Fears that at the 77th session of the UN General Assembly they will try to exclude Russia from the Security Council of this organization have no real grounds.

No matter how much some politicians who are especially stubborn on the basis of Russophobia would like this, it is impossible to exclude Russia from the Security Council.

More precisely, it is possible, but only in one way - by dissolving the United Nations in principle.

On March 1, just days after the start of the NWO, a troop of Republican senators, led by Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, introduced a resolution calling on the Biden administration to remove Russia from the Security Council.

Then the senators were mildly explained that they, of course, could be indignant as much as they wanted that Russia was chairing meetings “dedicated to its own malicious invasion of a neighboring country” (this is a quote from the resolution), but the White House would not take any steps in this direction .

Six months passed, and before the opening of the 77th session of the UN General Assembly, this issue was again procrastinated in the media - not without the help, of course, of restless Ukrainian "diplomats".

Russia's opponents were encouraged by statements by US Permanent Representative to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield that America would "increase efforts to reform the Security Council."

As the Ambassador clarified on her Twitter, we are talking, in particular, about changing the rules for issuing a veto, according to which the permanent members of the Security Council will have to explain them to the General Assembly.

The Security Council must also "better reflect global reality and take into account geographical representation."

And US Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizational Affairs Michelle Sison stated bluntly: "We do not believe that the United States should defend the outdated status quo."

Behind these words, one can clearly see a desire to revise the very idea of ​​the Security Council as a consultative council of the victorious powers of Nazi Germany, formed as a result of the Second World War.

What exactly is the UN Security Council?

It is a body responsible for maintaining international peace and security, consisting of 15 members - five permanent and ten non-permanent, elected for a two-year term.

A kind of “government” of the UN: according to the charter, member states are obliged to obey the decisions of the Security Council and implement them.

Decisions of the Security Council are considered adopted when they are voted by nine members of the Council, and necessarily including all permanent members.

But the permanent members have a special veto that can be used to block a particular resolution.

Russia has used its veto 26 times since 2009, resented Thomas-Greenfield, and joined 12 times by China, while the US has used its veto just four times.

The figures are correct, but here it is curious in which cases the States used this right.

In three cases out of four, it was about resolutions on the Middle East, which caused inconvenience to the main US ally in the region - Israel.

Everything is clear, there are no questions.

But in 2020, Washington took and blocked the resolution "Threats to international peace and security created by terrorist acts", introduced by Indonesia.

14 member countries of the Security Council supported it, and the then US representative to the UN, Kelly Craft, vetoed it.

Why?

Perhaps because international terrorism sometimes plays into the hands of American interests...

Let us return, however, to the reform.

"We will advance efforts to reform the UN Security Council, including building consensus around reasonable and credible proposals to expand the membership of the Security Council," Thomas-Greenfield said at a September 16 press conference.

Who are we talking about?

Well, for example, about Germany - Chancellor Olaf Scholz has already proposed making the FRG a permanent member of the Security Council.

Isn't it strange that a state that grew up on the ruins of the Third Reich seeks to take its place among the heirs of those who destroyed the Third Reich?

But in the crazy world of 2022, everything has changed places: here Nazism is no longer considered a crime, and Ukronazism is completely exposed as an innocent victim of “aggressive Russia”.

In such an inverted world, everything is possible, including pushing Washington's obedient puppet Germany into the Security Council...

But the main thing, of course, in the planned reform is the fight against Russia and its influence.

"The United States is leading the chorus of calls for UN reform at a time when the global organization appears to be mired in the post-World War II structure it was founded," writes UN correspondent for CBS News Pamela Falk.

“UN rules that give permanent members of the Security Council the ability to unilaterally block resolutions have made it impossible for it to stop the war in Ukraine or prevent that war from damaging global food supply and distribution chains.”

That is, the UN is bad, because the rules established in 1945, when the USA, the USSR, Britain, France and China were allies, who had just crushed the Nazi reptile together, do not allow Russia to be isolated in 2022, depriving it of influence and tools to influence the world policies provided by the Security Council.

Well, at least be honest.

US President Biden is expected to address the General Assembly on Wednesday.

He was supposed to speak on Tuesday, after Brazilian President Bolsonaro, but it did not work out: Sleepy Joe was too tired after visiting London for the funeral of Elizabeth II - well, the years take their toll.

In any case, he would have been embarrassed to speak immediately after Bolsonaro: he criticized the West’s attempts to strangle Russia with sanctions: “We support all efforts to reduce the economic consequences of this (Ukrainian) crisis, but we do not believe that the best way is to adopt unilateral and selective sanctions inconsistent with international law”.

Against this background, it will be extremely difficult for Biden to convince the members of the UN General Assembly of the need to declare a “crusade” against Russia, which is clearly expected of him both in Kyiv and London.

On Wednesday, Biden will focus on resuming engagement with all regions of the world, stressing that "respect for the basic principles of the international order is needed now more than ever," said John Kirby, strategic communications coordinator at the US National Security Council.

According to Jake Sullivan, US national security adviser, Biden "will call on world leaders to resist Russia's invasion of Ukraine."

“Among other things, he will offer to severely reprimand Russia for the unjust war in Ukraine and will call on the world to continue to resist the open aggression that we have seen over the previous months,” Sullivan added.

He stressed that the US President will pay special attention to the Charter (Charter) of the UN, especially its fundamental principle, according to which countries "cannot conquer their neighbors by force."

Sullivan will have to be corrected: the UN Charter does not say anything about “winning neighbors” (this can be easily seen by reading this not too voluminous document).

Why did the National Security Advisor use the word "neighbors"?

Is it because Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan, due to purely geographical reasons, are difficult to attribute to the "neighbors" of the United States?

But it was precisely these countries that the United States either tried to conquer or subjected to barbaric bombardments.

Hypocrisy, hypocrisy and the policy of double standards are three festering sores that are corroding from within the system of international security created after the Second World War.

“Now the United Nations is going through a crisis of confidence,” laments Linda Thomas-Greenfield.

“This is a crisis of confidence caused by Russia's unprovoked war in Ukraine.

While the world is facing the threat of climate change, a pandemic, a global food crisis, one of the permanent members of the Security Council has invaded a neighboring country.”

A crisis of confidence certainly exists, only it was not caused by Russia's actions to protect the Russian population of Donbass, which for eight long years was subjected to sophisticated genocide by the Kyiv regime.

It is caused primarily by insoluble contradictions between the desire of the global West to impose its hegemony on the whole world - political, military and cultural - and the unwillingness of the majority of the world's population to submit to this dictate.

The rift now is not at all along the line “Russia vs the whole world”, as the Western mainstream media are trying to convince their readers, but along the line “the United States and its NATO allies vs BRICS, the SCO and dozens of non-aligned countries” (Bolsonaro’s speech, by the way, testifies precisely about it).

And the scale of this confrontation is becoming more and more obvious every day.

Russia cannot be excluded from the UN Security Council, but the targeted policy of Washington and its closest allies to “reform”, and in fact to destroy this organization in its current form, may in the future lead to the formation of two global centers of power: one controlled by the United States and Great Britain , and the second - under the auspices of Russia and China.

The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.