International Responsibility to Save Humanity from Hell... Before it's Too Late

The United Nations logo is seen on a window in an empty hallway at United Nations headquarters during the 75th annual UN General Assembly high-level debate in New York, US, September 21, 2020. REUTERS/Mike Segar
The United Nations logo is seen on a window in an empty hallway at United Nations headquarters during the 75th annual UN General Assembly high-level debate in New York, US, September 21, 2020. REUTERS/Mike Segar
TT

International Responsibility to Save Humanity from Hell... Before it's Too Late

The United Nations logo is seen on a window in an empty hallway at United Nations headquarters during the 75th annual UN General Assembly high-level debate in New York, US, September 21, 2020. REUTERS/Mike Segar
The United Nations logo is seen on a window in an empty hallway at United Nations headquarters during the 75th annual UN General Assembly high-level debate in New York, US, September 21, 2020. REUTERS/Mike Segar

“The United Nations was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell”. A quote famously said by Dag Hammarskjöld, a former secretary general of the United Nations, who gave his life in 1961 while on UN duty. It is one of the truest statements that summarize the role of the United Nations as an international organization that does everything in its power to bring countries and peoples together, promoting peace and fraternity among them to avoid the tragedies and the scourge of war, and to work for peaceful solutions that end armed conflicts.

This phrase also shows that the United Nations does not possess a magic wand. It cannot resolve all the persistent crises, if Member States do not respond to its calls for collective endeavor.

The hell that threatens our world today is these recent global crises that cast heavy shadows on the international community. Today, our planet is more threatened than ever, not only by the serious socio-economic consequences caused in particular by the Covid pandemic’s outbreak in the past two years, but especially by the repercussions of Russia's war in Ukraine. The war threatens to undermine the Charter of the United Nations, when Russia annexed the territory of an independent State in a flagrant violation of the Charter, and therefore, violated the respect for the sovereignty of States.

Major dangers

Since February 24, the world has seen Russia, a permanent member of the Security Council, occupying another independent country, and annexing parts of its land by force, in a clear breach of international law.

The ongoing war in Ukraine poses dangers that jeopardize the United Nations’ Charter, and might potentially lead to the complete collapse of the principle of the territorial integrity of States, and lead to the return to the era of colonialism and conquests.

Furthermore, a greater danger is looming over all of us. That is of a nuclear annihilation. The repeated threat of using nuclear weapons is now a trend we have been hearing from senior Russian leaders since the start of the war in Ukraine, and which, if it becomes true, will bring devastation never seen before, while not sparing the launchers of the first missile themselves.

Specter of the League of Nations

Past experiences of the League of Nations - the international organization that arose after the end of the First World War - proved that the predominance of the logic of applying military force to occupy and annex States, was the main reason responsible for the failure of the League's effort to protect world peace, and for the entry into a second world war.

The failure of the League of Nations to stop the Japanese invasion of Chinese Manchuria, and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia in the 1930s, was an incentive for the expansionist countries, led by Nazi Germany, to take advantage of the deteriorating collective security prestige, to achieve its expansion projects.

However, the reaction of the major Member States in the League was feeble. In particular, France and Britain, whose reactions were not sufficient to deter the venture of the Japanese and Italian expansion at the expense of two independent countries - China and Ethiopia - that were members of the League of Nations. Many reasons can explain their weak responses, but the most noticeable are their interior preoccupations with combating the repercussions of the global economic crisis.

This logic of expansion whet the appetite for Nazi, as well as Soviet expansion in neighboring countries. In the German case, despite the policy of appeasement pursued by Britain and France towards the Nazis, especially at the Munich Conference in 1938 - a strategic political victory for Nazi Germany - the Nazis took advantage later to wipe neighboring Czechoslovakia off the map. Czechoslovakia was also a member of the League of Nations. The expansion contradicted Nazi Germany’s promises at the Munich Conference to preserve the integrity of Czechoslovakia. Then the German expansion continued, which eventually led to the eruption of the Second World War, resulting in horrors on an unimaginable scale.

Today, the complete collapse of collective security, if it occurs, will lead to major and regional countries racing to impose their military hegemony and annex their neighbors. Remarkably this time, an imminent nuclear war, will threaten the very existence of human life.

UN: Partial success, hard work

The United Nations is aware of these looming dangers, and it is making all possible efforts to end the Ukraine war in a manner consistent with the territorial integrity of the Member States of the organization.

I also saw during my stay at the United Nations as part of the Dag Hammarskjöld Fellowship for Young Journalists, and over the course of more than two months, the great efforts made by the United Nations with all its capabilities, to alleviate the humanitarian crisis caused by the war in Ukraine. It succeeded in securing humanitarian aid significantly, but was unable to put an end to this war, especially since Russia, a permanent member of the Security Council and the pivotal party in the war, has constantly resorted to its veto power at the Council to block any draft resolution to end it.

