others
Biden: Russia war a ‘genocide,’ trying to ‘wipe out’ Ukraine
President Joe Biden on Tuesday said Russia’s war in Ukraine amounted to “genocide,” accusing President Vladimir Putin of trying to “wipe out the idea of even being a Ukrainian.”
“Yes, I called it genocide,” he told reporters in Iowa shortly before boarding Air Force One to return to Washington. “It’s become clearer and clearer that Putin is just trying to wipe out the idea of even being a Ukrainian.”
At an earlier event in Menlo, Iowa, addressing spiking energy prices resulting from the war, Biden had implied that he thought Putin was carrying out genocide against Ukraine, but offered no details. Neither he nor his administration announced new consequences for Russia or assistance to Ukraine following Biden’s public assessment.
Biden’s comments drew praise from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who had encouraged Western leaders to use the term to describe Russia’s invasion of his country.
Read: More than 10,000 civilians dead in Ukraine port city: Mayor
“True words of a true leader @POTUS,” he tweeted. “Calling things by their names is essential to stand up to evil. We are grateful for US assistance provided so far and we urgently need more heavy weapons to prevent further Russian atrocities.”
A United Nations treaty, to which the U.S. is a party, defines genocide as actions taken with the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.”
Past American leaders often have dodged formally declaring bloody campaigns such as Russia’s in Ukraine as genocide, hesitating to trigger an obligation that under international convention requires signing countries to intervene once genocide is formally identified. That obligation was seen as blocking President Bill Clinton from declaring Rwandan Hutus’ killing of 800,000 ethnic Tutsis in 1994 as genocide, for example.
Biden said it would be up to lawyers to decide if Russia’s conduct met the international standard for genocide, as Ukrainian officials have claimed, but said “it sure seems that way to me.”
Read: Putin vows to press invasion until Russia’s goals are met
“More evidence is coming out literally of the horrible things that the Russians have done in Ukraine, and we’re only going to learn more and more about the devastation and let the lawyers decide internationally whether or not it qualifies,” he said.
Just last week Biden had he did not believe Russia’s actions amounted to genocide, just that they constituted “war crimes.”
During a trip to Europe last month, Biden faced controversy for a nine-word statement seemingly supporting regime change in Moscow, which would have represented a dramatic shift toward direct confrontation with another nuclear-armed country. “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” Biden said.
He clarified the comments days later, saying: “I was expressing the moral outrage that I felt toward this man. I wasn’t articulating a policy change.”
Biden urges Modi not to step up Indian use of Russian oil
President Joe Biden asked India’s Narendra Modi on Monday not to accelerate the buying of Russian oil as the U.S. and other nations try to cut off Moscow’s energy income following the invasion of Ukraine. The Indian prime minister made no public commitment to refrain from Russian oil, a source of tension with the U.S.
Meeting by video call, Biden told Modi that the U.S. could help India diversify its sources of energy, according to press secretary Jen Psaki. Even though India receives little of its oil from Russia, it stepped up recently with a major purchase as other democracies are trying to isolate Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“The president also made clear that he doesn’t believe it’s in India’s interest to accelerate or increase imports of Russian energy or other commodities,” Psaki said.
At a separate State Department news conference with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Indian Foreign MinisterSubrahmanyam Jaishankar pointedly suggested that Europe, not India, be the focus of Washington’s concern about energy purchases from Russia.
“I suspect, looking at the figures, probably our total purchases for the month would be less than what Europe does in an afternoon,” he said.
While Biden and Modi ended their session with Biden saying they committed to strengthening their relationship, White House officials could not say if India stood with them in fully condemning Putin, saying the choice ultimately rested with Modi’s government. The two leaders will meet in person May 24 in Tokyo for a summit of the Quad, a coalition that also includes Australia and Japan.
At the State Department news conference, Blinken appeared to seek to cajole India into taking a stronger stance on the conflict in Ukraine, appealing to the country’s interest in upholding the international rules-based order and pointing out that resource-stretched Indians may be affected by both energy and food shortages caused by the war.
“Russia’s aggression stands in stark contrast to the vision that the United States and India share for a free and open Indo-Pacific, and Russia’s actions are having a profound impact not just in Europe and Ukraine, but around the world, for example, causing food insecurity and rising prices,” Blinken told reporters after the meetings concluded.
India’s neutral stance in the war has raised concerns in Washington and earned praise from Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who lauded India this month for judging “the situation in its entirety, not just in a one-sided way.”
Read: More than 10,000 civilians dead in Ukraine port city: Mayor
Biden opened the video conversation by emphasizing the defense partnership between the two countries and by saying the U.S. and India are going to “continue our close consultation on how to manage the destabilizing effects of this Russian war” on food and other commodities.
“The root of our partnership is a deep connection between our people, ties of family, of friendship and of shared values,” the U.S. president said.
