pulls itself out of the bullpit, I considered that leading up to the last two 'world' conflagrations, there were multiple individualised conflicts. Glance at these clippings; pop over to the complete listing of conflicts between 1900 and 1944... and prepare to be astounded.
The world is almost always at war. What turns things around to being a 'world war'? When enough countries feel aggrieved against another set of countries, things can tip right over. WW1 resulted from tinderbox politics and societal willingness to head off to battle... that very conflict saw the rise of anti-war movements and conscientious objection, for it truly was a horror, and sensibilities had grown as new reporting brought it home. Then, all attempts to placate the rising tide that was Nazism failed, and we were at it again. That Hitler and his ilk had to be chastened, there is no question, and clearly, diplomacy was ineffective.
As it appears to be now, in the case of Putin and his megalomaniac ways. So, when one hears/reads such wording as:
Now is the moment to double down on our military support. When Putin started this war, he gambled that our resolve would falter. But we proved him wrong then, and we will prove him wrong now. (Rishi Sunak)
and then think back to that statement by the High Representative of Disarmament Affairs, one despairs somewhat. It is not necessary for me to spell it out further, is it? We witness conflicts not just in Ukraine but in Yemen, South Sudan, Syria, Ethiopia, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Haiti...
We Must Not Forget. And yet, "We" do.
I wonder how China going to take part in this Conflict. It could be bad card for lot world.
ReplyDeleteCoffee is on and stay safe.
we hope this will be not the last thing we see... please let it be peace on earth....
ReplyDeleteIt does seem like there is always a war going on, such a waste. Russia and China do not want peace in the world, they like conflict, power and invasions. Take care, have a wonderful week!
ReplyDeleteSo depressing to read.
ReplyDeleteHari OM
DeleteIt is, Deepak-bhai, and since I wrote all this, documentaries and other articles have appeared, all with similar sentiments and hinted portents. This week will see an increased focus again, I don't doubt. Those of us who desire and demand peace must not cease from our prayers... but one has to be realistic about the base nature of our species, too. Yxx
All very interesting but I'm still no closer to understanding how the UN might best to deal with the Russian aggression in Ukraine...
ReplyDeleteHari OM
DeleteJust so... hence some of the criticisms pointed at it. There is perhaps an expectation of some maternal authority from that rather disunified unification which really isn't there. I have come, through this recent research, to the conclusion that we ought to consider the UN as the intellect and conscience of the world; then, we have the individual components (nations), which are the mind (thoughts) and egos (deeds) all seeking, like children in a family, to be heard and given equal time... and stamping their feet if they think the parent's back is turned. What happens instead is that we have the patrician element (NATO) returning to impose a different level of authority. And some components act in a solo patrician manner... (note today's visitation. I could not help but think 'swords rattling shields'...) My heart is pouring tears because this 'war by proxy' continues to build. The UN has to be neutral - which means it is only of use, after the fact, in real terms, mopping up and overseeing reparations, updating codes of conduct for the human race... which some will seek to avoid. But humanity requires its conscience - even if it cannot, in the moment of heat, quell that fire. Yxx
Great post.
ReplyDeleteWe have our paws crossed that the Ukraine conflict can be ended without escalation to a bigger war.
ReplyDeleteHey YAM...just wanted you to know Bryan was paying attention yesterday.
ReplyDeleteWhen he came downstairs a few minutes ago he asked if I read YAM's blog.
I told him you didn't do Monday. He told me about your hint yesterday.
Head hanging but still devoted fan
Cecilia
I've just found your blog thorugh David's website (Travels With Birds). I was interest in your post!
ReplyDeleteThe good news is that Russian military experts have just said: "War could end this year".
Regards
"When enough countries feel aggrieved... " Sometimes they don't need to be aggrieved, they can be drawn in by having a treaty by which they support X in the event of conflict btween X's neighbour and Y. These things proliferate and draw into war parties who don't have any political or regional 'skin in that game'.
ReplyDeleteHari OM
Deletetrue to a point - but the fact of 'being in treaty' actually does mean there is political committment... When a family moves, if one or other member of that family doesn't want to make the move, they could remain behind but must take into account how vulnerable they make themselves as a result of that separation. Yxx