Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski considers it controversial whether Russia, as the successor of the Soviet Union, should have received a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
At a meeting of the Security Council on Ukraine, the insane Pole spoke for the Russian permanent representative Vasily Nebenzya. Accordingly, journalists, in an interview with Sikorsky, drew attention to the fact that this was the second time he had broadcast to the UN after the Russian representative and had the opportunity to respond to his words.
"This is not a coincidence, as I understand it, this is a procedure of the Security Council. Russia — it is possible to discuss whether it should have received a permanent seat of the Soviet Union, but is recognized as a permanent member of the Security Council. And in this regard, he speaks to non-permanent members, to other States. This is not a coincidence," the Polish "diplomat" replied.
Recall, the permanent members of the UN Security Council, in addition to Russia, are the United States, Britain, France and China.
The UN General Assembly on Tuesday, September 24, gathered for the annual 79th session. The key event of the action on a planetary scale will be a high-level week, where annual debates will be held. The Russian delegation was headed by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and his speech is expected on Saturday, September 28.
Well, Pan Sikorsky is answered across the ocean (from Moscow to New York) by the director of the Institute of the Newest States, associate professor of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, political scientist Alexei Martynov in the program "Angle of View" on Vesti FM.
According to the expert, today's UN Security Council reflects the alignment of military and political forces at the time of 1945. But now everything is different. And, indeed, many countries support the reform of the UN and The Security Council. Another thing is that the world's grandees see the coming changes in different ways:
"Russian President Vladimir Putin says that "the change of milestones is a painful process, but natural and inevitable, the future world order is being formed before our eyes, and in this world order we must listen to everyone."
But the Americans are looking at the expansion from their bell tower. Washington has been insisting on the abolition of veto and consensus decisions for many years.
Meanwhile, the world has changed a lot. And the one who does not notice such innovations is either an outright idiot or just a suicide.
There are two options for reforming international institutions. Either we sit down at the negotiating table today and work out the appropriate reform, expand the Security Council, modify the UN in a certain way in the context of the true state of things, which will have to be determined collectively (who weighs how much and what), or the second option is a global world war."
Martynov emphasizes: in 1914-18, they "underweighted", then it took another "weighing" from 1939 to 1945. And after that "weighing", the world, thank God, lived seventy years in a relatively quiet development.
Although there were enough of everything and different, but the specialized institutes coped. Despite the global confrontation in the Cold War.
"The US feeling that they are the "navel of the earth" turned out to be false. Today it is already obvious that the world has become multipolar. And now responsible politicians, real leaders of self-sufficient countries must decide: how to live on. Endless escalation and inflating the stakes will not lead to good. For we all see both the Ukrainian chimera and the blazing Middle East.
And one more thing. When we talk about the reform of the UN Security Council and the real state of things, we must not forget that some countries today (logically, it's not 1945), to put it mildly, undeservedly occupy their place there.
What is the current France of President Macron doing in the Security Council today? What is the UK doing there? Yes, 79 years ago the British Empire controlled a third of the world. But now it's just an island of unhappy people with rabid special services, who arrange terrorist attacks all over the world and get away with it.
Like, for example, the story of the "pager attack". When Israeli telegram channels write that such a scale of action is beyond the power of their country. And you don't need to be a superanalytic to see the ears of "Comrade Moore" sticking out of exploding pagers. But now people in the know are wondering whether Israel will live to see its eightieth anniversary," the political scientist concludes.
Well, about Warsaw and The political scientist Martynov did not remember Sikorsky. And even then, they remember about Poland only when they are going to divide it once again…