Letter to Sir Tobias Ellwood MP
From Wiktor Moszczynski, Polish lobbyist and journalist living in UK.
Dear Sir Tobias,
I note your consistent and laudable campaign to introduce a no fly zone over Ukraine.
I share with you the desire to help Ukraine in a more meaningful way than just the present financial sanctions, or the upgrading of defensive weapons in Eastern Europe or the supply of defensive weapons across the Polish border. The current impact of these measures is that the West is beating the serpent’s tail, while in Ukraine it is still biting and devouring its victims with increased ferocity. I am aware that currently NATO leaders are reluctant to step into Ukraine, despite President Zelensky's pleas, for fear of a Nuclear standoff. However, not all options have been considered.
You are no doubt aware that, according to Article 51 of the UN Charter, a General Assembly resolution of “Uniting for Peace”, requiring only a majority vote, can instruct the UN Secretary General to take action, whether economic or military in nature, to enforce the peace in a conflict zone, in circumstances where the UN Security Council cannot act because of a veto by one, or more, of its 5 permanent members. This has been used to impose sanctions and even to instigate military interventions, as in Korea, Lebanon and Congo in the 1950s. Putin actually invoked this Article to justify his invasion of Ukraine.
Judging by the massive majority that voted to condemn the Russian invasion in the General Assembly on March 2nd. it would be quite possible to obtain a similar majority to a resolution imposing a no fly zone over Western and Southern Ukraine (including strategic cities such as Lviv, Zhitomir and Odessa). Clear rules of engagement should be agreed beforehand, and the Ukrainian government’s secret approval sought. It could be imposed currently without any conflict, as Russian forces have not yet reached this part of Ukraine. The military forces in this exercise would come from various parts of the world, but obviously NATO countries’ forces could participate as well, but still under a UN flag.
At a more modest level, UN forces could at least vote to offer their services to provide humanitarian corridors to ensure safe passage for refugees and for supplying food and medical aid to civilian populations in central and eastern Ukraine, still fighting Russian troops.
It would be up to Russian forces to challenge a UN presence in Ukraine, and in doing so they would be challenging a fait accompli and acting as aggressors towards a force that represents all the countries that voted for this UN resolution. Putin could not use the argument that this is a NATO invasion, and NATO leaders could overcome their concern to avoid direct lethal contact between Russian and NATO forces.
UN forces would not intervene directly in the battle for Kyiv or Kharkiv, but this measure would ensure the survival of independent Ukrainian territory in the west, as a stepping off point to continue the struggle further east. It would give much needed relief to the overall Ukrainian war effort and to civilian morale. It could reduce the number of refugees leaving Ukraine. It would also add to Putin’s difficulty of justifying to the Russian people why their leader has led them into a conflict, not just with Ukraine or NATO, but with the rest of the world.
If you agree with me please put these views forward to the government and to your own parliamentary committee.
Yours sincerely,
Wiktor Moszczynski
No comments:
Post a Comment