With Brazil’s vote, UN opens investigation into Ukraine war

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – In a vote on May 12, the UN Human Rights Council approved the opening of investigations into possible war crimes in the outskirts of Kiev and other Ukrainian cities.

The resolution, which condemns Russia’s military operation, was supported by Brazil’s vote. However, the government of Jair Bolsonaro could not convince other countries to modify the resolution that, in the view of many delegations, would undermine the original proposal to pressure Russia. Brazil’s Foreign Ministry (Itamaraty) also criticized the terms of the document, especially concerning food insecurity issues.

The text was approved with 33 votes in favor, 12 abstentions, and two votes against.

The UN had already established a commission of inquiry. Now, the mechanism will have the mandate to specifically investigate suspected war crimes in the regions of Kiev, Chernihiv, Kharkiv, and Sumy. The purpose of the mandate would be to bring those responsible to justice.

“This area, under Russia’s occupation in late February and March, experienced the worst human rights violations on the European continent in decades,” said Emine Dzhaparova, Ukraine’s deputy prime minister.

But in an unprecedented move, China has taken on the role of defending Russia, a country that has been suspended from the UN Human Rights Council. Xi Jinping’s government criticized the resolution, insisting that the resolution is “neither balanced nor objective.” Beijing asked for the floor and requested that the text be voted.

For China, the priority should be to prevent the conflict from escalating “to the point of no return.” Beijing insisted that the international community should support peace talks and “stop putting fuel on the fire.”

MORE THAN 1,000 BODIES RECOVERED ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF KIEV

Before the vote, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet suggested that much of the crime committed in Ukraine appears to be the responsibility of the Russians and that more than 1,000 bodies had been recovered in the vicinity of Kiev alone. The version contrasts with Moscow’s narrative and belies the Kremlin’s version that does not attack civilian targets and spreads news in its social networks and press about the involvement of Ukrainians in the killing of the local population.

According to Bachelet, the actual death tolls are probably considerably higher than what is known up to this point. “In areas of intense hostilities – notably, Mariupol – it has been difficult for my staff to access and obtain and corroborate information,” she explained.

According to her, most deaths are caused by explosive weapons with wide-area effects in populated areas, heavy artillery shelling, including multiple-launch rocket systems, and air and missile attacks.

“According to our information, while such incidents can be attributed to both sides of the conflict, most of these casualties appear to be attributed to the Russian armed forces and affiliated armed groups,” she denounced.

Suspended from its seat on the Council, the Russian government could attend the meeting as an observer or an involved party in the debate. But Moscow chose not to be in the room at all.

Another resolution will be voted on in the Council, calling for investigations into specific regions controlled by Russian troops.

BRAZIL’S PROPOSALS WERE IGNORED

Unlike votes in other international bodies, Brazil chose to support the resolution. However, Itamaraty worked to deflate parts of the document that put pressure on Russia. Its suggestions were ignored in several parts of the text.

The Brazilian government, for example, did not want a reference in the text to Russian “aggression” against Ukraine. But the term was kept.

Nor was Brazil able to convince the other countries to remove from the text a reference to Russia’s alleged role in the food crisis in Ukraine. Itamaraty “regretted” the decision, insisting that the treatment of the issue could not be discriminatory and that it would be useless to talk only about the impact of the war without mentioning the sanctions imposed by the West.

The government wanted the exclusion of a reference to the fact that part of the world’s food insecurity occurs “in light of the impediments to Ukraine’s agricultural exports as a result of the blockade of its seaports and the destruction of relevant critical infrastructure, as well as the theft of grain from the territories of Ukraine under the control of the Russian armed forces in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions.”

Even so, the government gave a yes vote and argued that the text included language limited to human rights and respected the principle of the investigation’s independence.

After the vote, Brazil’s ambassador to the UN, Tovar Nunes, took the floor to demand “impartiality” from the Council in dealing with Ukraine and insisted that this would not mean indifference. He indicated Brazil’s hope that the approval of the text would “speed up the investigation” and allow the Council to be maintained as a place of dialogue. Brazil’s focus is on stopping Russia’s policy of isolation.

Before the vote, Tovar had already taken the floor. But not once did he mention the word “Russia” before the Council. While the Argentine delegation called for an “end to the Russian invasion,” Brazil insisted on asking that the allegations of crimes be investigated “independently” and quickly so that responsibilities could be determined.

Still, without mentioning Vladimir Putin’s Russian government, Brazil asked that “everyone” cooperate with the investigations conducted by the UN and that the group in charge of the inquiry bring accurate results that are not biased.

For the Brazilian government, “impartiality and objectivity” must prevail in the work of the Council.

In its speech, Brazil also appealed for the resumption of negotiations in the search for a ceasefire and warned about the risk of measures that could deepen the tension.

The government also asked that spaces be preserved so that a dialogue can occur between the parties, “avoiding measures that could polarize the debate and exacerbate the conflict.

With information from UOL