Modi on Monday called the situation in Ukraine “very worrying,” and he noted that an Indian student lost his life during the war. He said he has spoken with Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, appealing to both of them for peace. India has condemned the killings uncovered in the city of Bucha and has called for an independent investigation.
A senior U.S. official described the Biden-Modi exchange as warm and productive, though the official stressed that India would make its own decisions on how to respond to Putin. The official insisted on anonymity to discuss the meeting.
Biden and Modi discussed how to manage the risks of global instability regarding food, humanitarian relief and climate change, and Modi candidly shared his views about some of the tight links between Russia and China that raise concerns, the official said.
Also Monday, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin met in person with Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh, and U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.
Austin appealed to India to act together with fellow democracies, a form of government based on the popular consent of the people that stands in contrast to autocracies such as China and Russia.
“Now more than ever, democracies must stand together to defend the values that we all share,” Austin said.
India has refrained from some efforts to hold Russia accountable for its invasion. India abstained when the U.N. General Assembly voted Thursday to suspend Russia from its seat on the 47-member Human Rights Council over allegations that Russian soldiers in Ukraine engaged in rights violations that the U.S. and Ukraine have called war crimes.
Read: More Western sanctions to hit Russia after Bucha killings
The vote was 93-24 with 58 abstentions.
India continues to purchase Russian energy supplies, despite pressure from Western countries to avoid buying Russian oil and gas. The U.S. has also considered sanctions on India for its recent purchase of advanced Russian air defense systems.
Last month, the state-run Indian Oil Corp. bought 3 million barrels of crude from Russia to secure its needs, resisting entreaties from the West to avoid such purchases. India isn’t alone in buying Russian energy, however. Several European allies such as Germany have continued to do so, despite public pressure to end these contracts.
Indian media reports said Russia was offering a discount on oil purchases of 20% below global benchmark prices.
Iraq is India’s top supplier, with a 27% share. Saudi Arabia is second at around 17%, followed by the United Arab Emirates with 13% and the U.S. at 9%, the Press Trust of India news agency reported.
Shehbaz Sharif elected prime minister of Pakistan
PML-N President Shehbaz Sharif was elected as the 23rd prime minister of Pakistan after 174 lawmakers voted in his favour as Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf MNAs boycotted the election.
Earlier, PTI MNAs had walked out of the halls, with Shah Mahmood Qureshi — who was the party's candidate for the top slot — announcing that they would be resigning en masse from the NA, according to Dawn.
PML-N's Ayaz Sadiq presided over the session after Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri his conscience did not allow him to conduct the session.
Announcing the results, Sadiq reminisced that he had also chaired a session during which PML-N supremo and Shehbaz's elder brother was elected as the premier.
"And today, I have the honour of chairing the session for Shehbaz Sharif's election," he said.
"Mian Mohammad Shehbaz Sharif has secured 174 votes," he announced. "Mian Mohammad Shehbaz Sharif has been ... elected as the prime minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan."
As soon as Sadiq announced the result and said Shehbaz was the new prime minister of Pakistan, lawmakers began shouting slogans in favour of Shehbaz and Nawaz.
The speaker asked Shehbaz to move to the seat of the prime minister in the house and he shifted to the treasury benches amid cheers, with other members of the former joint opposition following suit.
In his maiden address to the house as the prime minister, Shehbaz he thanked Allah for "saving Pakistan".
He said it was the first time in Pakistan's history that a no-confidence motion against a prime minister had been successful. "And good has prevailed over evil."
Shehbaz today was a big day for the entire nation when a "selected" prime minister was sent packing in a legal and constitutional manner.
He added that the US dollar's value declining by Rs8 signified the "happiness of the people".
The development comes two days after an unceremonious end to Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan's tenure as the country's chief executive through a no-confidence vote.
After taking the chair of the speaker, Sadiq read out the rules and procedure for the election of the prime minister and asked for the bells to rung for five minutes so that all lawmakers could come inside the halls before the voting began.
He said after the bells stopped ringing, the assembly's entrances and exits would be locked and would remain so until the voting concluded.
Thereafter, Sadiq read out the names of the contenders, PML-N President Shehbaz Sharif and PTI's Shah Mahmood Qureshi. In a slip of tongue, he named PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif as one of the contenders initially and quickly corrected himself, clarifying that he meant to say Shehbaz.
"I apologise Shehbaz sahab, Nawaz's name remains in my heart."
Sadiq then asked the lawmakers supporting Shehbaz to proceed to lobbies on his left side for voting. Similarly, he asked those who wanted to vote in favour of Qureshi to proceed to the lobby on his right side to cast their votes.
The voting has ended and the result sheet has reached the NA secretary who is counting the votes.
The NA session for the election of the prime minister today began with the recitation of the Holy Quran.
After the recitation, Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri, who was initially chairing the session, explained his rationale behind his contentious ruling to dismiss the no-confidence motion against erstwhile prime minister Imran Khan on April 3.
