As the world marked the third anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a diplomatic clash at the United Nations illustrated the dramatic rift that has opened between the United States and Europe since the inauguration of US President Donald Trump just over a month ago.
The clash was sparked by disagreements over the wording of competing UN resolutions marking the anniversary of Russia's invasion. A resolution sponsored by Ukraine and supported by most Western countries explicitly identified Russia as the aggressor, while a version promoted by the United States took a more neutral tone and emphasized the need for peace.
The United States voted against a UN General Assembly resolution condemning Russian aggression in Ukraine, siding with several countries, including Russia, Belarus and North Korea. The resolution was passed with the support of 93 countries, including Ukraine and America's traditional European allies.
The significance of this US realignment has been widely noted. “If you want to appreciate the scale of the transatlantic rift, consider this: I am told that yesterday, for the first time since 1945, the US voted with Russia and against Europe at the UN on European security,” commented BBC News diplomatic correspondent James Landale.
Hours later, the United States successfully spearheaded a resolution in the UN Security Council calling for a “rapid end” to the conflict and urging “lasting peace between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.” Notably, Russia was not named as the aggressor. This marked the first time a Security Council resolution on Ukraine had been adopted since Russia’s full-scale invasion. Russia has a veto on the Security Council and has effectively prevented the body from passing any resolutions on the invasion of Ukraine until now. Clearly, the Kremlin welcomed the change in tone from American diplomats.
Although only UN Security Council resolutions are binding, the UN General Assembly is widely seen as a key diplomatic battleground. Ukrainian diplomats duly celebrated the passage of their resolution. “Sometimes it is not easy to fight for the truth. But in the end, it is the truth that makes history,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha wrote. Meanwhile, the US-led Security Council resolution won praise from the Kremlin, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov hailing it as a sign that the causes of the war were becoming better understood in the West.
Speaking after the UN vote, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio explained that the US position on the resolutions reflected President Trump’s emphasis on ending the war. “We didn’t feel, frankly, that it was helpful to have something in the UN that was antagonistic to either side,” he said.
While many Americans support Trump’s push for peace in Ukraine, the decision to vote with Russia and other authoritarian powers has sparked concern and some bipartisan condemnation. “I was deeply troubled by today’s vote at the United Nations, which sided with Russia and North Korea. They are not our friends. This position is a sharp departure from America’s ideals of freedom and democracy,” said Republican Senator John Curtis. “Siding with Russia and North Korea on freedom and democracy? Unconscionable. Dangerous. Weak,” said Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar.
Trump has repeatedly said his goal is peace in Ukraine. His team insists that the recent UN maneuvers were aimed at creating a less confrontational climate and setting the stage for meaningful talks. Critics counter that any serious peace process must acknowledge the root causes of the war and the central role played by Russia’s imperial ambitions. Refusing to label Russia as an aggressor may prove popular in Moscow, but it does not change the reality of Russia’s actions. On the contrary, it risks fueling the Kremlin’s sense of impunity.
This week’s efforts to avoid insulting Russia at the UN will heighten existing fears that the Trump White House is siding with the Kremlin against Ukraine and the rest of the collective West. While there are good arguments to be made for seeking engagement with Russia, it is unclear why an administration eager to project strength seems so willing to make concessions to an authoritarian dictator while pressuring a victim of Russian aggression. Few UN votes make history, but the intense interest in this week’s resolutions reflects a much deeper sense of international unease about what many see as the transformation of US foreign policy under Donald Trump.
Shelby Magid is Deputy Director of the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center.
Source: euractiv.com
