Made them feel like worthless tossers, they awkwardly squirmed in their seats, applauded when he was done, told everyone how powerful his speech was to every camera they could find, and now will not do a fucking thing.
Russia needs to be removed from the security council.
A Good Woman
Yes, remove them from the Security Council.
schrodingers_cat
I don’t think it is possible to remove a permanent member with veto power from the Security Council.
PaulWartenberg
Problem is the rules make it damn near impossible to kick a permanent member of the SC off.
The smart move is to get all the other nations to dissolve the entire UN Charter, and then turn right around and vote for a NEW Charter in which the Security Council no longer has Russia on it (replace them with, oh, Egypt).
Emma from Miami
Amen, brother!
WaterGirl
The United States seeks to suspend Russia from the UN Human Rights Council.
Lots of other countries are in favor of that too. Apparently they spoke about it but what happens next. I have no idea how decisions are made. It’s not enough, but Russia shouldn’t get to spew their propaganda during a fucking Human Rights Council meeting.
Bupalos
Yeah we just dont seem to have it in us. Institutions and populations just not up to the job, not made for this.
To be fair, I think what Putin is doing is pretty shocking. I know all the ingredients are there, I know we should be able to see the patterns,….but I have to admit I’m shocked that he and that kleptocratic zombie country are quite this awful.
lowtechcyclist
Then kick Russia out of the UN altogether.
WaterGirl
@schrodingers_cat: I still like the “Russia never went through a formal procedure or a vote when it ascended to the USSR position after the collapse of the USSR” gambit.
I wonder if it’s gaining any traction.
Cacti
@schrodingers_cat: The Russian Federation usurped a seat that belonged to the Soviet Union, a political entity that had ceased to exist.
Should have been put to a vote of the other permanent members.
debbie
@PaulWartenberg:
There hasn’t been a time like this in the UN’s history, so I don’t see why extraordinary measures shouldn’t be taken.
Martin
@PaulWartenberg: Well, the same rules say that the government of the Soviet Union is a permanent member of the Security Council, not Russia. Same too for the government of China which is now in exile in Taiwan.
I don’t have a problem with there being permanent members of the security council. But nobody should have a veto. The veto is the real problem.
I have an alternate solution:
The nations that are best able to address the needs of the planet (climate change, poverty, etc.) get to sit on the security council. Gotta earn it doing the stuff that provides for global security. Still no vetos, but set up some metrics and let everyone compete for those seats. If you can stay on top consistently, consider it a permanent seat.
debbie
@WaterGirl:
That choice is a distant second. If Russia is that outraged about not getting their emergency meeting (which they actually got), we can be outraged enough to boot their ass out to the curb.
Martin
@lowtechcyclist: You want everyone in the UN. Take away their authority above just being a member.
Omnes Omnibus
As I said in an earlier thread: I think that people are expecting more from the UN than it is set up to do. The Security Council and the GA are set up to be talking shops and have little power to actually affect events. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Having such fora is a good thing, and, in time, it could evolve into more. In the meantime, as a number of people have said, the various UN agencies do a shitload of good work across the globe.
TL, DR: Don’t expect the UN to do things it wasn’t designed to do.
Miss Bianca
@Omnes Omnibus: Always a good reminder.
Roger Moore
@Martin:
I think the whole thing about the permanent members of the security council having veto power is where the real trouble is. It means the security council is basically useless, since any country can act with impunity if it’s good friends with a permanent member. Just getting rid of the veto would be a huge step forward.
bookworm1398
To what end? All this attention given to removing Russia from UNSC is a pointless distraction. UNSC isn’t what is keeping NATO from fighting in Ukraine and it’s not preventing them from imposing energy sanctions either.
planetjanet
The US ambassador made a clear case to remove Russia from the Human Rights Council That sounds much more doable. It is a start.
ETA: Now I see WaterGirl was ahead of me.
dmsilev
@Roger Moore: Ok, say Russia loses its SC veto. Somehow. Now what? Does anyone think that an SC vote condemning Russia’s many horrible acts will matter one whit to Putin? It’s not like the UN is going to send peacekeepers to Crimea or anything like that. Arms to Ukraine and sanctions against Russia are both things that individual countries decide on, so what would the UN do here?
debbie
Russia doesn’t deserve a seat at any table.
bbleh
At least from what I’ve seen, China is backing Russia in the SC, at least for now.
Lyrebird
Agreed, though I totally respect what Pres. Z. is doing, cutting through the war propaganda and turning up the guilt for some European countries that can do more.
Was it you or @Miss Bianca: or @WaterGirl: who recently reminded us that one point of NATO was to keep its members from going to war with each other?
I wonder, is there anything more we can do to support the Jan 6 investigations or otherwise push back on the totalitarians here?
gene108
@schrodingers_cat:
The Republic of China (Taiwan) held the Security Council seat, since they were the government in charge of China, in 1945.
In 1971, a motion was passed by the U.N. General Assembly to give the seat to the Peoples Republic of China (main land China).
I’m not sure how it work now since there’s no clear country to replace the USSR’s seat, if the Russian Federation is removed.
Miss Bianca
@Lyrebird: ’twasn’t me, although I approve the sentiment. It may have been WaterGirl, or it may have been Omnes Omnibus. It sounds like something O2 would say
Omnes Omnibus
@Lyrebird: I agree with you about Z. He was speaking to a larger audience. As far as the NATO comment, it may have been me; I certainly agree with it.
lowtechcyclist
@Martin:
Suppose the UN had existed prior to WWII. What would the point have been of maintaining the memberships of Germany, Italy, and Japan?
NotMax
@lowtechcyclist
Much easier to do spy stuff and/or infiltrate their delegations when they’re in the same building.
