Russian Oppression in Occupied Crimea Takes Center Stage

As has been Russia’s style, its brand of liberation oppression swept across the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea in the wake of Moscow’s invading “green men” nearly three years ago. They seized government buildings, schools and civic organizations, banned the Crimean Tatar language and religion, arrested, imprisoned and killed Tatar leaders and activists as they raised the Russian tricolor over what has become occupied Crimea.

A climate of daily brutality that has been condemned by the free world enveloped the peninsula. Russia orchestrated a fabricated referendum that led to its illegal annexation by Moscow. In a blitzkrieg act of aggression, Ukraine and the free world lost administrative control over political, economic and social developments in Crimea. As a result, human rights abuses have become a consistent part of life in Crimea.

Crimean Tatar leaders have revealed that under Moscow’s laws and policies, any resident of Crimea who refuses to take Russian citizenship and a Russian passport, or who tries to retain Ukrainian citizenship, forfeits his or her right to live, to work in, or even to visit the peninsula.

The Atlantic Council, in the executive summary to its 2015 report titled “Human Rights Abuses in Russian-Occupied Crimea,” wrote: “This first land grab on European soil since World War II exposed the Kremlin’s imperialist ambitions and posed a serious threat to the post-Cold War international order. Since the onset of Russian occupation, Crimea’s residents have faced increasingly grave civic, political, and human rights violations. These include discriminatory policies against Crimea’s ethnic Tatar minority, infringement of property rights, and intimidation of independent voices through selective use of the law and physical force.”

The Council further noted that there is “an alarming deterioration of human rights” in Crimea. Russian authorities have resurrected its Soviet predecessor’s inhuman practice of punitive psychiatry against Tatar political prisoners.

“For their refusal to recognize the authority of the de facto government, Tatar leaders have been exiled or banned from public life, their public commemorations prohibited, and their media muzzled. Activists and journalists who simply speak up for human rights have been subjected to torture, intimidated into emigration, and have had their property illegally confiscated. Some have gone missing, with authorities offering little to no evidence that they are investigating the disappearances,” wrote Andrii Klymenko, chief editor of Black Sea News and chairman of the Supervisory Board of Maidan of Foreign Affairs, in the summary.

With willful disregard of international law and order unseen seen Nazi Germany’s invasion of Europe some eight decades ago, Russia has brought war to Europe, occupied Crimea and eastern Ukraine, and spreads repression and terror in with its armed forces and mercenary terrorists.

In a draconian declaration of its thorough authority over the imprisoned inhabitants of the peninsula, the so-called colonial Supreme Court of Crimea on April 26, 2016, and the Supreme Court of Russia on September 29, 2016, declared the Mejlis, the self-governing institution of the Crimean Tatars, to be an extremist organization and banned its activities.

The invasion and occupation of Crimea, just like the war in eastern Ukraine, have been in the forefront of news media since February 2014 and have been the focus of numerous global, United Nations and regional forums. The United Nations reaffirmed its support for Ukraine in a resolution in support of the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

The UN General Assembly again will have the opportunity to address this issue on Monday, November 14. The Congressional Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe – the Helsinki Commission – will also review Russian abuses in Crimea at a briefing on Capitol Hill on Thursday, November 10.

Since the illegal annexation of Crimea, the European Parliament, among other institutions, condemned Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. The members of the parliament “condemn the unprecedented levels of human rights abuses perpetrated against Crimean residents, most notably the Tatars, an indigenous people of Crimea, and the severe restrictions on the freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly.”

“The Russian Federation, as an occupying power, has a responsibility to ensure the safety of the whole population and should, together with the de facto local authorities, investigate effectively, impartially and transparently all cases of disappearances, torture and human rights abuses by the police and paramilitary forces active in the Crimean peninsula since February 2014,” the European Parliament said.

Despite global denunciation of Russia’s invasion of Ukrainian Crimea, Moscow has not withdrawn from its occupied territories even in the face of economic sanctions that are not expected to be lifted. Nonetheless, the free world must continue to keep a spotlight on Russia oppression of Crimea and eastern Ukraine and keep the Kremlin’s feet to the hot coals until it unconditionally withdraws from all occupied regions of Ukraine.

Human Rights Watch, a respected global observer, also noted “Since Russian forces began occupying Crimea in early 2014, the space for free speech, freedom of association, and media in Crimea has shrunk dramatically. In two years, authorities have failed to conduct meaningful investigations into actions of armed paramilitary groups, implicated in torture, extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, attacks and beatings of Crimean Tatar and pro-Ukraine activists and journalists.”

“Under international law, the Russian Federation is an occupying power in Crimea as it exercises effective control in Crimea without the consent of the government of Ukraine, and there has been no legally recognized transfer of sovereignty to Russia. The referendum, held without the authorization of the Ukrainian government or any broad-based endorsement by the international community, and Russia’s unilateral actions afterward cannot be considered to meet the criteria under international law for a transfer of sovereignty that would end the state of belligerent occupation,” the human rights monitor stated.

The resolution that will be discussed in the UN General Assembly has been endorsed by the following countries: 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.