Diplomacy subject to consensus of warring nations

Even with the obstruction of the resolution to end the war, the United Nations’ role remains important and very urgent. The UN has the option of diplomatic initiatives, a mechanism that might be very effective to put an end to the war in Ukraine. The UN is a reliable diplomat and would be a guarantor of any upcoming peace.

To mediate, the UN will have to reach an agreement with the main warring nations. But are the belligerent nations ready to end hostilities and negotiate peace? Let us have a look at the main players in the current conflict. The main powers are three: Russia (the aggressor) and Ukraine (the defender in a life-or-death battle), the two countries involved in the direct conflict. The third major player, is the United States, which is by far, the first provider of military and economic aid to Ukraine, and the main factor for the Ukrainians’ success in launching the large-scale counter-attack against the Russian army.

We have just recently seen the result of this support: the Ukrainians have just retaken the city of Kherson. In addition to these major players, other countries remain. Some may play an important role, but they are less influential than the aforementioned three main countries in determining the course of the war.

There is no indication that the three major players will agree to reach a solution that ends the crisis soon. Therefore, the United Nations’ diplomatic activity, will remain the best intermediary so far. UN officials must increase their efforts to urge the largest number of countries to vote on draft resolutions transferred from the Security Council (after the use of the veto in the Security Council) to the General Assembly, to end the war in Ukraine.

This would guarantee the preservation of Ukrainian territorial integrity. Here emerges the responsibility of Member States to propose such resolutions, and vote to protect the Charter in any upcoming vote at the General Assembly. The adopted resolutions, although not legally binding, would morally compel the international community to take bold economic and political measures to press towards ending the war, while ensuring the protection of the UN Charter.

COP27 climate summit

In this context, the COP27 climate summit, which is currently being held in Egypt, is a great opportunity to mobilize international consensus under the umbrella of the UN, press for an end to the war, and save the human race from hell, as Dag Hammarskjöld said. The Member States of the UN are invited to link the existential danger that climate change poses to human life, with the same menace that a long-term conflict in Ukraine may lead to. They must seek out to devise effective solutions to address the two major crises, as soon as possible, before it is too late.



Türkiye and Russia Engage in Delicate Maneuvers over Syria after Assad’s Downfall

Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Turkish President Recep Tayyib Erdogan shake hands as they pose for photos during a meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, on July 3, 2024. (Sergey Guneyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)
Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Turkish President Recep Tayyib Erdogan shake hands as they pose for photos during a meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, on July 3, 2024. (Sergey Guneyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)
TT

Türkiye and Russia Engage in Delicate Maneuvers over Syria after Assad’s Downfall

Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Turkish President Recep Tayyib Erdogan shake hands as they pose for photos during a meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, on July 3, 2024. (Sergey Guneyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)
Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Turkish President Recep Tayyib Erdogan shake hands as they pose for photos during a meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, on July 3, 2024. (Sergey Guneyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)