//
TonyG
To state the obvious, the problem with International Law is that there is no International Police Force to arrest the perpetrators. So, sternly worded resolutions can be issued and then ignored. The Nuremberg Trials and punishments took place because Germany had effectively been destroyed and occupied by the USSR, the USA, Britain and other countries. The most effective retribution against Russia at this time would be the European countries to stop buying their oil and gas, but that’s not likely to happen.
Lyrebird
@Miss Bianca: Hey thanks!
@Omnes Omnibus: Good to know.
Peace all.
senyordave
Putin has used the claim that Ukraine was committing genocide against ethnic Russians as a main justification for the Ukraine invasion. No evidence has been given, and it is a taken for granted that this is a war conducted under false pretenses. And for this people say that Russia should be removed as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Wasn’t there a country that had a war of aggression under what turned out to be false pretenses back in 2003? And ultimately even the low estimates had civilian deaths of 150,000+. Wasn’t the aggressor in that war was a permanent member of UN Security Council.
El Muneco
@lowtechcyclist: The League Of Nations did exist before WW2, and when the topic of its ability to prevent Imperial Japan from doing anything it damn well pleased came up … Imperial Japan left the League Of Nations, so it prevented nothing.
Omnes Omnibus
@senyordave: The US at least went to the UN with evidence and tried to convince people to go along. Then it put together a coalition. Yeah, the evidence was bullshit and the coalition was a lot of countries that couldn’t really say no, but the US knew that hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue.
James E Powell
@senyordave:
I’m sure everyone here recalls the acts of the Bush/Cheney Junta with crystal clarity.
Here’s a thought: two wrongs don’t make a right.
schrodingers_cat
I saw many tankies circulating pictures of a destroyed Mosul to whatabout what Russia is doing in Ukraine.
Calouste
@TonyG:
It’s not likely to happen immediately, but it was something that was already in the pipeline, and it’s certainly speeding up now. Many European countries already have plans to ban the sales of new ICE cars in the 2030-2040 timeframe. The Netherlands, which had their own massive gas field but now partially relies on Russian gas, aims to convert all housing from gas to electric by 2050. All those things are going to speed up because there is a lot more public support now for cutting the dependency on petrostates.
It’s not going to have a short term impact, but Putin basically signed the death sentence for Russia’s continuing existence as a petrostate. And what do they have then left?
kalakal
@dmsilev: There is a precedent. The Korean War. Russia was boycotting the UN over Taiwan rather than China having a permanent security council seat. In their absence following North Koreas invasion of South Korea United Nations Security Council Resolutions 83 and 84 provided the international legal authority for member states to restore peace on the Korean Peninsula, and they designated the United States as the leader of the unified command we know as UN Command.
The UN basically declared war on North Korea, its Police force was the armed forces of 22 member states
Omnes Omnibus
OT: There was a election in WI today. Here in Madison, there was only contested race, a school board seat. Both candidates seemed more or less fine. One wanted more police in schools and the other really emphasized diversity and used they/them as pronouns. Those were the only big differences. I went with them. In Milwaukee, this happened. Which is awesome.
Another Scott
@Omnes Omnibus: ?
More, please.
Cheers,
Scott.
eddie blake
uh, no. NATO has ALWAYS been about fighting the russians and the warsaw pact. what you’re thinking about is the EU. the EU was made so the nations of europe wouldn’t fight each other, to prevent another war on the continent. (mostly germany and france, but yeah, baby steps)
Omnes Omnibus
@eddie blake: Nope. The EU is a political expansion of what began as a customs union.
eddie blake
@Omnes Omnibus: yeah. forcing the two largest economies on the continent to become entwined was about making sure it was in their vested interests in not setting europe ablaze every twenty years or so
and i mean, if you’re right, (which i’m pretty sure you’re not,) why was it cool for france to just bail from NATO from the sixties to the aughts?
no. NATO was about a unified command structure and a simplification of logistics for what was thought was going to be the inevitable soviet invasion of europe.
Omnes Omnibus
@eddie blake: Since France did not actually leave NATO….
eddie blake
@Omnes Omnibus: no, they just jumped ship from the integrated command structure. for over forty years.
whereas, for more than that length of time, they were wrapping themselves tighter and tighter economically to former existential enemies.
Omnes Omnibus
@eddie blake: Yes, and I am sure being in a military alliance had no effect whatsoever on the fact that western European nations avoided war with one another for seventy odd years. Of course the EU and its predecessor organizations help to accomplish the same thing. But don’t pretend NATO was not a part of it.
Ramona Rosario
@gene108: Give it to Ukraine?
Eibeinaka
@Omnes Omnibus: You’re being obtuse. The EU is the eventual result of the largely Franco-German Steel & Coal Community, the explicit aim of which was to tie Western European nations together by avoiding conflict over vital resources. It was not “just a Customs Union”. The EEC, which you’re probably thinking of by referring to “just a Customs Union” came letter.
The close economic integration of Europe, and its concomitant cultural integration have probably done much more to make conflict between France and Germany (to be realistic) unthinkable than membership (or quasi-membership in the case of France) of NATO.
I mean, speaking as a European (recently detached), it seems self-evident.
lowtechcyclist
I would think one thing the UN could do if Russia didn’t have a veto would be to authorize and put together a relief mission to Mariupol. Would something like that not be within its remit?
Antonius
@PaulWartenberg: Despite their recent fascist leanings… India? World’s largest Democracy?
Jørgen
@Eibeinaka: Yes, exactly. As a Dane, this is precisely why I have always been pro-EU (and before that pro-EEC), despite Denmark being very euro-sceptical.
Ramalama
@Martin:
I love this idea. Is this even possible?
Paul in KY
@kalakal: Now if we can just get Russia to boycott the SC for some stupid reason…