The resolution, when adopted, is expected to:

Condemn the temporary occupation of the part of the territory of Ukraine;

Condemn the imposition of the legal system of the Russian Federation and the negative impact on the human rights situation in Crimea; and

Condemn the reported serious violations and abuses against residents of Crimea, in particular: extrajudicial killings, abductions, enforced disappearances, politically motivated prosecutions, discrimination, harassment, intimidation, violence, arbitrary detentions, torture and ill-treatment of detainees, their transfer from Crimea to Russia, as well as reported abuses of other fundamental freedoms, including freedoms of expression, religion or belief, and association and the right of peaceful assembly.

The resolution urges Russia to uphold its international obligations, overturn its abusive policies in Crimea and release all imprisoned Ukrainian citizens. It urges Russia to address the issue of impunity and ensure that those found to be responsible for abuses are held accountable before an independent judiciary. The resolution calls on Moscow to revoke immediately the decision on declaring the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars as an extremist organization and banning its activities and repeal the decision banning leaders of the Mejlis from entering Crimea.

Among other passages in the resolution there is one that recalls UN Resolution 68/262 of March 27, 2014, on the territorial integrity of Ukraine, that affirms the General Assembly’s 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 UN system.

There are other worthwhile references but, sadly, there isn’t one that demands the withdrawal of Russian soldiers and officials from Crimea and return of the peninsula to Ukraine’s sovereign rule.

While these and other efforts such as the Minsk process to bring peace and stability to Ukraine and Crimea have been successful and Ukrainian civilians and soldiers are being killed defending their homeland, global efforts such as those that I mentioned here must continue so that no one forgets Russia’s crimes against humanity and, hopefully, it will be brought to justice.

Congressman Pascrell recognized with Shevchenko Freedom Award

Congressman Bill Pascrell (D-NJ), a staunch champion of independent Ukraine and critic of Russia for its crimes against humanity, was rewarded for his efforts with the Shevchenko Freedom Award. On Wednesday, November 3, leaders of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America visited the congressman in his Paterson, NJ, office to present him with the award. Pascrell has been the sponsor and co-sponsor of numerous resolutions in support of Ukraine and visited many local Ukrainian events. He is also a member of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, a group of lawmakers committed to advocating pro-Ukrainian issues.

Considering Russia for any Human Rights Post is Absurd

Without delving into its historic crimes of the previous century, Russia’s crimes against humanity in the past 16 years should be enough to ban it from being included on a human rights body.

In the 21st century alone, Russia has waged wars in the Caucasus, and at home violated the human rights of fledgling democracy groups, persecuted members of the LGBT community, denied religious rights of non-Orthodox believers, victimized and arrested Ukrainian community activists, and killed opposition leaders.

Mocking humanity by legalizing oppression, the Russian parliament rubber stamped Putin’s demand that it adopt a law that would eliminate troublesome NGOs by declaring them to be foreign agents, which in Russian means traitor. So far Russia’s Justice Ministry has designated 145 such groups as “foreign agents,” and more than 20 chose to shut down rather than accept this label. In November 2015, it branded Memorial’s sister organization, Memorial Human Rights Center, a “foreign agent,” accusing it of using overseas funding to harm Russia. Also in 2015, the authorities filed suit to have Memorial dissolved over a bureaucratic technicality, and only after high-level intervention, including by the Council of Europe, did they back off.

In February 2014, Russia invaded three regions of Ukraine turning them into Russian fiefdoms and launching a 28-month-long war that has claimed the lives of some 10,000 Ukrainians, shot down a Malaysian passenger jetliner, and began horrific bombardments of the Syrian city of Aleppo that will surely bomb the town into the Stone Age.

Russia’s brutal assault on Aleppo has earned the Kremlin the outrage of many free world leaders. Many governments, including the UK, France and the US, have accused Russia of war crimes for targeting built-up areas and civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, a water-treatment plant, bakeries and emergency response centers, as well as for bombing a UN aid convoy outside Aleppo during a ceasefire on September 19.

Residents and international monitors report that Russian-manufactured cluster munitions – banned under international law because of the indiscriminate damage they cause – as well as napalm, white phosphorous and ground-penetrating “bunker-buster” bombs have been dropped on besieged east Aleppo’s 250,000 residents in the past four weeks. 

Pundits have written that there is no reason to believe that Russia’s UNHCR interest will slow the assault. After ignoring the US, Europe and Syria’s neighbors in his single-minded support for Assad, they said, there is no reason to expect that Russian President Vladimir Putin would pause for the council. If the recent past teaches us anything, it is that Putin can remain secure that his aggressive activities will draw many complaints, but little action.

As for the latest wave of crimes in Ukraine, Iryna Gerashchenko, first deputy chairperson of Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada and Ukrainian envoy for humanitarian issues at Minsk peace talks, speaking at a UN Security Council on October 25, offered shocking testimony that 495 Ukrainian women and 68 children have been among the killed since Russia invaded Ukraine.

“Women and children are the most vulnerable groups in war. According to the latest data, there are 1,700,000 internally displaced persons in Ukraine, of which approximately 900,000 are women and 236,000 are children,” Gerashchenko said in her impassioned address.

But most unforgivable of other violence, Gerashchenko related this Russian war crime: “This is the symbol of the war in Donbas – Russian men fight against Ukrainian women and children, kill and mutilate them, take them captives.”

This should be highlighted for the world to read ahead of the UN vote on Russia’s bid to join the vaunted Human Rights Council.