"The ruling was declared unconstitutional by the court ... and we all are obliged to respect the court. But I want to tell you the reason behind my ruling," he said, adding that he had taken the decision "as a responsible Pakistani and deputy speaker of the NA".
He then referred to a communique, which purportedly contained evidence of a foreign conspiracy to topple Imran Khan's government, saying that cable was discussed in the federal cabinet, a meeting of the National Security Committee and a meeting of the parliamentary committee for security.
"And it was proven that the no-confidence motion [was linked] to a foreign conspiracy," he said.
Suri added that on April 9, it was decided during a cabinet meeting that the cable would be declassified and sent to then-NA speaker Asad Qaiser by the government.
"Asad Qaiser read and reviewed it [the cable]," he said. He then held up a piece of paper, saying that he had the cable with him. In the letter, he continued, an "open threat" had been made to Pakistan.
He added that the communique was sent to Pakistan before the no-confidence motion was submitted on March 8.
The cable, he continued, stated that in case of the failure of the no-confidence motion, Pakistan would have to face dire consequences.
The deputy speaker went on to question, "Was talking about an independent foreign policy, independent economy ... and fighting the case of Islamophobia Imran Khan's fault?"
"Was he punished because he refused slavery?"
The deputy speaker announced that he was sealing the cable and sending it to Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial.
Before giving the floor to PTI's Shah Mahmood Qureshi, he said his April 3 was in line with the oath he had taken as the deputy speaker and the Constitution. "I did it to stop a regime change at the will of another country," he said.
But, he added, "I accept the Supreme Court's decision on the matter."
He appealed to MNAs to think about the matter and apologised for hurting anyone's sentiments.
Qureshi began his speech by noting that a constitutional process would reach its conclusion today.
"An election will be held, in which one side will be successful and another will be freed," he said. "Today, the nation is at a crossroads. It has to choose between the path of independence and the path of slavery."
He then thanked Imran Khan and his party for showing confidence in him and nominating as the candidate for the prime minister's slot.
Qureshi continued that today, there was a cohort driven by a single ideology on one side and a coalition of parties, which was "unnatural" in the PTI's view, on the other.
PML-N President Shehbaz Sharif — who is the former joint opposition's candidate for the prime minister's slot — and PTI's Shah Mahmood Qureshi were in the race to become the country's new prime minister.
However, after the PTI boycotted the elections and walked out of the assembly, Shehbaz is the lone contender for the prime minister's slot and will be elected unopposed.
According to the NA agenda issued by the house's secretariat for today, the session for the prime minister's election will begin at 2pm.
The premier's election is the only item on the agenda — apart from the recitation of the Holy Quran and a Naat, which marks the commencement of every NA session — stating that the house would convene to vote for the new leader of the house "as required by Article 91 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, read with rule 32 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly, 2007".
Former prime minister Imran Khan arrived at Parliament House ahead of the session for the election of a new premier to chair a meeting of the party's parliamentary committee.
When asked to comment on protests held across the country by PTI supporters last night, he smiled and said: "God is the one who gives respect."
Submission of nomination papers
Both Shehbaz and Qureshi had filed their nomination papers yesterday, hours after Imran Khan's ouster as the prime minister.
Qureshi had submitted four forms with the NA Secretariat, while Shehbaz had filed 13 forms.
During the submission of the nomination papers, the PTI had raised objections to Shehbaz's nomination and subsequently PTI's Qureshi and Babar Awan had exchanged heated words with PML-N leaders Zahid Hamid and Atta Tarar.
The senior PTI leaders had submitted objections against Shehbaz, stating that the latter was contesting the election on the day of his expected indictment in a money laundering case. They were of the opinion that he did not deserve to be the new PM due to his “involvement” in corruption cases.
On Monday, the court, however, deferred the indictment.
Responding to these allegations, Tarar had said since Shehbaz had not been convicted in any case, his nomination could not be rejected merely on the basis of allegations. Hamid had reminded the PTI leaders that nomination could be rejected only on the grounds mentioned in the Constitution and Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the NA, 2007, under which the candidate for the office of PM must be a Muslim, an MNA and signature of the candidate and his proposer and seconder must be genuine.
The NA secretary had eventually accepted the nomination papers of both the candidates.
No-trust motion ousts Imran
The election for the prime minister comes two days after a premature end to the PTI tenure following weeks of political turmoil.
The saga began with the joint opposition — primarily the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) and the PPP — submitting the no-confidence motion against Imran Khan with the NA Secretariat on March 8.
In the days to follow, the country's political landscape was abuzz with activity as parties and individuals changed alliances and the PTI and opposition were seen trading barbs and allegations alongside intensifying efforts to ensure their success in the no-confidence contest.
Eventually, major allies of the ruling PTI — Balochistan Awami Party and Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan — deserted the government and joined the opposition ranks which led to PM Imran losing his majority in the lower house of parliament.
