Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid) 24 February 2022 [Draft]
I am something of an insomniac and, as is typical, I woke up at 3 am this morning and turned my small bedside television on to News 24, so I saw minute by minute the developments at the emergency meeting of the UN Security Council and I saw the invasion of and declaration of war on Ukraine by Putin.
I listened to the submissions by the Ukrainian representative—some were painful—as he heard about the attacks on his homeland. Something he said really caught my attention. He challenged the Russian representative to produce minutes of a meeting in 1991. I had no idea what he was talking about, but I looked into it.
As we know, Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council—one of five, along with China, France, the UK and the US. The council is, ironically, a legacy of what happened post world war two. Any member can veto any substantive resolution, so we are stuck. Russia, along with the four other members, is charged with maintenance of international peace and security—not with disrupting it. Obviously, Russia cannot remain a member. My understanding is that it takes a two-thirds majority of the General Assembly to suspend or expel a country from the UN—but that is unlikely.
However, there is another avenue to explore. Russia was not always a permanent member of the Security Council—the Soviet Union was. Was it legal, therefore, for Russia simply to step into the shoes of the Soviet Union in 1991? It is an entirely different country, with different territorial boundaries—although Putin, in his political madness, obviously has plans for other surrounding countries.
There is a precedent. In 1971, under Chiang Kai-shek’s nationalist Government, the Republic of China was replaced on the UN by the People’s Republic of China, which does not include Taiwan. Of course, Taiwan is still not a member of the UN. Under UN General Assembly resolution 2758, the General Assembly recognised the People’s Republic of China as the rightful representative of China in the UN and gave it the seat on the Security Council.
I am not an expert on international law, but I am not aware of any such resolution to recognise Russia as the successor to the Soviet Union, whose territory changed considerably.
That might seem to be dry legal stuff, but is that a route to expelling Russia from its permanent seat on the UN Security Council? That is a real test for the United Nations. The League of Nations failed. It is a test to see whether, with legalities, the UN can expel the disgraceful and atrocious behaviour of Putin from the UN Security Council.
16:30