“It’s the theater of the absurd, an insult to multilateralism”, denounces Patrick Martin-Genier, specialist in Europe

Patrick Martin-Genier, teacher at Science Po, specialist in Europe, believes that the Russian presidency of the UN Security Council for a month is contrary to the notion of international peace.

“It’s completely grotesque. It’s the theater of the absurd”, denounced Saturday on franceinfo Patrick Martin-Genier, teacher at Science Po, specialist in Europe, while Russia took over the presidency of the UN Security Council for the whole month of April. Patrick Martin-Genier sees in this presidency “an insult to multilateralism and to the notion of international peace that the UN must protect”. But he believes that the Security Council “will wait” May the month of April pass “before important meetings”.

franceinfo: How do you judge this Russian presidency of the UN Security Council?

Patrick Martin-Genier: It’s completely absurd. We are in the Ubu theatre, it is the theater of the absurd. Article 24 of the United Nations Charter provides that the primary responsibility of the United Nations Security Council is the maintenance of international peace and security. Someone who attacked Ukraine, someone who commits war crimes, a nation descended from the victorious nations of the Second World War, is going to preside over this Security Council for a month, which has an essential role in maintaining the peace. It is truly a dramatic situation, an insult to multilateralism and to the notion of international peace that the United Nations must protect.

>> Russian Presidency of the UN Security Council: “There will be no boycott, but countries will try to put its importance into perspective”, says an expert

Is it possible to exclude it?

Of course not. It is impossible to boycott either. It is the Charter of the United Nations. There are fifteen members of the Security Council, five of whom are permanent. The countries follow one another. So it is not possible to exclude him from this presidency. This charter should be amended. It’s bureaucratic. Each one exercises this presidency in turn. Nevertheless, for some countries, there could be a number of reactions, including lowering, for example, the level of diplomatic representation to the Security Council.

What room for maneuver can Russia have during this month of the presidency? Can this be a platform for Moscow?

In the Security Council, there are a certain number of States which are rather neutral in this war. And Russia, Vladimir Poutine and Lavrov, want to use this platform to show well that they are not isolated on the international scene. So they’re going to preside over hearings. Lavrov will chair one, notably on multilateralism. That too is perfectly ubiquitous. On April 10, a meeting of the Security Council on the export of military equipment is scheduled. He will also preside over a situation on the Middle East. We can see that it is an extraordinary forum. Of course, he won’t convince anyone.

“The problem that arises today is the paralysis of this international organization which is gradually withering away because of these institutional blockages.”

Patrick Martin-Genier, teacher at Science Po, specialist in Europe

at franceinfo

Will the Security Council be completely paralyzed during this month of April?

I’m not sure. The President of the Security Council has at least one power, and that is to convene or refuse to convene the Security Council. There are already three meetings planned, including one on the situation in the Middle East, one on multilateralism and especially that of peace operations throughout the world. And of course, it’s not just about Ukraine. Of course we can’t prevent Lavrov from getting publicity at the UN level. If for example Lavrov refused to convene the Security Council on an issue related to Ukraine, there is a possibility in the rules of procedure that nine members of the Security Council will demand a meeting on this issue. And there, they could not refuse. But I believe that what will happen is that we will wait for this month to pass before holding important meetings at the level of the Security Council.

What is the use of this Security Council in today’s context?

Supposing that one wanted to condemn Russia, that would of course be impossible. We need an agenda. The agenda must be made with the President of the Security Council. Moreover, we know very well that China refuses to systematically condemn Russia. So it is a Security Council which is completely paralyzed, on this subject as on others.


source site-29