Gerashchenko noted that “violence against women and girls has always been the part of conflicts and sexual violence is used as war weapon. The information is available about human trafficking in the occupied territories, sexual violence and exploitation, cases of involvement of young people in military actions that are incompatible with human rights standards and unacceptable in the modern world.”

“Every fourth person who has been in captivity of the pro-Russian militants became a victim or a witness of gender-based violence. Human rights advocates underline that sexual violence is used as a part of tortures to spread panic and fear,” she said.

In Crimea, Russian occupiers have outlawed the Tatar language and religion, and arrested, imprisoned and killed Crimean Tatar leaders.

Does Russia with its blood-soaked hands deserve global consideration for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council? Surely not.

The UN General Assembly will select new members of the Human Rights Council on Friday, October 28, and Russia, which is ranked “not free” by the democracy watchdog Freedom House, will be competing with two “free” countries – Hungary and Croatia – for the two Eastern European seats on the 47-member body.

While Russia in principle could be outvoted, sadly, given the history and pattern of voting at the UN the chances of that happening are very slim.

Voting for a place on the Geneva-based Human Rights Council takes place in the full UN General Assembly, in a secret ballot vote, which protects countries from being challenged about – or embarrassed by – their vote choices. Membership is granted by a simple majority vote, 97 of the General Assembly’s 193 members, so it is possible for a candidate, even in a closed slate, to fail to pass that threshold, although it has hardly ever happened.

Human Rights Watch said Russia’s membership bid risks undermining the credibility of the UN and its Human Rights Council and its ability to hold rights abusers accountable for their crimes. How can a perpetrator hold court against other perpetrators?

“The UN Human Rights Council’s ability to successfully expose and hold violators to account is under threat because a number of countries use it to thwart attempts to expose their own crimes and abuses,” said Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch.

A number of human rights and aid organizations have urged the United Nations this week to deprive Russia of a seat on the council. More than 80 global organizations have signed the appeal, with such groups as Human Rights Watch, CARE International and Refugees International among them.

The signatories asked the UN member-states to “question seriously whether Russia’s role in Syria which includes supporting and undertaking military actions which have routinely targeted civilians and civilian objects renders it fit to serve on the UN’s premier inter-governmental human rights institution.”

The appeal has been submitted ahead of elections to the UN’s human rights.

Why should the man and woman on the street care about human rights and Russia’s criminal track record?

Firstly, allowing Russia a seat at the council would desecrate human rights principles, the Human Rights Council, the UN and all crimes committed in local neighborhoods. It would be akin to reserving a place at the table for Adolf Hitler. It would contribute to civilization’s submersion into a vile existence on our watch.

Codifying respect for human rights, the UN has noted that human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. In other words, we are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible and they are also incorporated into the principles of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals – Agenda 2030.

The principle of universality of human rights is the cornerstone of international human rights law. This principle, as first emphasized in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948, has been reiterated in numerous international human rights conventions, declarations, and resolutions. The 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights, for example, noted that it is the duty of states – national governments – to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems. The government of Russia has chosen to perennially violate human rights on all levels.

The UN also noted that human rights entail both rights and obligations. States assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights. The obligation to respect means that states must refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The obligation to protect requires states to protect individuals and groups against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means that states must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights. At the individual level, while we are entitled our human rights, we should also respect the human rights of others.

The following are some of the most important characteristics of human rights: Human rights are founded on respect for the dignity and worth of each person; Human rights are universal, meaning that they are applied equally and without discrimination to all people; Human rights are inalienable, in that no one can have his or her human rights taken away; and others.

Finally, by guaranteeing life, liberty, equality, and security, human rights protect people against abuse by those who are more powerful. According to the United Nations, human rights “ensure that a human being will be able to fully develop and use human qualities such as intelligence, talent, and conscience and satisfy his or her spiritual needs.” More categories of violations by Russia.

Michelle Maiese, addressing human rights violations and wars or conflicts, noted on the website BeyondIntractability.org: “Many conflicts are sparked by a failure to protect human rights, and the trauma that results from severe human rights violations often leads to new human rights violations. As conflict intensifies, hatred accumulates and makes restoration of peace more difficult. In order to stop this cycle of violence, states must institute policies aimed at human rights protection. Many believe that the protection of human rights ‘is essential to the sustainable achievement of the three agreed global priorities of peace, development and democracy.’

“Respect for human rights has therefore become an integral part of international law and foreign policy. The specific goal of expanding such rights is to "increase safeguards for the dignity of the person. To protect human rights is to ensure that people receive some degree of decent, humane treatment. Because political systems that protect human rights are thought to reduce the threat of world conflict, all nations have a stake in promoting worldwide respect for human rights.”

The UN operates on a different level than national governments but humanity’s indignation with the possible election of a criminal state, Russia, to the respected UN Human Rights Council must be vocally expressed. Contact your elected officials and say this possibility is a great moral blasphemy that must be quashed by the free world. Ban Russia from the UN Human Rights Council and other global events.

Is Free World Finally Seeing Russia as Evil Empire?

It’s been 33 years since President Ronald Reagan branded the Soviet Union – a euphemism for Russia – as the evil empire. His historic observation about Russian imperialism can be compared with Winston Churchill’s speech on March 5, 1946, in which he stated that an iron curtain has descended over Europe as a result of Moscow’s plans for global domination.

