the General Assembly.
violations still persist in different parts of the world.
law and undermining of the rules-based order.
places where Russia set the earth on fire. Russia pretends
occupying Power there. Still, even the Russian courts,
that Russian troops are there.
Yet the reports of international organizations and
their missions, which were invited by Ukraine, clearly
tell the contrary. They speak the truth in facts. Since
February 2014, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and
the city of Sevastopol of Ukraine have been temporarily
occupied by the Russian Federation as a result of armed
aggression against my country. And that is a fact that is
very difficult to deny. Hence Russia was recognized as
an occupying Power by the General Assembly.
It is quite easy to understand the whole horror
of the Russian occupation regime, despite what the
Russian representative just said, as in the famous
Soviet propagandistic television show Vremya. One
has only to open two recent reports of the Secretary
General on the human rights situation in Crimea.
Repression, depression and hopelessness — that is
what local populations face today in the temporarily
occupied Crimea.
Systemic human rights abuses and violations have
turned Crimea into a land of fear, not a land of tourism
as the representative of the Russian Federation just said.
The Crimean Tatar people — the indigenous people of
the peninsula who were expelled from their homeland
in 1944 by the Stalin regime — have once again become
a direct target of intimidation, harassment and terror,
forcing them to leave.
Russia drives ethnic Ukrainians out of the peninsula
by destroying political and civic organizations of
Ukrainians, eliminating education in the Ukrainian
language — despite what the Russian representative
just said — persecuting leaders and activists exerting
massive psychological pressure and expelling citizens
of Ukraine from the occupied territory. Anyone who
dares to reject the so-called “reunification with Russia”
narrative becomes a victim of arbitrary detention,
prosecution, extrajudicial executions, torture and
in human treatment in Crimea We strongly condemn the sentencing of civic
and political activists prosecuted for being loyal to
their own country — Ukraine. Despite the demand
expressed in General Assembly resolutions, Mr. Emin
Usein Kuku still remains in a Russian prison, as does
Mr. Server Mustafayev, a human rights defender who
was arbitrarily sentenced to 14 years in a strict-regime
correctional facility. Hundreds of citizens of Ukraine,
including Halyna Dovhopola, Vladyslav Yesypenko and
Nariman Dzhelyal, to name just a few, remain illegally
detained by Russia under politically motivated charges.
The Orthodox Church of Ukraine is practically
expelled from the occupied peninsula. Communities of
Jehovah’s Witnesses and Muslims also face oppression.
Despite Russia’s forced imposition of its legal
system, residents of Crimea remain Ukrainians and my
country will spare no effort defending its citizens.
Meanwhile, Russia continues its aggressive
illegal policy to militarize the peninsula, exploit
natural resources and practice the illegal transfer
and destruction of the Ukrainian cultural heritage
in Crimea. The occupying Power pursues forcible
demographic change in Crimea.
The de-occupation of Crimea, as well as other
temporarily occupied territories, is an absolute priority
for Ukraine. We are grateful to our international
partners for their response to the Russian aggression
against Ukraine. It is important to maintain the political
and diplomatic pressure on the Kremlin until Ukraine’s
territorial integrity is restored.
To increase the effectiveness of the international
response to an array of problems arising from the
ongoing temporary occupation of Crimea, including
in the field of human rights, we established a new
consultation and coordination format: the International
Crimea Platform. We invite all interested parties to join
the Platform — in fact, we invited Russia itself — and
would like to thank our partners that already expressed
their support for the initiative.
Draft resolution III, entitled “Situation of human
rights in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic
of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, Ukraine”, also
calls on cooperation within the International Crimea
Platform and will serve as a practical tool for the
United Nations, its Secretariat and the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe and their respective
monitoring missions in Ukraine.
I am grateful to all Member States — and I am
not going to threaten any of them, like the Russian
representative just did — from all regions that supported
the draft resolution in the Third Committee. It is also
encouraging that the text received the co-sponsorship
of more than 40 Member States.
I ask Member States to vote in favour of draft
resolution III.
2 - che la risoluzione menzionata del 2022 per completezza di informazione era questa:
Seventy-seventh session
Third Committee
Agenda item 66 (a)
Elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia
and related intolerance: elimination of racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
Australia, Japan, Liberia and North Macedonia: amendment to draft
resolution A/C.3/77/L.5
Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other
practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
Before operative paragraph 3, insert a new operative paragraph, reading:
Notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its territorial
aggression against Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism, and
underlines that the pretextual use of neo-Nazism to justify territorial aggression
seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism;
3 - le ragioni per le quali nel 2021 gli USA (non ho trovato quella Ucraina ma credo sia assimilabile a questa) votò negativamente alla risoluzione sono riportate qui:
e sono
Nicholas Hill
Deputy U.S. Representative for ECOSOC
New York, New York
November 12, 2021
Explanation of Vote at the Third Committee Adoption of the Combating Glorification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism and other Practices that Contribute to Fueling Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance Resolution
AS DELIVERED
Chair – As we mark the end of World War I with Armistice Day, the United States also joins the world community in commemorating the valiant sacrifice, heroism, and years-long struggle of all allied nations in the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 to end the Second World War. The United States joins those in the international community in condemning the glorification of Nazism and all forms of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, and intolerance. In fighting against the murderous ideology of Nazism, the United States fought for the freedom, dignity and human rights of all individuals and our steadfast commitment to preserving and protecting fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of expression.
Today, however, the United States must once again express opposition to this resolution, a document most notable for its thinly veiled attempts to legitimize Russian disinformation campaigns denigrating neighboring nations and promoting the distorted Soviet narrative of much of contemporary European history, using the cynical guise of halting Nazi glorification.
The United States Supreme Court has consistently affirmed the constitutional right to freedom of speech and the rights of peaceful assembly and association, including by avowed Nazis, whose hatred and xenophobia are vile and widely scorned by the American people. We nevertheless firmly defend the constitutional rights of those who exercise their fundamental freedoms to combat intolerance and express strong opposition to the odious Nazi creed and others that espouse similar hatreds.
We have again attempted this year to improve this resolution by engaging in negotiations on the draft text. Despite consistently expressing our concerns with the Russian delegation and proposing revisions to improve the text and protect against unacceptable restrictions on freedom of expression, most of these recommendations were ignored. We discourage States from invoking Article 4 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in order to either silence unwelcome opinions or to excuse their failure to combat intolerance.
For these reasons, the United States has voted against each new version of this resolution since 2005 and is, again, compelled to vote “No” on this resolution, and calls on other States to do the same.
In conclusione, le informazioni, di questo tipo di importanza, non possono essere divulgate senza una completa ed esaustiva documentazione dei fatti, in alternativa rimangono ideologizzate e rimangono opinioni personali; opinioni deliberatamente volenterose di accomodare il pensiero di una schiera di persone che non ha voglia o che, peggio, non vuole approfondire le questioni che stanno alla base delle politiche e delle decisioni dei governi. Mettiamola come vogliamo, ma i governi sono influenzati dalle opinioni pubbliche, e il politico che vuole il potere non può altro che assecondarle per ottenere voti. Da qui la pericolosità delle informazioni divulgate a spizzichi e bocconi.
Redaelli Stefano