In addition, over a dozen PTI dissident MNAs have already come into the open with their criticism on PTI policies.
Read: Pakistan's PM vows to fight on after Parliament ousts him
For its part, the PTI had managed to secure the support of another one of its key allies, the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q), as Usman Buzdar stepped down as the Punjab chief minister in favour of the PML-Q's Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, who the ruling party announced as its candidate for the province's new chief executive.
However, one of the many twists in the saga emerged when Imran Khan claimed to have evidence of a "foreign conspiracy" to oust his government. At the PTI's rally on March 27, the premier had pulled out a piece of paper from his pocket and waved it at the crowd, claiming it was evidence of an "international conspiracy" being hatched to topple his government.
The PTI accused the opposition of being part of the foreign plot and tried to turn the tide in its favour by disclosing some of the details in the "threat letter" to journalists and lawmakers.
Separately, after a few delays, the National Assembly finally convened on April 3 to vote on the no-trust motion against the premier.
However, the PTI would prove to be five steps ahead of the opposition as the deputy speaker, who was chairing the session, dismissed the motion, saying it was part of a foreign conspiracy to oust Imran Khan, after Chaudhry spoke on a point of order, citing Article 5 of the Constitution, which mandates loyalty to the state for every citizen.
Within minutes of the pandemonium that broke out, Imran Khan appeared on television to announce that he had advised the president to dissolve the lower house of parliament and called on the people to prepare for fresh elections.
The government's move also led to the Supreme Court taking suo motu notice of the deputy speaker's ruling with Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial stating that all orders and actions initiated by the prime minister and president regarding the dissolution of the NA would be subject to the court's order. Meanwhile, opposition parties also filed pleas questioning the legality of Suri's ruling.
What followed were five days of marathon hearings where the court heard arguments from the government and the opposition. At the same time, the PTI began its preparations for the next elections, insisting on the existence of a foreign conspiracy behind the no-confidence motion.
On Thursday last week, the apex court — in a historic ruling — set aside Suri's ruling and the subsequent dissolution of the assembly by the president on the erstwhile PM's advice, with all five judges unanimously voting 5-0 against it.
The court's verdict also restored the prime minister and his cabinet in their position and directed for the session of the National Assembly to reconvene on Saturday no later than 10:30am, saying that the session cannot be prorogued without the conclusion of the no-trust motion against Imran.
On Saturday, the session commenced at 10:30am but continued into the wee hours of Sunday as the opposition's clamour for immediate voting throughout the day fell on deaf ears amid lengthy speeches delivered from treasury members on the floor of the house. The session was adjourned four times and the voting took place only after Asad Qaiser resigned at the speaker of the house almost 15 minutes before midnight, which according to legal experts, was the deadline to implement the Supreme Court's orders to conduct voting on the no-trust motion.
PML-N's Ayaz Sadiq, who was among the panel of chairmen, had then chaired the session, with the voting on the motion finally taking place at 11:58pm.
The results were announced in the early hours of Sunday, with 174 MNAs voting in favour of the resolution, two more than the required number of 172 out of a total 342 for the resolution to pass.
History was written as Imran Khan became the first prime minister in Pakistan to have been removed from office through a no-confidence vote.
Read: Pakistani lawmakers to elect new PM after Imran Khan ouster
World Bank projects Ukraine's economy to shrink by 45 pct this year
Ukraine's economy is expected to shrink by 45.1 percent this year, and Russia's economy is projected to contract by 11.2 percent, the World Bank said Sunday.
The Russia-Ukraine conflict and sanctions on Russia are hitting economies around the globe, with emerging markets and developing countries in the Europe and Central Asia region expected to bear the brunt, according to the newly released World Bank's Economic Update for the region.
The economy in the region's emerging markets and developing countries is now forecast to shrink by 4.1 percent this year, compared with the pre-conflict forecast of a 3-percent growth as the economic shocks from the conflict compound the ongoing impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the report showed, noting that the contraction is twice as large as the pandemic-induced contraction in 2020.
Ukraine's economy is expected to shrink by an estimated 45.1 percent this year, "although the magnitude of the contraction will depend on the duration and intensity" of the conflict, the report noted.
Hit by unprecedented sanctions, Russia's economy has already plunged into a "deep recession" with output projected to contract by 11.2 percent in 2022, according to the report.
Biden, Modi to speak as US presses for hard line on Russia
President Joe Biden is set to speak with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday as he presses world leaders to take a hard line against Russia’s Ukraine invasion.
India’s neutral stance in the war has raised concerns in Washington and earned praise from Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who lauded India this month for judging “the situation in its entirety, not just in a one-sided way.”
Most recently, India abstained when the U.N. General Assembly voted Thursday to suspend Russia from its seat on the 47-member Human Rights Council over allegations that Russian soldiers in Ukraine engaged in rights violations that the U.S. and Ukraine have called war crimes.