President Reagan, in his address on March 8, 1983, to the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, FL, presented his succinct portrayal of the Soviet Russia, stating: “Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness—pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the Earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.”

Reagan, a highly regarded champion of independence for Ukraine and the other captive nations and an anti-communist, also said: “I urge you to beware the temptation of pride—the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”

For decades since the end of World War Two the freedom fighters of the captive nations had sought to convince the free world that the end of war will not quell Russia’s passion for aggression. Hitler’s quest to dominate the world was quashed by a united effort but, sadly, Russia continued and continues to pursue its relentless imperial pursuit of global subjugation with impunity.

Russia meticulously absorbed Eastern European nations into its empire while the free world watched with disbelief and merely restrained criticism. There were few noteworthy attempts to raise awareness about Russia’s global threat along the lines of the Captive Nations Week Resolution or Public Law 86-90 of 1959. However, nothing seemed to be able to halt Russian expansion. The US Congress countered Russia’s human rights violations with proclamations and denunciations but Moscow’s arrests and imprisonments of activists persisted.

During the 2012 Presidential Election Campaign GOP candidate Mitt Romney reminded us that “Russia is our number one geopolitical foe” but that admonition did not elicit the type of reaction from free world leaders that would force reforms in the Kremlin.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2014, two weeks after the conclusion of the Winter Olympics, caught world capitals by surprise and wondering how to bring about an end to the latest European war. Should they force Ukraine to submit to Russia’s demands? The United States and free world allies instituted punitive sanctions against Moscow but stopped short of sending lethal weapons to Ukraine that would help it subdue and expel Russian soldiers and terrorists back to Russia.

Russia continued its war against Ukraine while the free world failed to make a solid united stand against Moscow’s persistent attempts to resurrect the imperial glory of Russia. Russia’s political and business leaders were still being welcomed by their counterparts around the world.

And then the world was shocked to its core by Russia’s brutal bombardment of Aleppo that according to TV accounts will wipe the city and its residents off the face of the earth.

World leaders, having endured enough the gruesome photographs of children decimated by Russia’s bombardment, have finally condemned Russia with words that haven’t been used against Moscow in decades. Secretary of State John Kerry and others, expressing their exasperation with Russia’s continuous lies and violence, have called Russia’s heartless shelling of Syrian towns a war crime and called for an investigation in Russia’s latest aggression. Their aggravation was compounded by intelligence reports that Moscow ordered damaging hacking attacks of the United States.

The United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Theresa May, assessing the shelling of Aleppo, posed a solution to Russian aggression that shouldn’t be belittled by her colleagues. May castigated Russia for its merciless shelling, saying EU countries must work together and put pressure on Russia to stop its “appalling atrocities, its sickening atrocities” in Syria, which, according to the Financial Times, raise the prospect of further sanctions against Moscow. 

Condemning Russia for destroying Aleppo and killing its residents, May said on the eve of an EU summit Russia’s aggression showed the need for the UK and the EU to show a “robust and united European stance.”

May’s remarks came as a Russian naval taskforce, including the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, was being shadowed by the Royal Navy as it headed toward the eastern Mediterranean and on to Syria presumably to bolster Moscow’s aerial bombing of Aleppo.

The significant point is that a major European political leader understands the global threat posed by Russia and has wisely called for a needed united European stance to halt its devastating bombardment. Russia’s violence in Syria is not different than its belligerence against Ukraine and European leaders would do well to consider including Russia’s war versus Ukraine in their condemnation. A united European stand against Russia on both counts would be a positive, fresh step to overcome Moscow and return peace and stability to the region.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin alluded to such a unified tendency in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal.

Ahead of talks on Ukraine and a summit of European leaders, he and other Ukrainian officials said last week they believe there is increasing support in Europe for a harder line approach to Russia. Klimkin said frustration with Russian actions in Syria has helped convince European leaders that Moscow has been following similar approaches in Ukraine and Syria.

“Syria and Ukraine are two separate tracks, they don’t directly overlap,” Klimkin said. “But in the sense of understanding the whole picture of course there is a kind of cross influence.”

“Let’s stop shelling, let's pull back heavy weaponry, let’s give the OSCE missions the possibility for the access the whole territory of Donbas,” he continued. “The Russian regular troops should be out and the OSCE should be in.”

In the wake of Russia’s bombardment of Aleppo, I have discovered similar epiphanies among pundits and politicians.

Among them, Eli Lake wrote in Bloomberg News that the world would not be better if Russia and the US were friends. Calling Russia a pariah, Lake accused it of regularly poisoning global relations.

“But as Secretary of State John Kerry has learned in his fruitless engagements, Russian promises are worthless. Everyone in U.S. politics, with the exception of Donald Trump and a few other extremists on the left and right, understands this. Russia is a pariah.

“Pariahs are not asked to cooperate on challenges to the global commons. They shouldn’t get to host events like the World Cup, as Russia is scheduled to do in 2018. They should not be diplomatic partners in U.S. policy to disarm other pariahs like Iran. No, pariahs should be quarantined. With Russia, it’s the very least the U.S. and its allies can do to save the international system from a country that seeks to destroy it,” Lake wrote.

