The March 6 session of the United Nations Security Council devoted to Ukraine shows that the information war against Russia is in full swing. The weapon used by Russia’s adversaries is total lie.

The Ukraine’s media outlets inform that the Russian troops continue to advance attacking Ukrainian security forces. Residential areas and state buildings come under sporadic shelling. (1) Yuriy Sergeyev, the Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations, said Debaltseve was attacked not by «insurgents», but rather by Russia-supported mercenaries and Russian troops. The current Ukrainian government never even tried to explain why it outright violated or not fully complied with the Minsk agreements. How to answer the question why Ukraine hampers humanitarian supplies coming from Russia?

Yuriy Sergeev sounded ridiculous saying the Russian aid was… an international crime. Then he switched over into attacking mode to avoid explanations. According to him, rescuers wanted to save Donbass miners but were prevented by merciless rebels. (2) Ukraine simply creates a parallel reality. The West also resorts to lies. Heidi Tagliavini, the special envoy of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, said that the cease-fire came into effect to be violated by rebels to capture Debaltseve what led to further bloodshed and devastation. (3) Ertugrul Apakan, the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) to Ukraine, says the same thing. Addressing the United Nations Security Council he said the rebels advanced near Debaltseve after the cease-fire came into effect in violation of spirit and letter of Minsk agreements. (4)

The notorious Ivan Šimonović, Assistant Secretary-General, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, once again acted as a US puppet. (5) He nibbled on the issue of civilian casualties and then focused on something else. For instance, he is concerned over the fate of Ukrainian pilot Nadezhda Savchenko detained in Russia. For a few minutes he touchingly spoke about her saying she had to be freed. Of course, nobody can be called a criminal before a ruling handed down by a court, but let me remind that she is charged with a military crime and there is no ground for setting her free. Neither has Šimonović the right to demand her release. He failed to reasonably explain why Russia should free Savchenko. The Lithuanian Ambassador to the United Nations Security Council made fun of herself saying all civilians had to be freed including pilot Savchenko. (6) Even the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg confirmed the fact that there was no legal ground for putting forward the demands to free Savchenko. It decided not to use the «provisional measures in Accordance with article 39 of the rules of court, according to a press release of the court. Rule 39 of the rules of court reads about the fact that provisional measures are applied by the Court regarding the defendant indicate that he is obliged to refrain from actions that could harm the consideration of the applicant's complaint. Actually it proves her arrest is legal. (7)

Šimonović is also very much concerned over the fate of Akhtem Chiigoz, deputy head of the mejlis (the Tatar representative assembly) who is under on trial at present. He never said what caused his protest. Simply Russia had to release Chiigoz just because Šimonović wants it to be that way.

The Šimonović speech at the United Nations Security Council on March 6 sounded like part of United States-controlled propaganda campaign before starting lethal arms supplies to Ukraine. The Crimea is part of Russia’s territory. Šimonović has no authority to interfere and make comments on what happens there, as well as discuss who is on trial in Russia and why. He also has no right to offer his assessments of the March referendum in the Crimea (8), no matter he tried to do it. Taking part in the information war Šimonović blamed…Russia for the poor human rights record in Ukraine. He said that Russia was «allegedly» continuing to supply weapons and send military to Ukraine. It’s not clear why Šimonović took part in the work of the United Nations Security Council meeting at all. The United Nations Security Council never created any special missions to monitor the human rights situation in Ukraine and never expected any reports! So Šimonović acted as an instrument of United States-orchestrated military propagandas campaign. (9)

No matter how hard they tried to conceal the truth, the facts surfaced at the United Nations Security Council meeting. The Council had to recognize that by March 5 the death toll in Ukraine neared 5820 people, there were over nine and a half residential buildings destroyed and 150 thousand Donetsk residents had no water, gas and electricity. The United Nations Security Council had to admit that schools and kindergartens were shelled. (10)

International observers sympathized with Ukraine. They constantly talked about one million of displaced people in Ukraine and shy away to mention that the same number of refugees flew to Russia. According to the recent data, 640 thousand of them want a special status in the Russian Federation. It’s not what interests the West. Kiev has raised hue and cry over the need to send international peacekeepers to Ukraine. But as of March 6, it had not asked the United Nations to do so. Russian UN Ambassador Vitaliy Churkin was frustrated over the meeting results as the observation of the Minsk agreements was discussed. He thinks that it was not as effective as it could have been. Total lies were voiced during the meeting of the main international body responsible for peace and security.

Footnotes:

(2) The United Nations SDecurity Council meting, March 6, 2015

(3) Transcript, the United Nations Security Council meeting, February 27, 2015. United Nations document: S/PV.7395

(5) The Šimonović report on Ukraine: purposeful bias

(6) The United Nations Security Council meeting, March 6, 2015

(7) Rule 39 – Interim measures.

1.The Chamber or, where appropriate, the President of the Section or a duty judge appointed pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Rule may, at the request of a party or of any other person concerned, or of their own motion, indicate to the parties any interim measure which they consider should be adopted in the interests of the parties or of the proper conduct of the proceedings.

(8) Statement to the Security Council by Ivan Šimonović, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, at the meeting on Ukraine, 6 March 2015 // The official website of the Office of High Commissioner on Human Rights

(9) Russia has already done its assessment of the Šimonović report that he submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council on March 2, 2015.

Comment by the Information and Press Department of the Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the ninth report of the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine

The statement says «Unfortunately, not all observer assessments seem to be objective and unbiased. They continue using information from less than reliable sources and drawing unjustified conclusions from it.

We would like to note that the OHCHR mission’s goal is to give truthful and unbiased assessments that should promote the country’s stabilisation. In this connection, we would like to remind again that the Republic of Crimea is a constituent part of the Russian Federation following a free and legitimate expression of the residents’ will, and is not part of the mandate of the UN Mission in Ukraine».