US highlights split with Europe by siding with Russia over Ukraine at UN

New partners
The votes
Europe's demands
US abstains over its own resolution
Second shot
Amendments vetoed
A Trump win
A White House Russia can do business with
A solid foundation?
UK begs to differ
A need to differentiate
Trump's
Critical minerals
“Major Economic Development transactions
New partners

America’s decision to side with Russia and North Korea in voting against a UN resolution condemning Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on its third anniversary starkly framed the growing rift between the US and Europe.

 

The votes

The US was among 18 states, that also included Israel, Hungary and Sudan, that voted against the European resolution. Ninety three states voted for it and 65 abstained.

 

Europe's demands

Introduced by Ukraine, the resolution slammed Russia’s territorial aggression at the 193-member UN General Assembly (UNGA) in New York on the morning of February 24, and demanded the immediate withdrawal of Russian troops.

 

US abstains over its own resolution

A much softer US resolution that let Russia off the hook was also presented to the UNGA and was approved but only after its wording was amended by Europe to include anti-Russian terms, resulting in a US abstention.

Second shot

That afternoon, the US presented its resolution to the much more powerful 15-member UN Security Council, again with no condemnation of Russia.

 

Amendments vetoed

The UK, France, Denmark and Slovenia this time failed in their attempt to amend the wording of the resolution as they had done that morning

 

A Trump win

As the vote went ahead, these countries along with Greece abstained, resulting in the US resolution passing by 10 votes, giving Donald Trump and his new allies a win.

 

"Right direction"?

Russian Ambassador Vasily Nebenzya said the US resolution was “a step in the right direction,” reports The Washington Post.

A White House Russia can do business with

He added that it was “a common-sense initiative which reflects the will of the new administration in the White House to really contribute to the peaceful settlement in the conflict.”

 

"Path to peace"

The US “resolution puts us to the path to peace,” said Dorothy Camille Shea, the US interim chargé d’affaires said after the Security Council vote, according to The New York Times.

 

A solid foundation?

“Now we must use it to build a peaceful future for Ukraine, Russia and the international community,” she added.

 

UK begs to differ

But British ambassador Barbara Woodward, saw it differently: “The terms of the peace must send a message that aggression does not pay,” she said in The Times.

A need to differentiate

“This is why there can be no equivalence between Russia and Ukraine in how this council refers to the war.”

 

Trump's "self-evident" decision

Asked by reporters why the US voted against the UN resolution introduced by Ukraine, Trump said, “I would rather not explain it now, but it’s sort of self-evident.”

 

 

Critical minerals

The US stance is undoubtedly linked to Trump’s determination to get his hands on 50% of Ukraine’s critical minerals and other resources as specified in a draft contract on Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky’s desk.

 

“Major Economic Development transactions" with Russia

But perhaps more telling is Trump’s admission in a social media post that he and Putin were “in serious discussions on “major Economic Development transactions which will take place between the United States and Russia. Talks are proceeding very well!”

Never miss a story! Click here to follow The Daily Digest.

More for you