An anonymous US official was quoted by Reuters as admitting that Russia’s Putin is intent on restoring the torn iron curtain and the ill begotten Russian prison of nations.

“The Russians have been engaged in a sustained campaign to recapture what Putin considers their rightful buffer in Eastern Europe, and to undermine not just NATO and the EU, but the entire democratic foundation of both institutions,” said the official who claimed he has studied Russian behavior since before the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991.

The reason the official requested anonymity is shocking: The White House has ordered officials not to publicly discuss hostile Russian activities.

President Poroshenko also joined the chorus of officials urging the global community not to be naïve about Russia’s intentions. Just as Britain’s May, Poroshenko earnestly presented a case for a united effort to stop Russia. In an op-ed appropriately titled “The End of the Masquerade” in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Poroshenko wrote: “We should finally stop being so naïve with respect to Russia’s true intentions, as we were in 2008 or in 2014-15. It has no desire to end its aggression if we do not stop them together. Fraud and manipulation are only effective if solidarity and foresight are lacking.”

Apparently, Aleppo has become the final straw for the world as it condemns Russia for its wanton belligerence. While Russian aggression and killings in Ukraine and elsewhere predate its Syrian attacks, it is nonetheless vital now for a united front to declare Russia to be a pariah and war criminal, and banish it from the international community until its people emerge from their darkness and force reforms and democratization in the Kremlin.

Assurances Lead to Expectations

On the one hand, statements and declarations in support of besieged Ukraine are welcome and bolster the global sense of goodwill and approval Ukraine is enjoying today.

On the other hand, words of support, especially expressed by government leaders, carry an obligation and a commitment to do something to justify the words. By articulating support for Ukraine at a time of war, Ukrainian officials and citizens are naturally filled with an expectation that something beneficial will soon take place. Ukrainian Americans voters also share this same expectation.

Otherwise, these assurances are merely for the news media, hollow, and any forthcoming expectations are unwarranted.

US Secretary of State John Kerry voiced strong support for Ukraine at an event hosted by The German Marshall Fund and the US Mission to the European Union in Brussels on Tuesday, October 4. His words were truly inspiring and should have resounded frighteningly throughout the halls of the Kremlin.

Kerry’s latest warning to Russia, unwavering support for Ukraine and reaffirmation of American principled advocacy of the downtrodden could be deemed historic as they touched all of the correct buzzwords. However, Russia has turned a deaf ear to Washington’s repeated rebukes.

Warning Russia in the person of its Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Kerry emphatically declared the US will stand its ground on behalf of freedom. He said:

“But the willingness of NATO and EU countries to search for common ground with Russia doesn’t relieve us of the obligation to stand our ground on behalf of freedom and international law, which is why we remain steadfast in our support for a stable, united, and democratic Ukraine.”

The Secretary of State created the foundation for a global duality in US foreign policy. There is Russia, with which the US and others desire to work; there is Russia, which the US and others condemn, and there is Ukraine, which the US and others will steadfastly support.

“And Moscow should have no doubt on this point: we will stand our ground. Blatant aggression is not something that any of us are prepared to accept, and no place in the world should understand it better than Europe.”

Kerry warned Moscow not to underestimate the US determination. While the US wants to search for common ground with the Kremlin, Washington will stand its ground in supporting Ukraine. Note, he didn’t say defending Ukraine. One American hand will deal with a criminal and the other with the victim.

“So we have imposed sanctions and we are insisting on a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Donbas and the illegal annexation of Crimea – even as we encourage the government in Ukraine to stay the course and accelerate the pace of reform.”

He underlined economic sanctions as the height of America’s arsenal against Russian transgressions and set the bar on diplomacy to resolve the conflict – avoiding the word war – in Ukraine. Then to show that the US will not play favorites, he intimated that Kyiv still needs to do more to hasten reforms and eliminate corruption.

“Our priority should be an open and competitive market that doesn’t play favorites and that contributes to the prosperity of all countries and doesn’t use this in some antiquated 18th or 19th century power game between states. We’ve made real strides, I think, in the last four years in creating energy options for Ukraine, Moldova, the Baltic states, southern Europe; and now we have to continue our work to bring energy independence to the countries in Central Europe that have too few choices in their supply.”

In other words, according to Kerry, Washington will remain wary of Russian intentions, critical of the Kremlin’s behavior, supportive of Ukraine, while striving to build open and competitive markets that don’t play favorites. Can the White House simultaneously cheer the lions and Christians?

Faced with these options, Russia would be remiss if it didn’t instinctively continue its war against Ukraine, accept American admonitions with a grain of salt and build competitive markets.

And Lavrov voiced the same opinion during an earlier press encounter with Kerry at the President Wilson Hotel in Geneva on August 26. The Russian said the two countries should sweep the Ukrainian issue under the carpet because there are many similar troubling concerns.

“As you can understand, there is quite a plenty of them in the current circumstances, but I believe that the genuine interests of Russia and United States boil down to the fact that we have normal relations between the two states and the two peoples. I do hope that our today’s meeting was another step in that direction,” Lavrov said.

The Voice of America picked up on this disturbing concept of let’s play nice with the enemy in its story about Kerry’s speech in Brussels. Its lead paragraph read: “US Secretary of State John Kerry says Western alliances are willing to work with Russia to seek solutions to end the unrest in Ukraine, but will stand firm on principles based on freedom and international law.”