The vote was 93-24 with 58 abstentions.
In the virtual meeting, Biden will talk about the consequences of Russia’s war against Ukraine “and mitigating its destabilizing impact on global food supply and commodity markets,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement Sunday.
Read: Ukrainian defenders dig in as Russia boosts firepower
They’ll discuss “strengthening the global economy, and upholding a free, open, rules-based international order to bolster security, democracy, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific,” she said.
India continues to purchase Russian energy supplies, despite pressure from Western countries to avoid buying Russian oil and gas. The U.S. has also considered sanctions on India for its recent purchase of advanced Russian air defense systems.
Last month, the state-run Indian Oil Corp. bought 3 million barrels of crude from Russia to secure its needs, resisting entreaties from the West to avoid such purchases. India isn’t alone in buying Russian energy, however. Several European allies such as Germany have continued to do so, despite public pressure to end these contracts.
Indian media reports said Russia was offering a discount on oil purchases of 20% below global benchmark prices.
Iraq is India’s top supplier, with a 27% share. Saudi Arabia is second at around 17%, followed by the United Arab Emirates with 13% and the U.S. at 9%, the Press Trust of India news agency reported.
Biden and Modi last spoke in March.
Ukraine war: Does UN really matter?
The ongoing war in Ukraine has sparked many questions about the United Nations – namely, the role of the Security Council, the General Assembly and the secretary-general.
The intergovernmental organisation was set up at the end of World War II "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war."
Now that war has returned to Europe many ask what the UN can do to stop it and if it really matters.
Security Council
Although there are still some 60 UN members that have never sat on the Security Council, all members of the organisation, under Article 25 of the Charter, agree to accept and carry out decisions adopted by the Council.
In other words, actions taken by the Council are binding on all UN member countries. When dealing with crises, the Council, guided by the UN Charter, can take several steps.
The Council can call upon parties to a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and recommend methods of adjustment or terms of settlement.
In some cases, the Security Council may resort to imposing sanctions or can even authorise, as a last resort, when peaceful means of settling a dispute are exhausted, the use of force, by member states, coalitions of member states or UN-authorised peace operations to maintain or restore international peace and security.
The first time the Council authorised the use of force was in 1950 under what was referred to as a military enforcement action, to secure the withdrawal of North Korean forces from the Republic of Korea.
Veto power
The voting procedure in the Security Council is guided by Article 27 of the UN Charter which establishes that each member of the Council has one vote.
However, a negative vote by any of the permanent five – China, France, Russian, the UK and US – can prevent the adoption by the Council of any draft resolution relating to substantive matters.
General Assembly's role
According to the General Assembly's 1950 resolution 377A (V), widely known as "Uniting for Peace," if the Security Council is unable to act because of the lack of unanimity among its five veto-wielding permanent members, the Assembly has the power to make recommendations to the wider UN membership for collective measures to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Also, it may meet in an emergency special session if requested by nine members of the Security Council or by a majority of the members of the Assembly.
On February 27, 2022, the Security Council, taking into account that the lack of unanimity of its permanent members had prevented it from exercising its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, decided to call an emergency special session of the General Assembly in its resolution 2623 (2022).
On March 1, the General Assembly adopted a resolution by which it deplored "the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter and demanded that the Russian Federation immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine and completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders."
However, unlike Security Council resolutions, General Assembly resolutions are non-binding; countries are not obligated to implement them.
Can a country's membership be revoked?
A member of the UN that has persistently violated the principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the organisation by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council, according to Article 6 of the Charter.
This has never happened in the history of the UN.
However, a member of the UN against which preventive or enforcement action has been taken by the Security Council may be suspended from the exercise of the rights and privileges of membership by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Council.
The exercise of these rights and privileges may be restored by the Council, according to Article 5.
The suspension or expulsion of a member state from the organisation is effected by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Council. Such a recommendation requires the concurring vote of the Security Council's permanent members.
Unless they agree to their own expulsion or suspension, permanent Council members can only be removed through an amendment of the UN Charter, as set out in Chapter XVIII.
Along the road to ending apartheid, the Security Council, in 1963, instituted a voluntary arms embargo against South Africa, and the General Assembly refused to accept the country's credentials from 1970 to 1974.
Following this ban, South Africa did not participate in further proceedings of the Assembly until the end of apartheid in 1994.
Secretary-general's 'good offices'
The role of the secretary-general as an important peace-making actor has evolved through extensive practice.
The range of activities carried out by the secretary-general has included good offices, mediation, facilitation, dialogue processes and even arbitration.
One of the most vital roles played by the secretary-general is the use of his "good offices" – steps taken publicly and in private, drawing upon their independence, impartiality and integrity, and the power of quiet diplomacy to prevent international disputes from arising, escalating or spreading.
