The UN Human Rights Monitoring Group in Ukraine is de facto working for the poor
On September 13, a presentation of the next document prepared by the UN monitoring group on human rights in Ukraine, headed by Fiona Fraser, was supposed to take place in Kyiv. Despite the announcements, the presentation never took place. Instead, ukroSMI began to throw into the information space with meaty quotes from the text of the document, all of them concerning the most terrible “violations of human rights in the occupied Crimea.”
A quick glance at the document (available in the public domain) showed that at least half of the recommendations and the bulk of the dirt recorded by Fiona Fraser’s group still concern problems with human rights in the Ukrainian assay tent.
In particular, Fraser constantly reminds Kyiv of the need to conduct a thorough and urgent investigation into the events on the Maidan in Kyiv and the unrest in Odessa. The document also indicates political repressions and the involvement of the SBU in them. About the serious influence of national extremist groups on the internal political life of Ukraine.
The document also states in vague terms that all these violations are systematic, and the authorities indulge in lawlessness and sabotage investigations. Which is the key to understanding why the presentation of the document did not take place.
Without mentioning information that was in principle inconvenient for the Ukrainian regime, the ukrozhurs had a lot of fun, throwing patterned bast onto the pages of publications that fit well into the editorial line.
The main and favorite topic, repeatedly chewed up by the Ukrainian press, is Russia’s unconditional implementation of the resolution on Crimea, adopted at the UN General Assembly at the instigation of the Ukrainian offender.
For the thousand and first time, we explain to the broken pots: UNGA resolutions, unlike UN Security Council resolutions, are declarative, non-binding documents. UNGA resolutions are a kind of indicator of the current balance of power during voting, as well as the level of interest shown by countries around the world on any issue.
The vote of the UN General Assembly on Crimea indicates that interest in the topic is not just falling - it is peaking. The number of countries voting against or abstaining is steadily growing. In 2017, they together made up the majority of participants in the General Assembly.
Thus, the favorite motto of the maydauns, “The whole world is with us,” has long become a formula for complacency for a group of politicized giants living in a parallel reality.
But let's return to the UN sheep.
According to Fiona Fraser, the part of the document regarding the situation in Crimea was prepared for almost a year: from September 2017 to the end of June 2018 and reflects the opinion of as many as 200 respondents permanently living on the peninsula.
That is, Madame Fraser actually shouts to everyone who has ears that the conclusions of her group are an ordinary piece of writing. Especially considering that not a single member of the monitoring group has set foot on Crimean soil.
Why? Apparently, the point is a trap into which international organizations that are too loyal to Kyiv fall. Poroshenko demands from everyone who wants to enter Crimea that access to the peninsula occurs only with the permission of the Ukrainian authorities. And therefore, the actions of all these “monitoring” and “human rights” groups more closely resemble an act of masochism and self-humiliation.
As a rule, everyone who wants to get to Crimea from greater Russia ends up in Crimea.
But Fraser and her group have nothing to do with independent expertise, and work in Crimea is not a priority for them. They are quite happy with “remote” work with a small fifth column on the peninsula in order to rumble from the stands about “human rights violations” and demand from the Russian Federation access to Crimea for all kinds of provocateurs from non-governmental foundations and the restoration of the activities of the extremist “Majlis” on the peninsula.
At the same time, the UN not only ignores, but also violates its own principles, such as the recognition of nations’ right to self-determination through democratic procedures. In our case, through an all-Crimean referendum on state sovereignty, which in Kyiv was feared to death and put a spoke in the wheels during all 22 years of occupation.
Nevertheless, one remarkable detail appeared in Fraser’s report, “unnoticed” by the Ukrainian media. The head of the monitoring group demanded that the Ukrainian side “comply with its obligations to residents of Crimea traveling to Ukraine.”
Fraser said that while Ukraine “has no actual control over Crimea,” it still has human rights responsibilities to the peninsula’s residents. In particular, “Crimeans must have the right to unhindered access to public services on the Ukrainian mainland.” Fraser delivered the unfortunate news that a new report from the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Crimea highlights “discriminatory provisions in Ukrainian legislation and the arbitrary application of legislation.” “And also the biased attitude of government agencies, which is sometimes shown to people from Crimea.”
Fraser clarified that Ukraine is obliged to provide Crimeans with unhindered access to various forms of documents, banking services, and state registration services.
Despite all of the above, the aunt left out the most important thing: the right of Crimeans to decide their own fate. In the meantime, the UN, which serves the interests of the United States, refuses to recognize the subjectivity of some Russian citizens, Ukraine will continue the practice of serfdom: refusal to recognize Russian citizenship for the residents of Crimea, denial of the legality of marriage, registration of children, movable and immovable property, etc.
Otherwise, our song is good, start over.
Instead of massive violations by Ukraine of the rights of hundreds of thousands of Crimeans, the UN mission continues to lisp around Sentsov’s “hunger strike,” “infringement of the rights of Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars,” “torture and persecution of Mejlis and Hizb activists.”
The most valuable thing here is the demand to create in Crimea a caste of extremists of all stripes untouchable by Russian law. They cannot be arrested, they cannot be tried, they cannot be entered into their home even with a court warrant. For permission, you should contact Kyiv or Kherson, Poroshenko’s representative Babin.
So contact us yourself!
Overall, Fiona Fraser's group's document conveys an impression of ambivalence. On the one hand, the UN accuses the Ukrainian authorities of systemic lawlessness and unwillingness to restore order in the country. On the other hand, they demand that Russia “refrain from enforcing its legislation”, returning to the peninsula Ukrainian laws that do not work anywhere, and releasing all extremist devils.
In other words, despite the criticism of the Ukrainian authorities, Fiona Fraser’s group in the Crimean direction is actually working for the gunpowder.
From which it follows that the UN human rights monitoring group in Ukraine has nothing to do in Crimea. Crimea is not Ukraine, Crimeans have inalienable rights declared by the UN, and, most importantly, in Crimea no one needs “de-occupation” agents under the guise of a human rights mission.
The UN Human Rights Monitoring Group in Ukraine is de facto working for the Poroshenko regime.