Sincere words of support for Ukraine traditionally reach a crescendo during the anniversary of Ukrainian Independence Day on August 24. These words also generate expectations in the minds of victims.

For example, President Obama observed: “Today, we reaffirm that the United States will continue to stand with the Ukrainian people as they protect their sovereignty and territorial integrity, embrace the vision of a strong and united Europe, and deepen their commitment to democracy, anti-corruption, and respect for human rights. I offer my best wishes to all the people of Ukraine.  On this occasion, we are reminded that even in the most difficult moments, the glory and freedom of Ukraine—and the indomitable spirit of the Ukrainian people—lives on.”

Rep. Evan McMullin (R-UT), among other lawmakers, said during this year’s independence observance that the US “will revive and expand America’s strategic partnership with Ukraine, enhancing bilateral military, intelligence and diplomatic cooperation, and will fight for the right of the Ukrainian people—not Moscow—to decide whether they will seek membership in NATO, the European Union, and other regional organizations.”

The US “will support the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and will work to ensure all territories of Ukraine illegally annexed or occupied by Russia must be returned to the rightful government,” McMullin said.

Candidate Hillary Clinton noted through a spokesperson: “Through her multiple visits to Ukraine, Secretary Clinton has seen firsthand the passion with which Ukrainians fight for these ideals in the face of persistent adversity. She remains a staunch ally and advocate as they continue to defend their sovereignty.”

Secretary Kerry marked the date by saying: “Today we mark not just a quarter-century of your independence, but also of the fruitful partnership between our nations based on our shared commitment to freedom and the rule of law. The United States will stand by you as you continue to strengthen your democracy. With our European partners, we will also press for full implementation of the Minsk agreements to end Russian aggression in Donbas and return the international border to Ukrainian control. We remain steadfast in our refusal to recognize Russia’s attempted annexation of Crimea.”

Words of support such as these are coupled with daily reports about Russia’s continuing military onslaught against Ukraine, and Ukrainian military and civilian deaths signal that something isn’t right. The assurances don’t match reality. Why are the White House’s views belittled by the enemy?

High-ranking US officials have been emphasizing that Ukraine has a true friend and staunch ally in the United States, that the US will stand by Ukraine as Ukrainians defend their independence, that the US will press for Minsk implementation to end Russian aggression, that the US will be steadfast in its refusal to recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea, and that the US will provide defensive – and perhaps lethal – weapons to Ukraine.

Assurances have special meanings not least of all in the minds of the victims. Ukrainian American voters also read these pledges and wonder why is Russia continuing its war against Ukraine? Why are there Russian tanks, missiles and soldiers in Ukraine and occupied Crimea? Why are Ukrainian civilians and soldiers still being killed? Why is Russia allowed to invade a neighbor, violate human rights, commit a host of other crimes with impunity? Why are sanctions levied against Russians without consequences? Why is the free world willing to condemn Russia, support Ukraine and then make commercial and political deals with the criminal?

It’s time that the friendly assurances truly help Ukraine and Ukrainians, and subdue and expel Russia from Ukraine.

X-Captive Nations Recall War

In Ukraine at 71st UN GA Talks

Leaders of Latvia and Estonia reminded the international community of the Russian war in Ukraine during their addresses today during the second day of general debates during the opening of the 71st session of the UN General Assembly.

Below are the relevant excerpts:

Latvia, President Raimonds Vÿjonis

We must remain vigilant and insist that all States abide by their obligations under international law.

Russia has undermined the foundations of international law by changing borders of sovereign States through the use of force.

Latvia together with the international community will continue to stand for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. The illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation will not be recognized and must end. Any discrimination against the Crimean Tatars and ethnic Ukrainians in Crimea requires a firm UN reaction.

The international community must work to facilitate the peaceful resolution of the conflict in the eastern Ukraine. All parties must fulfill their commitments under the Minsk Agreements and make the Minsk process work.

Latvia continues to support Ukraine in its reform process and its humanitarian needs.

Estonia, President Toomas Hendrik Ilives

Certainly the world was more stable then, before the economic crisis, the migration crisis; current conflicts in the wider Middle East or Russia’s aggression against Georgia and Ukraine; before the war on truth and facts that seems to have taken over in many places. Despite our concerns at the time, we lived in a world more stable, where optimism was not yet naivete. Today, in too many parts of this world, we find a conflict either emerging, raging or frozen. Terrorism, always a scourge, dominates our daily headlines in all parts of the world.

Not all of today’s conflicts and crises could have been prevented. Yet the effect of many could have been mitigated had we acted sooner, had the proper mechanisms to resolve them been in place. When I addressed this assembly in the wake of the Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008, I warned not to apply international law selectively. International law had been clearly violated, yet little was done. Six years later, in 2014, we saw a repeat performance in Ukraine. Part of a sovereign state was annexed, part turned into a warzone. For the first time since World War II borders in Europe had been changed through use of force. The prohibition on the use of force to change borders lies at the heart of the UN Charter. It was blatantly violated and yet the UN could not make a difference. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine continues.

Territories of Georgia and Ukraine remain occupied by a foreign military, frozen conflicts remain in

Nagorno-Karabakh and Trans-nistria.

