June 19 is the day when the UN Security Council adopted a resolution on security assurances for non-nuclear-weapon states. Find out what this resolution was supposed to guarantee and how russia is now disregarding international law and institutions

Get involved in an urgent fundraiser to help the injured animals of Kherson region

DONATE

On June 19, 1968, a resolution on security assurances for non-nuclear-weapon states came into force in New York. The UN Security Council meeting was attended by representatives of 15 countries, and the memorandum was adopted with 10 votes in favor and 5 abstentions. It is also important that the resolution included the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

According to the adopted document, it was stipulated that in the event of aggression with the use of nuclear weapons or a possible threat of such aggression against a state that does not possess nuclear warheads, the UN Security Council and its immediate members that have these weapons should immediately act in accordance with their obligations under the UN Charter.

In addition, the document clearly states that a state that has become a victim of the above-mentioned aggression should receive immediate support and assistance from the nuclear-weapon states and that the UN Security Council member states are responsible for the non-use of nuclear weapons.

So why does Ukraine, which gave up nuclear weapons back in 1996, today suffer from constant threats of nuclear use by russia, while russia itself transfers nuclear warheads to Belarus with impunity, and the UN Security Council watches and "strongly condemns" the actions of the aggressor country?

Nuclear terrorism in action

From the very beginning of the full-scale invasion, russia has not stopped its nuclear terrorism, starting with the seizure of the Ukrainian nuclear power plant and ending with direct threats to use nuclear weapons to strike at the territory of Ukraine. At the same time, not only russian authorities, but also media propagandists are making eloquent statements, boasting on television about the "power of russia." 

Moreover, after Polish MEP Radoslaw Sikorski stated that the West has the right to transfer nuclear weapons to Ukraine because russia violated the terms of the Budapest Memorandum, moscow began threatening a nuclear strike not only against Ukraine but also against Poland.

At the same time, the aforementioned resolution (and not only it) should have served as a deterrent to what russia is doing now. And today, we can only believe that not only Ukraine but also partner states care about preventing the use of nuclear weapons. However, in the context of recent events, it seems that no one cares about global security, because if all the documents backed by international law were implemented, the ways to put pressure on russia would look somewhat different.

Visit Ukraine on social media: Telegram | YouTube | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | TikTok

Nuclear weapons deployment in Belarus: why does putin need it?

putin's statements about the transfer of nuclear weapons to Belarus are yet another gesture aimed at attracting attention. Currently, the question of the actual deployment of weapons is up in the air, but it is known that russia has begun construction of warhead storage facilities. According to preliminary information, it should be completed in July.

At the same time, there is no military sense in relocating nuclear missiles, because russia has the ability to strike anywhere from its territory. Therefore, putin needs the deployment of weapons only to strengthen his control over Alexander Lukashenko and the Belarusian army.

In this russian "game of nerves," Belarus itself is just another pawn without a voice, although according to international treaties, the state has pledged to be free of nuclear weapons. According to experts, Lukashenka wants to use russian nuclear weapons to threaten and "prevent attacks on his territory" in case of a repeated offensive by russian troops from the north, i.e. from the territory of Belarus itself. However, even according to the statements of the russian authorities, Belarus will not gain control over the warheads, meaning that in fact, russia will simply use Belarusian lands for its own purposes once again.

The reaction of Western countries to putin's statements was quite predictable. Most of them condemned the actions of the kremlin announcer, but noted that they have no reason to revise their nuclear policy now, as the actual escalation has not yet taken place. What world leaders are waiting for is a rhetorical question.

So, unfortunately, today we have questions about the viability of the resolution on security assurances for non-nuclear-weapon states, as well as the UN Security Council itself. And although the United States and the United Kingdom (which participated in the signing of the Budapest Memorandum) are now among Ukraine's main partners, providing an unprecedented amount of military, political and financial support, international law has not yet become a guarantee of security. After all, if global institutions were to work in accordance with previously adopted decisions, an actual full-scale offensive, let alone nuclear threats, would be impossible.

We remind you on June 14, the trial of 22 Ukrainian prisoners of war from the Azov regiment began in russia. The reasons why russia has once again disregarded international humanitarian law and why the trial is a war crime against Ukraine were described in a previous article.

You may be interested in:

Visit Ukraine Donation - make a good deed and an important contribution to the Victory of Ukraine;

Visit Ukraine Tours - the largest online database of tours to Ukraine for every taste;

Visit Ukraine Merch - choose patriotic clothing and accessories with worldwide delivery;

Visit Ukraine News - get the latest news and updates in our Telegram channel;

Cooperation - cooperation and advertising integrations with Visit Ukraine and Visit World projects.