In practice, this means a UN chief can use his authority, legitimacy and the diplomatic expertise of his senior team to meet with heads of state and other officials and negotiate an end to disputes between parties in conflict
At the end of March, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres invoked the use of his good offices and asked Under Secretary-General Martin Griffiths, the UN emergency relief coordinator, to explore the possibility of a humanitarian ceasefire with Russia and Ukraine, and other countries seeking to find a peaceful solution to the war.
Russia's removal from Human Rights Council
Meanwhile, Russia's membership to the Human Rights Council was suspended Thursday after the General Assembly voted 93 to 24, with 58 abstentions, including Bangladesh, to adopt a resolution.
The brief resolution that was approved expresses "grave concern at the ongoing human rights and humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, particularly at the reports of violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law by the Russian Federation, including gross and systematic violations and abuses of human rights."
Explaining their decision not to support the resolution, some countries called it premature, noting that there are ongoing investigations into whether war crimes have occurred, or said it would undermine the credibility of the Human Rights Council and the UN.
Others said the resolution reflected American and European geopolitical agendas and what opponents called Western hypocrisy and selective outrage about human rights.
The vote on the US-initiated resolution was significantly lower than the vote on two resolutions the assembly adopted last month demanding an immediate cease-fire in Ukraine, withdrawal of all Russian troops and protection for civilians. Both of those resolutions were approved by at least 140 nations.
Russia's Deputy Ambassador Gennady Kuzmin announced after the vote that the country withdrew from the Human Rights Council earlier Thursday, before the assembly took action, apparently in expectation of the result.
He accused the council of being monopolised by a group of countries with "short-term political and economic interests" that he accused of "blatant and massive violations of human rights."
The Geneva-based Human Rights Council is tasked with spotlighting and approving investigations of rights violations including in Syria and in late March in Ukraine. And it does periodic reviews of the human rights situation in all 193 UN member nations.
The 47-member council was created in 2006 to replace a commission discredited because of some members' poor rights records.
The new council soon faced similar criticism, including that rights abusers sought seats to protect themselves and their allies, and for focusing on Israel.
US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield launched the campaign to suspend Russia from its seat on the council in the wake of videos and photos of streets in the town of Bucha strewn with corpses of what appeared to be civilians after Russian soldiers retreated.
Russia is the second country to have its membership rights stripped at the rights council which was established in 2006.
In 2011, Libya was suspended by the assembly when upheaval in the North African country brought down longtime leader Moammar Gadhafi.
While the Human Rights Council is based in Geneva, its members are elected by the General Assembly for three-year terms. Russia's term ends in December 2023.
The March 2006 resolution that established the council says the assembly may suspend membership rights of a country "that commits gross and systematic violations of human rights."
New wave a reminder that Covid far from over, says UN chief
The Covid-19 pandemic is far from over as the world is seeing 1.5 million new cases each day, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said Friday.
Large outbreaks are spreading in Asia, and a new wave is sweeping across Europe. Some countries are reporting their highest death rates since the start of the pandemic, he added.
The spread of Omicron – now surging in the form of the BA2 variant in many parts of the world – was a startling reminder of how quickly Covid can mutate and spread – especially in the absence of high vaccination coverage, the UN chief said.
A third of the planet is still lacking even one dose, and yet, some high-income countries are preparing for their second booster doses.
Read: Bangladesh reports 28 new Covid cases, no death
"This is a brutal indictment of our deeply unequal world. It's also a prime breeding ground for new variants, more deaths, and increased human and economic misery," Guterres said.
"We are far from our target of every country reaching 70 percent vaccination coverage by the middle of this year. And with new variants emerging roughly every four months, time is of the essence."
Saudi Arabia will host a million pilgrims for this year’s Hajj
A million pilgrims will be allowed to perform Hajj in 2022, according to Saudi authorities.
The numbers attending the annual event were severely reduced in the previous two years to combat the coronavirus pandemic, reports Arab News
Pilgrims will need to be under the age of 65 and must have had COVID-19 vaccinations approved by the Kingdom’s health ministry.
All pilgrims will need to present a negative PCR test taken within 72 hours of the time of departure.
The decision seeks to allow the largest number of pilgrims to take part in the Hajj, while preserving the health gains achieved by the Kingdom in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic, the ministry said.
Read: Hajj management in 2022 to be tech-based: State Minister
The increase will be according to the quotas allocated to countries, taking into account health recommendations.
Last year, 58,745 pilgrims performed Hajj, according to official data.
Before the pandemic, the number of pilgrims often exceeded 2 million.
Will Smith gets 10-year Oscars ban over Chris Rock slap
The motion picture academy on Friday banned Will Smith from attending the Oscars or any other academy event for 10 years following his slap of Chris Rock at the Academy Awards.
The move comes after a meeting of the academy’s Board of Governors to discuss a response to Smith’s actions.