The rapid downfall of Syrian leader Bashar Assad has touched off a new round of delicate geopolitical maneuvering between Russia's Vladimir Putin and Türkiye’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
With the dust still settling from the stunning events in Damascus, the outcome for now seems to be favoring Ankara, which backed the victorious opposition factions, while Moscow suffered a bruising blow to its international clout.
“In the game of Czars vs. Sultans, this is Sultans 1 and Czars 0,” said Soner Cagaptay, director of the Turkish Research Program at the Washington Institute. “Far from being allies, Türkiye and Russia are competitors. And in this case, Türkiye has outsmarted Russia.”
The Assad regime’s demise opens another chapter in the complex relationship between Putin and Erdogan, with wide-ranging implications not just for Syria but also for Ukraine and the two leaders' ties with Washington.
Russia and Türkiye share economic and security interests — along with an intense rivalry. The personal relationship between Putin and Erdogan often sees them both praising each other, even as they jockey for political and economic gains.
“There are currently only two leaders left in the world -- there is me and there is Vladimir Putin,” Erdogan said recently, reflecting the respect for the Kremlin leader. Putin, in turn, has often praises Erdogan’s political prowess.
Conflicts and deals Russia and Türkiye backed opposing sides in Syria’s civil war that started in 2011, putting them on a collision course. Tensions spiraled when a Turkish fighter jet shot down a Russian warplane near the Türkiye-Syria border in November 2015, soon after Moscow launched its air campaign to support Assad.
The Kremlin responded with sweeping economic sanctions that halted Turkish imports, drove Turkish companies from the lucrative Russian market and cut the flow of Russian tourists to Türkiye’s resorts.
Faced with massive economic damage, Erdogan apologized months later. Soon after, Putin staunchly supported him when he faced an attempted military coup in July 2016, helping to warm ties quickly.
In 2018, Moscow and Ankara negotiated a ceasefire and de-escalation deal for the opposition-held Idlib province in northwestern Syria on the border with Türkiye and sought to anchor the often-violated agreement with follow-up deals in the next few years.
But even as they cooperated on Syria, Moscow and Ankara also vied for influence in Libya, where Russia supported forces loyal to military commander Khalifa Hifter while Türkiye backed his Tripoli-based foes. Türkiye also aggressively sought to increase its leverage in the former Soviet Central Asian nations competing with Russia and China.
In 2020, Moscow backed off when Türkiye’s ally Azerbaijan routed ethnic Armenian forces in the fighting over the breakaway region of Karabakh. Even though Armenia hosted a Russian military base, the Kremlin has engaged in a delicate balancing act, seeking to maintain warm ties with both Azerbaijan and Türkiye.
While their political interests often clashed, economic ties boomed, with Russia boosting natural gas exports to Türkiye via a Black Sea pipeline; by building Türkiye’s first nuclear plant; and by providing the NATO member with advanced air defense systems — to Washington’s dismay.
Relations amid the war in Ukraine
Ties with Türkiye grew even more important for Putin after he invaded Ukraine in 2022, Europe’s largest conflict since World War II.
The West responded with economic sanctions that barred Russia from most Western markets, restricted its access to international financial system, shut transport routes and halted exports of key technologies. Türkiye, which didn’t join the sanctions, has emerged as Russia’s key gateway to global markets, strengthening Erdogan’s hand in negotiations with Putin.
While Türkiye backed Ukraine’s territorial integrity and supplied Kyiv with weapons, Erdogan echoed Putin in accusing the US and NATO of fomenting the conflict. Putin has praised Erdogan for offering to mediate a settlement.
In March 2022, Türkiye hosted Russia-Ukraine peace talks in Istanbul that soon collapsed, with both Putin and Erdogan blaming the West for their failure.
Later that year, Ankara pooled efforts with the United Nations to broker a deal that opened the door for Ukrainian grain exports from its Black Sea ports, an agreement that helped drive down global food prices before falling apart the following year.
Türkiye’s balancing act in Ukraine is driven by its dependence on the vast Russian market, supplies of natural gas and a flow of tourists.
Russia’s focus on Ukraine has eroded its clout in regions where Türkiye and other players have tried to take advantage of Moscow's withering influence.
In September 2023, Azerbaijan reclaimed control over all of Karabakh in an one-day blitz while Russian regional peacekeepers stood back. That hurt Russia’s ties with Armenia, which has shifted increasingly toward the West.
Moscow's new look at Syria
Focused on Ukraine, Russia had few resources left for Syria at a time when Hezbollah similarly pulled back its fighters amid the war with Israel and Iranian support for Assad also weakened.
Russia tried to sponsor talks on normalizing relations between Türkiye and Syria, but Assad stonewalled them, refusing any compromise.
Assad’s intransigence helped trigger the Türkiye-backed opposition’s offensive in November. The underfunded and demoralized Syrian army quickly crumbled, allowing the opposition to sweep across the country and capture Damascus.
Even as it has offered asylum to Assad and his family, Russia has reached out to Syria's new leaders, seeking to ensure security for its troops still there and extend leases on its naval and air bases.
At his annual news conference Thursday, Putin said Russia offered Syria's new leaders to use the bases for humanitarian aid deliveries and suggested Moscow could offer other incentives.
While Assad's demise dealt a heavy blow to Russia, some believe Moscow could navigate the rapidly changing environment to retain at least some clout.
“Syria’s opposition forces well understand that the country’s future is uncertain,” said Nikolay Kozhanov, a consulting fellow with Chathan House’s Russia and Eurasia program, in a commentary. “They want Russia, if not as a friend, then a neutral party.”
He noted that “Moscow’s main goal will be to maintain at least a minimal level of influence through a military presence, for example, at its existing bases, or through contacts with other regional players, such as Türkiye.”
Cagaptay observed that while Türkiye would like to see an end to Russia’s military presence in Syria, Ankara’s position will depend on how relations evolve with Washington.
“If we see a reset in US-Turkish ties where Türkiye thinks it can comfortably lean on the U.S. against Russia, I can see Erdogan adopting a kind of more boisterous tone vis a vis Putin,” he said.
But if the US maintains its alliance with the Kurds and stands against Türkiye’s effort to push back on Kurdish fighters in northeastern Syria, “Ankara may decide that it needs to continue to play all sides as it has been doing for about a decade now,” Cagaptay said.
Putin noted Russia understands Türkiye’s motives in securing its borders, but he also warned that the Kurds could offer strong resistance if attacked.
Emre Ersen, a Russia expert at Istanbul’s Marmara University, also noted that while Assad’s fall will diminish Moscow’s influence, “the relationship between Türkiye and Russia will not be devastated by the events in Syria.”
“Obviously, they still need to reach out to each other regarding the crisis in Ukraine, but also because they have very significant economic relations,” Ersen said, adding that Erdogan could be expected to seek more concessions from Russia on energy and trade issues.