Ohryzko: Ukraine has no chances of practical support from the UN




Article by: Dmytro Barkar

Kyiv – Prime Minister Arseniy Yatseniuk started his official visit to the U.S. on September 24, during which he will participate in the 69th session of the UN General Assembly. However, at this representative event, the head of government will only be able to remind the global community of the unacceptability of Russia’s aggressive policies regarding Ukraine, noted former Minister of Foreign Affairs Volodymyr Ohryzko in an interview with Radio Liberty. According to him, the UN is a paralyzed structure which is more capable of words than actions. 

It is unlikely the UN will be able to assist us with anything practical or real, thinks Ukrainian diplomat, former head of the MFA Volodymyr Ohryzko. To his mind, the UN is only a forum to exchange opinions regarding world development, where there are more words than actions. This is characteristic of the UN Security Council, as well, though it is the main institution which is responsible for the issues of peace and security, Ohryzko says.

“Because, unfortunately, its permanent members include one country which not only disregards statute obligations but violates them. This is why today both the OSCE and the UN are paralyzed structures, which can only draw conclusions. Best case scenario, they can agree on some observer missions. However they are unable to act practically in any way. Therefore, I think that our Prime Minister’s visit will be used only in order to make Ukraine’s position clear to the world public. However, there are no chances of counting on any practical steps in support of Ukraine,” the expert says.

“I don’t think the UN General Assembly with bring about a breakthrough”

Meanwhile the UN General Assembly is a space where heads of state and government hold a big number of bilateral meeting, as it is convenient, as they don’t need to organize visits, notes Volodymyr Ohryzko. Therefore, the Prime Minister will have a number of meetings to discuss with the most important partners a number of relevant issues, the expert notes.

“This will simply give the possibility to confirm the bilateral obligations we already have, or they have to us. But I don’t think it will be a breakthrough of any sort, as all European Union member countries understand what is happening. The U.S., Canada, Japan, Australia and others understand what is happening. Will we be able to convince, say, Argentina or China? I have great doubts here, as the position has already been determined, and it is unlikely to change,” Ohryzko thinks.

“It is important to point out that Russia’s actions are unacceptable” 

Besides, it is also possible that during the bilateral meetings important issues will also be discussed, such as weaponry or financial aid, Volodymyr Ohryzko adds. To his mind, the majority of practical content, especially if we are dealing with Ukraine-U.S. relations, will include events outside the UN General Assembly. In particular, Arseniy Yatseniuk plans to meet with the heads of American investment and financial institutions and NGO representatives, reminds the former head of the MFA.

“However, in the political sense, it is difficult to point out to the global community that Russia’s actions are unacceptable, condemn these actions and continue political work in order to form an international anti-Putin coalition. In case the global community does not comprehend the threat level, we may gradually come to face what humanity faced after the annex of Sudetenland and after Nazi Germany attacked Poland,” noted Volodymyr Ohryzko.

Translated by: Mariya Shcherbinina
Source: Radio Liberty

Since you’re here – we have a favor to ask. Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine is ongoing, but major news agencies have gone away. But we’re here to stay, and will keep on providing quality, independent, open-access information on Ukrainian reforms, Russia’s hybrid war, human rights violations, political prisoners, Ukrainian history, and more. We are a non-profit, don’t have any political sponsors, and never will. If you like what you see, please help keep us online with a donation!

Tags: , ,

  • Brent

    The United Nations is a joke. It has become an organization to which many countries send political appointees as graft and they accomplish nothing for security or safety in this world. The U.N. is the biggest waste of money and time that has become a self serving bloated bureaucracy that is useless. Where was the U.N. during the Rwandan massacres in the 1990’s? Where is the U.N. during Russia’s invasion of Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine and its continuing threats against the Baltic countries?
    >Russia and Saudi Arabia currently sit on the Human RIghts Council…no violations from their countries!!!
    >Russia and China and the United States have veto power over Security Council issues. All three are among the biggest violators of security in this world and are immune from their actions.
    >Iran was a member of the U.N. Committee on disarmament in 2013 and is currently on the Committee on the Status of Women>>>other countries must have wanted to find out more about ‘stoning’, segregated class rooms, girls marrying at 13 and polygamy
    >Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe was nominated for a UN Leader of Tourism in 2012

    Countries should opt out of the U.N. as it has become more of a hindrance to blocking actual security issues and any country is allowed to join any committee, no matter what their track record on violations.

    • Dean Venture

      I think some groups like UNICEF and UNHCR have done a lot of good in the world, but when it comes to maintaining international law, it is indeed a failure. All nations should share equal representation, and I think most countries are mature enough that the majority can be trusted to do the right thing. A strong indication of this is that only six countries chose to recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea.

      If China and Russia hadn’t boycotted the Security Council at a critical meeting dealing with North Korea, South Korea would not have been spared being conquered by the North. They would have vetoed any action. The veto has to go, or there has to be some mechanism where a supermajority in the security council or general assembly can override it.

      • LorCanada

        I was listening to the news yesterday and it said the only reason the members of Security Council had the veto was because they were the ones who ‘won’ the war, WW2. Other countries want more say about vetoes but I doubt anything can change. Yes, it needs to be updated.

        • Dean Venture

          That makes sense. I wonder what the permanent members are going to do when India starts asking why her billion people don’t get a veto.

    • Danny Gallo

      Its that monkey ass in office though if where Africa