“The 94th Oscars were meant to be a celebration of the many individuals in our community who did incredible work this past year; however, those moments were overshadowed by the unacceptable and harmful behavior we saw Mr. Smith exhibit on stage,” the academy said in a statement.
“I accept and respect the Academy’s decision,” Smith said in response. He pre-emptively resigned from the academy last week during the run-up to the meeting, calling his actions “shocking, painful, and inexcusable.”
Smith will keep the Oscar he won after the slap, and he will remain eligible to be nominated for and to win more of them in the 10-year period, though he can’t show up to accept them.
The academy also apologized for its handling of the situation and allowing Smith to stay and accept his best actor award for “King Richard.”
“During our telecast, we did not adequately address the situation in the room. For this, we are sorry,” the academy said. “This was an opportunity for us to set an example for our guests, viewers and our Academy family around the world, and we fell short — unprepared for the unprecedented.”
In a statement in the days following the Oscars, the academy said Smith was asked to leave the ceremony but refused.
Read: Chris Rock takes to comedy mic, still processing Oscars slap
But it’s not clear how the message was delivered to Smith or what form it took, and several media outlets reported that he was never formally told to leave the Dolby Theatre. The Los Angeles Times reported in a story Thursday that Oscars producer Will Packer told Smith: “Officially, we don’t want you to leave. We want you to stay.”
The ban means Smith will not be presenting one of the major awards at next year’s Oscars, as is tradition for the best actor winner.
The academy in its Friday statement also expressed “deep gratitude to Mr. Rock for maintaining his composure under extraordinary circumstances.”
The academy has not revoked Oscars from expelled members Harvey Weinstein or Roman Polanski.
With his resignation last week, Smith lost the ability to vote for nominees and winners. Smith has been nominated for four Oscars, winning once.
At the March 27 Academy Awards, Rock came out to present the best documentary award and made jokes about several attendees, including Smith’s wife, Jada Pinkett Smith.
“Jada, I love you. ‘G.I. Jane 2,’ can’t wait to see it,” Rock said.
Pinkett Smith, who has spoken publicly about her hair loss condition, alopecia, had a closely shaved head similar to that of Demi Moore in the 1997 movie.
Smith strode from his front-row seat on to the stage and smacked Rock, stunning the comedian, the theater crowd and viewers at home.
Read: Oscars producer says police offered to arrest Will Smith
Many thought it was a planned gag set up by the show or the men themselves, but the seriousness of the situation set in after Smith returned to his seat and angrily twice shouted at Rock to “keep my wife’s name out your (expletive) mouth.”
Rock said he had no interest in pursuing charges when asked by police backstage.
Smith took the stage again less than hour later to accept his Oscar, tearfully apologizing to the academy but notably omitting any mention of Rock. He compared himself to Richard Williams, the man he played in “King Richard,” “a fierce defender of his family.”
Later that night, Smith danced with his trophy and his family and rapped along with his own songs in celebration of his win at the Vanity Fair post-Oscars party.
Rock has only briefly addressed the attack publicly, saying at one comedy concert in Boston this week that he was still “kind of processing what happened.”
Missile kills at least 52 at crowded Ukrainian train station
A missile hit a train station in eastern Ukraine where thousands had gathered Friday, killing at least 52 and wounding dozens more in an attack on a crowd of mostly women and children trying to flee a new, looming Russian offensive, Ukrainian authorities said.
The attack, denounced by some as yet another war crime in the 6-week-old conflict, came as workers unearthed bodies from a mass grave in Bucha, a town near Ukraine’s capital where dozens of killings have been documented after a Russian pullout.
Photos from the station in Kramatorsk showed the dead covered with tarps, and the remnants of a rocket with the words “For the children” painted on it in Russian. About 4,000 civilians had been in and around the station, heeding calls to leave before fighting intensifies in the Donbas region, the office of Ukraine’s prosecutor-general said.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who says he expects a tough global response, and other leaders accused Russia’s military of deliberately attacking the station. Russia, in turn, blamed Ukraine, saying it doesn’t use the kind of missile that hit the station — a contention experts dismissed.
Also read: Ukraine appeals for weapons as fight looms on eastern front
Zelenskyy told Ukrainians in his nightly video address Friday that efforts would be taken “to establish every minute of who did what, who gave what orders, where the missile came from, who transported it, who gave the command and how this strike was agreed to.”
Pavlo Kyrylenko, the regional governor of Donetsk, in the Donbas, said 52 people were killed, including five children, and many dozens more were wounded.
“There are many people in a serious condition, without arms or legs,” Kramatorsk Mayor Oleksandr Goncharenko said, adding that the local hospital was struggling to treat everyone.
British Defense Minister Ben Wallace denounced the attack as a war crime, and U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called it “completely unacceptable.”
