President Barack Obama scored a minor victory today in his clash with Russia’s Vladimir Putin when the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) rejected Russia’s annexation of Crimea and declared that the referendum of March 16, 2014 was illegal and invalid.
The UNGA resolution– approved by 100 in favor, 11 against and 58 abstentions– used clear wording free from the usual variations in diplomatic interpretations. But it did nothing to undo Crimea’s annexation by Russia. At best, it called on all countries to refrain from any actions that might be construed as recognition of Crimea’s altered status.
To dissuade new military incursions into Ukraine, it affirmed the international community’s “commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders”.
It underscored that “the referendum held in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on 16 March 2014, having no validity, cannot form the basis for any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea or of the city of Sevastopol”.
It called upon “all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the basis of the above-mentioned referendum and to refrain from any action or dealing that might be interpreted as recognizing any such altered status”.
The resolution is not legally binding and amounts only to a statement of opinion of 100 out of the 192 members of the UN. The 69 countries that voted against or abstained illustrate the opinion’s divided nature although on paper 100 for and 11 against amounts to an overwhelming majority.
To avoid more negative votes or abstentions, the United States refrained from sponsoring the resolution. However, the presence of Germany (a friend of Russia) and Canada (a strong voice for democracy) added to the resolution’s credibility and prestige.
Yet, the two-page resolution’s wording carefully avoided offending Moscow. It did not mention Russia by name or make any reference, indirect or direct, to Russian military movements and the presence of its troops and flags in Crimea before the referendum.
It also addressed Russia’s main concerns in Ukraine about protecting Russian-speaking minorities by stressing “the importance of maintaining the inclusive political dialogue in Ukraine that reflects the diversity of its society and includes representation from all parts of Ukraine.”
Underlining the international community’s apprehensions, the resolution twice noted the centrality of “protecting the rights of all persons in Ukraine, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities”.
Despite the abstentions, the resolution’s message is indisputable. It asks “all States to desist and refrain from actions aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine, including any attempts to modify Ukraine’s borders through the threat or use of force or other unlawful means”.
It also takes aim at the factions within Ukraine that triggered the crisis. It insists that they immediately pursue peaceful resolution through direct political dialogue, exercise restraint, and refrain from unilateral actions and inflammatory rhetoric that may increase tensions.”
In general, the resolution is quite balanced and sensible. Alas, it contains no sticks or carrots to change Putin’s behavior but his supporters in the UNGA were an unsavory crew– Armenia, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, North Korea, Nicaragua, Russia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.