Guillotine in the hands of maniacs

How the United States trampled on the UN Charter and arrogated to itself the right to decide whether to execute or pardon

Sanctions that kill

Back in the 1990s, sanctions were the exclusive prerogative of the UN. It was declared, at least, that the issue of their application was resolved in the UN in detail and thoughtfully. But the situation has changed a lot. Now individual and collective sanctions in the world are applied by states and international structures without the approval of the UN Security Council and, in this regard, almost without control. 
As a result, according to the UN, 20 percent of UN member states are under individual sanctions. And on a global scale, a third of all countries in the world are under sanctions.
The out-of-control situation with the large-scale application of sanctions raises questions not only in those countries that are directly affected by them. The UN also sometimes recalls the need to control the application of sanctions. After all, they sometimes not only violate fundamental human rights, but also doom people to physical suffering and painful death. The UN seems to understand this fact... 
A striking example is the US unilateral sanctions against Iran. Banks, enterprises, companies, including pharmaceutical and medical ones, are forced to restrict trade with Iran for fear of consequences for themselves from the United States. As a result, the people of Iran are being deprived of urgently needed humanitarian goods, including food, medicines, medical equipment and supplies. 
Hunger, falling living standards, a decrease in its duration, lack of medical care and the possibility of working in the countries of humanitarian missions — these are the consequences of unilateral sanctions, the use of which in the world has become uncontrolled and too large-scale.

Loss of control

Of course, the UN is deeply concerned. But its statements, like its concerns, are completely unimpressive to countries and regional organisations that apply sanctions in order to achieve their political and economic goals in the world. They do not react to them at all and continue to introduce more and more new ones. Unfortunately, the UN does not apply other means of influence to unbridled fans of UN sanctions.
“We always proceed from the premise that when imposing sanctions, one should try not to harm civilians,” Stéphane Dujarric, representative of the UN Secretary General, says at a regular briefing. That’s all. The fact that words about the position of the UN on sanctions were heard from a high rostrum does not make sick Iranian children dying in agony any easier. As well as the starving Syrians...

Higher purpose

The United Nations was established in June 1945, immediately after the end of World War II. The goals of the organisation were as follows: peace and security on the planet; development of friendly relations between countries; co-operation in solving international problems; observance of human rights; coordination of actions of different countries.
The UN appeared ‘on the ruins’ of its predecessor organisation, which was called the League of Nations. It was planned that when creating a new organisation, all previous mistakes would be taken into account. As time has shown, they really did it, but not completely. 
The creators of the UN really tried to take into account the mistakes of the League of Nations. Thus, the permanent members of the Security Council acquired the right of veto, which cannot be limited under any circumstances. The Military Staff Committee, a subsidiary body of the UN Security Council, was formed. It is the Military Staff Committee (MSC) that can conduct military operations with the consent of the Security Council. Peacekeeping forces (the so-called ‘UN Blue Helmets’) have also appeared, which play a certain role in ensuring international security. That is, in addition to diplomatic mechanisms, the UN has the possibility of military intervention in conflicts between states.
Moreover, unlike the League of Nations, the UN is more versatile. It deals not only with security issues, but also with the economy, ecology, social relations, pays attention to the humanitarian aspects of relations in the world and human rights.
Today, the UN is one of the most bureaucratic organisations in the world. Nonetheless, the maintenance of such a huge bureaucratic machine requires huge expenses. And it seems that it is precisely the issues of UN funding that become the obvious reason for the ‘toothlessness’ shown by the organisation in relation to some countries.

22 percent

  The United Nations exists at the expense of the financial contributions of the participating countries. At the same time, various UN structures also attract their own contributions from various states and organisations in addition to receiving part of the main budget. Moreover, it can be both permanent mandatory contributions and charitable ones. The main budget of the UN, from which the salaries of employees of all structural divisions of the organisation are financed, does not in any way affect the financing and budget of missions and projects implemented by the UN around the world. 
The amount of mandatory contributions to the UN directly depends on the state of the economy of a particular country — the payer of contributions. So, here we come to an interesting moment: the largest contributions are transferred to the United Nations by the United States. And it is the United States that is the country most frequently and aggressively applying economic and political sanctions around the world.
Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia, Iran, Syria, Belarus, Burundi, Central African Republic, North Korea, Russia, Moldova, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Venezuela, Serbia, Montenegro — this is an incomplete list of countries, who have faced and continue to face sanctions pressure from the US. But there are also sanctions against enterprises, citizens, as well as those applied jointly with other states...
Probably 22 percent of the budget that the United States transfers only allows UN officials to express their concern about the current situation. In fact, do nothing about the fact that the human rights of millions of people in the world have been destroyed for the sake of US interests.
Even the financial crisis of the last decade, which arose in the UN in connection with the delay in transferring those same 22 percent, will not become a reason for a ‘quarrel’ with the United States. After all, 650-700 million dollars is much more important than the suffering of some sick children.

The UN needs to be reformed

  Obviously, the United States, openly ignoring the UN Charter, is even trying to reshape the organisation itself to suit its own interests. They are greatly annoyed by Russia’s presence on the UN Security Council and its right to veto any projects pushed by the US and its allies. 
Attempts to limit the right of veto in the UN Security Council have been made for more than one year. But now, they have become especially active in connection with the special operation of the Russian Federation in Ukraine. Thus, the UN General Assembly has already been given unprecedented liberties to demand explanations from states using their veto power. 
But this is still not a limitation of the veto right itself. Depriving the permanent members of the UN of this right will be the collapse of the UN itself. The adoption of such a decision will throw the UN back to the level of the League of Nations, when coalitions of countries turned the organisation into an instrument for serving their interests, but not protecting world peace. We would like to believe that the UN remembers how the existence of the League of Nations ended. For those not in the know, the League of Nations effectively ceased to exist with the onset of World War II. It was the policy of the League of Nations, which did not react in any way to the Third Reich, absorbing one after another territory in Europe, that led to the outbreak of war.
Today that the world is once again teetering on the brink of a world war, the parallels between the fate of the League of Nations and the prospects of the United Nations are all too clear. Apparently, these parallels are noticed in the UN as well. Indeed, even the Secretary-General is personally making some effort to bring the world back from the brink. And this can already be considered an unprecedented aspiration on the part of the UN. 
Indeed, it is not the time to engage in reforming the UN, the world community has more pressing problems. But in the future, it is the reform of the organisation that should become an urgent task for all of us.

By Alena Krasovskaya