X-captive nations must unite to defend themselves against Russian aggression. – TC

Ukraine’s Poroshenko at UNGA Urges Justice,

Development & Security to be Included in SDGs

Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko, addressing the seminal global theme of Sustainable Development Goals from the point of view of a head of state of a country that is defending itself against foreign invasion, called on the international community to include concepts of justice, development and security in the 2030 Agenda.

Speaking at the general debate at the 71st UN General Assembly session today, Poroshenko warned UN member-states that appeasing foreign aggression and terrorists will not bring peace, stability and security to the world. On the other hand, he continued, violators – both “perpetrators and masterminds” – of the UN Charter and global order must be held accountable for their crimes.

“There is a critical need to make our Organization capable of addressing effectively acts of aggression and to bring those responsible to justice. Otherwise, no nation, no UN Member State can enjoy sustainable security and development,” Poroshenko said, echoing the words of Poland’s President Andrzej Duda, expressed yesterday.

Speaking about one of the worst years in recent memory, Poroshenko questioned what makes evil so strong and good so weak nowadays? His tacit reply was acquiescence to injustice.

“But never since the end of the Cold War have international norms and principles been unilaterally defied on such a scale and with such brutality. The Charter of the United Nations – the document underpinning our responsibility for maintaining the world order – has never been questioned. And never has a Security Council member been a major violator of the UN Charter while being at the same time the instigator of, and active participant in, a conflict as well as its mediator. As a result, global instability is no longer a subject of academic debates,” he said. The unspoken instigator of the conflict is Russia.

Poroshenko offered the 193 General Assembly members two choices.

“Either we recognize the problem and spare no efforts to address it on the basis of shared values and principles, or deceive ourselves by the illusion of stability, turn a blind eye to obvious facts and leave the future of the United Nations – this unique platform for common action – at the mercy of one player who blatantly violates the UN Charter.”

However, he continued, if the global community makes the unfortunate mistake of selecting the latter alternative, the world will “face severe disappointment.”

“The price for this short-sightedness has long been known – it is human lives. In the last century, humanity paid an enormous price following two world wars – about 70 million lives. Isn’t it enough?” he said.

He said Ukraine today is a testing ground for a new hybrid form of warfare, which through global ambivalence is spreading around the world. Consequently, he continued, “It is time for the Security Council to go resolutely and effectively into this issue.”

With the UN being on the threshold of electing a new secretary-general, Poroshenko said he hoped he or she “would ready to use decisively all tools at his or her disposal, including those provided under Article 99 of the UN Charter, in case of a threat to peace and security.”

Turning to Russia’s war with Ukraine, Poroshenko said since 2014, his country “has learned from its own tragic experience what foreign-grown terrorism feels like.”

He pointed out that the terrorist component of the undeclared hybrid war is evident.

“Dramatically, it has become a daily routine in the occupied areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine. For over two years of this tragedy, Ukraine has received extensive and irrefutable evidence of direct involvement of Russia, its state agencies and officials in financing, sponsorship, and coordination of terrorist groups which have committed countless crimes against my compatriots.

“The shocking reality is that there is a roughly 38,000-strong illegal military force in Donbas and its large part is regulars and mercenaries from Russia. This force is armed to the teeth by Russia,” Ukraine’s president said.

Accusing Moscow of being fully intent on deceiving the international community about its crime, Poroshenko said that Russia has been denying its military presence in Ukraine at every conceivable forum, including the UN Security Council.

“Today, in response to thousands of available photos, videos, satellite images, eyewitness and other evidence of the Russian military presence in Donbas, Russia only goes over and over again with a cynical recitation ‘We are not there.’

“Russia used to say the same about Crimea. ‘We are not there.’ And then a sham referendum was conducted at the Russian gunpoints. And a few days ago, a contradictory statement by Russian president that Crimea, can you imagine, was annexed in accordance with the UN Charter. Do we really refer to the same Charter?” he said.

In its third year, Poroshenko said, Russia’s aggression against Ukraine “continues bringing pain and suffering to the Ukrainian people” with 2,430 people killed.

“The total death toll of this war in the heart of Europe inflicted on us has amounted to 2,500 military and 7,500 civilian. Altogether 10,000 people. Hundreds of hostages remain in unlawful captivity in Donbas and in Russia,” he continued.

Russia’s war against Ukraine has also touched the lives of Ukrainian children with the taking of hostages who were later seen on videotape being interrogated for allegedly conspiring to commit subversive operations. He urged UNICEF to investigate this occurrence.

Poroshenko emphasized that the Minsk accords have failed to result in peace because Russia continues to violate its provisions. However, he emphasized that Ukraine is fully committed to implementing the tenets of the ceasefire.

He demanded that Russia “set the captives free, stop shooting, withdraw weapons, let the OSCE carry out its mandate and watch over the Ukrainian-Russian border without hindrance, withdraw Russian weaponry as well as regular and irregular military units.”

Occupied Crimea is also enduring Russia’s brutality, Poroshenko said.

“The latest stroke in this picture is the ban by the Russian occupation authorities on the activities of the Mejlis, the self-governing body of the Crimean Tatar people. Add to this the arbitrary detention of Ilmi Umerov, Deputy Head of the Mejlis, in a psychiatric facility for 20 days. In fact, the outrageous practice of punitive psychiatry, which had been widely used by the Soviet repressive machinery, is now back in service for Russia.

