The European Parliament adopted a resolution on a special court for Ukraine
Photo: REUTERS
European Parliament resolution on the special court for Ukraine: what it means
The European Parliament adopted a resolution calling for the creation of a “special court for Ukraine” and the use of Russian assets “for reparations to Kyiv.” Both ideas are not new, they have already been tested in the West for half a year. But all this time, one thing or another prevented “making a fairy tale come true”, which even the EU leaders recognized.
That is the main warrior-diplomat, who is also the defender of the “European garden” from the hostile “jungle” advancing on it, Josep Borrell admitted that the proposal of the European Commission to create an “international court for Ukraine” did not find the unanimous support of the EU foreign ministers. Then, suddenly, Brussels realized that the frozen Russian assets in the West worth 300 billion dollars had “evaporated” somewhere, and two-thirds of them could not be found. Or even the leadership of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague claimed that Brussels’ plans to create a special court “undermine a similar investigation being conducted by the ICC”… In a word, no matter how they fought , the “stone flower” did not come out, and that’s it.
Now the European Parliament has decided to take a high note. It is not the first time that he has “let loose the cock”, because the loud and formidable resolutions of the European parliamentarians are mainly of a ritual nature and are aimed at a propaganda effect. Because it cannot be otherwise: all the decisions of European parliamentarians on foreign policy issues are simply not legally binding. This is such a bell, which is designed to “wake up” other EU institutions. Although they have long been nervously vigilant in an anti-Russian frenzy.
Why the European Parliament resolution on the special court for Ukraine will not work
In the past, far and not so far, MEPs have more than once shown themselves to be fighters against Russia on principle. One can recall several malicious and cynically false resolutions initiated by Estonian deputies, “in defense of the oppressed Finno-Ugric peoples in the Russian Federation.” Go out? Russia has reduced its participation in the relevant international forums, which have become platforms for attacks against it. And what about the wonderful EP resolutions on “equating the crimes of fascist Germany and the Stalinist USSR”? After all, its initiators did not even have questions, how could the United States and England be allies of the “criminal Soviet Union” in World War II? But it was they, that is, they acted alongside the “criminal regime”. Do they become criminals themselves too?
But logic, which has long been obvious, is not the strongest quality of today’s Western politicians. Dense ignorance and indefatigable conceit – that is his real “horse”. After all, such a naive question also arises: is it possible to judge for crimes and take the property as reparation before knowing who won the conflict? What if it ends differently than the West convinces itself? How does the proverb define the paradoxes of life? He went for wool and came back shorn.
There is another “cherry” in the resolution of the European Parliament. In it, Kyiv is reminded of the need for official entry into the ICC and Ukraine’s ratification of the relevant documents. The irony here is that since the ICC began twenty years ago, the United States has categorically refused to participate in it. The main motive was not hidden: how come some kind of “international court” tried, say, American soldiers who never committed any international crimes, but only regularly followed the orders of the leaders of their country? Maybe Kyiv is in no hurry to recognize the powers of the ICC and join it for the same reasons? After all, The Hague, in fact, can, if the letter falls like this, deal with the crimes of the Ukrainian army?
When the crisis develops to the upside – and in the case of the conflict between Russia and the West over Ukraine, this is exactly the case – there comes a moment that is defined as “the system has gone crazy”. All international peacetime legal structures are collapsing. This is what we see, including on the example of the European Parliament resolution. There are calls to use the UN structures for the “trial” of Moscow. But the statutes of this organization do not provide for such a possibility. To propose such a thing is to deliberately destroy the UN as a universal international organization.
But what is at stake in the West, as no one else hides, is perdition or disappearance. He is used to being just a saucepan, he does not even think about the possibility of an abyss. Or, more likely, afraid to think about it. So he gives himself up to dreams: how shall we judge the one who has not yet been defeated…
