Originally published on the CGS blog on March 14, 2014.
In the wake of continued threats of invasion into the Ukraine by Russia, Western diplomats are drafting Security Council resolutions to take action against Russia that would effectively isolate Moscow. While this is a noble effort in a string of attempts to punish Russia for its threatened military aggression, the Russian veto automatically makes any resolution dead in the water. The proposed Security Council resolution would urge respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, a fundamental principle under the UN Charter.
If any of these draft resolutions were to make it to voting with enough sponsors, Russia would automatically exercise their veto. This begs the question if the United Nations could actually effectively act to keep Russia from using military force. And if they cannot who will?
Yes there has been a lot of talk about sanctions and a whole array of Western leaders have condemned Putin’s actions. However there have been no moves as of yet. The West is essentially in a ‘Mexican stand-off’ with Russia seeing who will blink first when the referendum to make Crimea a part of Russia comes to a vote this Sunday.
An op-ed in The Guardian on Tuesday by Simon Jenkins said, “At least the west is agreed on the Ukraine crisis. It agrees that something must be done to stop Russia’s re-occupation of Crimea, and it agrees that nothing can be done to stop it.” Jenkins calls this the paradox of foreign policy when leaders know they must act to show strength to their constituents and other countries but for all their speeches and phone calls and think tanks, the bite rarely matches the bark.
This is exactly what is happening in the United Nations. The western powers must be seen moving against military aggression that threatens sovereignty, but realistically there is little hope of actual action when Russia holds the power of the veto.
