Rosalind Evans
On the brink of the second anniversary of the conflict gripping Eastern Europe, Ukraine’s top diplomat, Dmytro Kuleba, stood before the United Nations, casting a message of unwavering resilience and impending victory. Amidst the shadows of skepticism, Kuleba’s declaration at the UN, “Ukraine will win the war,” resonates as a testament to a nation’s undying spirit against aggression. The statement comes as a stark rebuttal to the lingering doubts about Ukraine’s capability to withstand the colossal pressure exerted by Russia’s military endeavours.
Russia’s narrative at the UN, voiced by Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia, paints a contrasting picture, denying the initiation of the conflict and attributing the turmoil to Western machinations, with Ukraine depicted as a pawn in a giant geopolitical chess game. Nebenzia’s insistence on continuing Russia’s “special military operation” until its objectives, primarily the de-militarization and enforcement of a “neutral status” for Ukraine, underscores the deep-seated discord and the challenging path to reconciliation.
As reflected in the UN General Assembly and Security Council proceedings, the international community’s response highlights the complex web of diplomacy, solidarity, and strategic interests that define the global stance on the Ukraine crisis. The assembly’s role as a barometer of world opinion is particularly significant given the Security Council’s impasse due to Russia’s veto power.
Kuleba’s reference to the overwhelming support from over 140 nations for resolutions backing Ukraine underscores a broad international consensus against the aggression despite the resolutions’ non-binding nature. His critique of the calls for negotiation, based on the failed peace efforts post-2014, brings to light the deep-seated mistrust and the scars of past betrayals, setting a high bar for future dialogue.
The Ukrainian Foreign Minister’s emphasis on President Zelenskyy’s 10-point peace plan as the solely viable resolution blueprint encapsulates Ukraine’s peace conditions, including the withdrawal of Russian forces and the establishment of accountability and security guarantee mechanisms.
The discourse at the General Assembly, enriched by perspectives from various nations, including strong endorsements from Britain and Poland and a call for a peace conference by Switzerland, reflects a multifaceted international dialogue marked by concerns of war fatigue, the perils of compromise with an uncompromising adversary, and the broader implications of the conflict on global peace and order.
As the world watches the unfolding events, the echoes of Kuleba’s words at the UN serve as a reminder of the enduring spirit of a nation in the face of adversity. Far from being a regional skirmish, the conflict has morphed into a litmus test for international law, sovereignty, and the collective resolve to uphold the principles enshrined in the UN Charter. The path to peace remains fraught with challenges. Still, the discourse at the UN underscores a collective aspiration for a resolution that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty and sets a precedent for the resolution of future conflicts.