“There are almost no words for it,” European Union Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, in Ukraine, told reporters. “The cynical behavior (by Russia) has almost no benchmark anymore.”
Also read: Russian shelling is prelude to new attack
Ukrainian authorities and Western officials have repeatedly accused Russian forces of atrocities in the war that began with a Feb. 24 invasion. More than 4 million Ukrainians have fled the country, and millions more have been displaced. Some of the grisliest evidence has been found in towns around Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, from which Russian President Vladimir Putin’s troops pulled back in recent days.
In Bucha, Mayor Anatoliy Fedoruk has said investigators found at least three sites of mass shootings of civilians and were still finding bodies in yards, parks and city squares — 90% of whom were shot.
Russia has falsely claimed that the scenes in Bucha were staged.
On Friday, workers pulled corpses from a mass grave near a town church under spitting rain, lining up black body bags in rows in the mud. About 67 people were buried in the grave, according to a statement from Prosecutor-General Iryna Venediktova’s office.
“Like the massacres in Bucha, like many other Russian war crimes, the missile attack on Kramatorsk should be one of the charges at the tribunal that must be held,” Zelenskyy said, his voice rising in anger late Friday.
He expounded on that theme in an excerpted interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes” that aired Friday, citing communications intercepted by the Ukrainian security service.
“There are (Russian) soldiers talking with their parents about what they stole and who they abducted. There are recordings of (Russian) prisoners of war who admitted to killing people,” he said. “There are pilots in prison who had maps with civilian targets to bomb. There are also investigations being conducted based on the remains of the dead.”
Zelenskyy’s comments echo reporting from Der Spiegel saying Germany’s foreign intelligence agency had intercepted Russian military radio traffic in which soldiers may have discussed civilian killings in Bucha. The weekly also reported that the recordings indicated the Russian mercenary Wagner Group was involved in atrocities there.
German government officials would not confirm or deny the report, but two former German ministers filed a war crimes complaint Thursday. Russia has denied that its military was involved in war crimes.
Russian forces, who pulled back after failing to take the capital in the face of stiff resistance, have now set their sights on the Donbas, the mostly Russian-speaking, industrial region where Moscow-backed rebels have been fighting Ukrainian forces for eight years and control some areas.
A senior U.S. defense official said Friday that the Pentagon believes some of the retreating units were so badly damaged they are “for all intents and purposes eradicated.” The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal military assessments.
The official did not say how many units sustained such extensive damage, but said the U.S. believes Russia has lost between 15% and 20% of its combat power overall since the war began. While some combat units are withdrawing to be resupplied in Russia, Moscow has added thousands of troops around Ukraine’s second-largest city, Kharkiv, he said.
The train station hit is in Ukrainian government-controlled territory in the Donbas, but Russia’s Defense Ministry accused Ukraine of carrying out the attack. So did the region’s Moscow-backed separatists, who work closely with Russian regular troops.
Western experts refuted Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov’s assertion that Russian forces “do not use” that type of missile, saying Russia has used it during the war. One analyst added that only Russia would have reason to target railway infrastructure in the Donbas.
“The Ukrainian military is desperately trying to reinforce units in the area … and the railway stations in that area in Ukrainian-held territory are critical for movement of equipment and people,” said Justin Bronk, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London.
Bronk pointed to other occasions when Russian authorities have tried to deflect blame by claiming their forces no longer use an older weapon “to kind of muddy the waters and try and create doubt.” He also suggested that Russia specifically chose the missile type because Ukraine also has it.
A Western official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence, also said Russia’s forces have used the missile — and that given the strike’s location and impact, it was “likely” Russia’s.
Ukrainian officials have almost daily pleaded with Western powers to send more arms, and to further punish Russia with sanctions and exclusion of Russian banks from the global financial system.
NATO nations agreed Thursday to increase their supply of weapons, and Slovakian Prime Minister Eduard Heger announced on a trip to Ukraine on Friday that his country has donated its Soviet-era S-300 air defense system to Ukraine. Zelenskyy had appealed for S-300s to help the country “close the skies” to Russian warplanes and missiles.
American and Slovak officials said the U.S. will then deploy a Patriot missile system to Slovakia.
After meeting with Zelenskyy on Friday, during which he urged the EU to impose a full embargo on Russian oil and gas, von der Leyen provided him with a questionnaire that is a first step for applying for EU membership.
Elsewhere, in anticipation of intensified attacks by Russian forces, hundreds of Ukrainians fled villages that were either under fire or occupied in the southern regions of Mykolaiv and Kherson.
In the northeast’s Kharkiv, Lidiya Mezhiritska stood in the wreckage of her home after overnight missile strikes turned it to rubble.
“The ‘Russian world,’ as they say,” she said, wryly invoking Putin’s nationalist justification for invading Ukraine. “People, children, old people, women are dying. I don’t have a machine gun. I would definitely go (fight), regardless of age.”