“We urge Russia to grant unimpeded access of international human rights organizations to both Crimea and Donbas, and implement the decision of UNESCO Executive Board on establishing monitoring in Crimea at the institutional level,” he said.

Poroshenko urged the UN to protect the rights of the Crimean Tatars while appealing to the member states not to recognize what he called the illegitimate elections in the occupied Ukrainian peninsula.

“If you do recognize them, this will play into the hands of the aggressor and encourage further repressions,” he warned.

The global community also faces the likely possibility that Russia will deploy nuclear weapons in Crimea, which “would destroy the global system of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and brutally violate Ukraine’s non-nuclear status.”

Despite the hardships that Ukraine is facing, Poroshenko assured his listeners that Ukraine “is fully committed to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, which were adopted by the UN General Assembly last year.”

Turning to a quotation devised 70 years ago by Prime Minister Winston Churchill, one of the founding fathers of the United Nations, at the Westminster College, where he also spoke of an iron curtain descending across Europe, Poroshenko insisted that world leaders must not close their eyes to violations of the UN Charter in order to remove contemporary difficulties and dangers.

“They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what happens; nor will they be removed by a policy of appeasement,” he said.

Poroshenko said "the two giant marauders – war and tyranny,” must be confronted in order to be overcome.

Polish President at UN Recasts 2030 Agenda in Three Pillars

Polish President Andrzej Duda, speaking today on the first day of the general debates at the opening of 71st Session of the UN General Assembly, recast the UN’s iconic 2030 Agenda – the Sustainable Development Goals – into three pillars that emphasized his vision of a just, secure and humane world.

“Sustainable development, human rights protection as well as peace and security – these are the goals pursued by the United Nations whose achievement has been mankind’s yearning,” Duda observed. “These three rules, the free foundations of sustainable development are: responsibility, solidarity and justice.”

Duda elaborated on his vision:

“Responsibility arises from our obligation to take care of the heritage that we are going to leave to our children and grandchildren. How we are going to be remembered by them and what they are going to write about us in history books. Responsibility is underpinned by the conviction that history does neither begin nor end here and now – but is a succession of generations, destinies and commitments. Responsibility understood this way pertains nowadays especially to social issues and natural environment. Responsible development is a development which cares.”

“Solidarity. This concept is particularly close to the Polish people who led by the social movement bearing this name (Solidarność) carried out a peaceful political transformation a quarter of a century ago, rejecting the system founded on lie and enslavement. What has given the Polish Solidarity its durable foundations to rely on, was a community of sensitivity to the misfortune of other people and respect to any man, regardless of his or her origin or financial situation.

“The third pillar of sustainable development is justice. A just and equitable order as an order in which the sustainable development model can be delivered, is founded on observance of human rights and law of nations. Individual freedom, dignity of human person and inviolability of his or her life, as well as freedom of conscience and religion - these are constituents of the catalogue of inalienable human rights which nowadays call for particular protection. There are by far too many sites worldwide where freedom is constrained by an oppressive political system; where human dignity is violated, and also man's most fundamental right: the right to life is encroached upon.”

In his image, Duda sees a close interdependence among development, human rights and freedoms, while making a direct connection between respect for human rights and the right to life.

“Only respect of human rights, not only the political ones but also social, economic and cultural, allows to fully harness human potential, and eventually, to the implementation of sustainable development model. Nevertheless, it must be remembered that all human rights are derived from the most fundamental one: the right to life,” Duda said.

Contrary to the Polish representative’s address last year, this year Duda only once referred to Ukraine, when he spoke about the hideous refugee consequence of the war in Ukraine. He said Poland has acted out of its sense of solidarity by increasing its “humanitarian and development aid in the Middle East region and to the East. In our efforts to build peace and sustainable development we set great store by education of children and young people. My country has been and will continue to be an active advocate of solidarity in the international arena.”

Duda also refrained from mentioning Russia when he spoke about aggressor states and invaders but was not short of condemning aggressors and invaders. However, he seemed to allude to Russia’s war against Ukraine and its occupation of Crimea.

“Today, I wish to reiterate in most clear terms: we must abide by the rules which is expressed by a Roman paremia: Ex injuria jus non oritur – ‘law is not born from lawlessness.’ No aggressor has right to the territory occupied by him. We reject the system in which it is politics of force and aggression that predetermines destinies of nations,” he said.

Aggression violates a nation’s right to a peaceful, stable and secure existence, and the aggressor must be held accountable for its transgressions, Duda said. Otherwise, bilateral and global confidence will be undermined, he added.

“The effectiveness of global action in this regard shall depend on international solidarity and concerted action between our states. In the meantime, any act of aggression which encroaches on international commitments undermines mutual trust among states and societies. It undermines the order, which was so strenuously built in the wake of World War 2.

“That is why it is so crucially important to make sure that the policy of force would each time meet with a decisive opposition of the international community. In order for the law to be effective, any violation thereof must trigger off execution of consequent measures.”

Duda concluded by emphasizing that “responsibility, solidarity and justice: these are the pillars on which Poland would like to build international community for sustainable development of free nations and equal states.”