International Responsibility and the Dominance of the Victors

By the end of the Second World War, the victors formed a charter known as the Charter of the UN and its international councils and bodies. The victors in the SWW continued to lead the international balance according to their interests and not according to the interests of the nations that signed the charter. Since that date, the UN has not presented resolutions that express the international system as an independent international body that expresses the aspirations of its members. The question is, are there indications for this organization to continue to carry out its tasks after the occurrence of more than 70 wars and until now since its establishment??

The victors in the SWW continued to hold the international balance stick in their favor, overlooking the texts of the Charter, and overlooking the criticism directed at it and the contradiction between its preamble and its various texts. The Russian military operation of February 2022 in Ukraine was a new horizon for re-drafting a world order capable of achieving security and stability. After more than 60 years, the victors in that war did not care to reconsider the UN Charter for one reason that its texts still agree with their interests regardless of the interests of the peoples.

The language of the victors in the SWW did not stop its rejection of calls for reform of the UN for six decades. Hence, the collective international responsibility, as defined by the provisions of the Charter, has shifted from the General Assembly to the SC, through which the interests of the powerful are moving at the expense of the weak and the imposition of the de facto international order. And the victors did not pay attention to calls for reform of the UN, especially the veto rights in the UN SC, which manages the tracks of international politics and interprets international interests, security and peace according to the interests of the victors’ system in the aftermath of World War II.

These people did not recognize the inability of the international system to ward off wars, assassinations, rampant poverty, invasion, division of nation states, reconfiguring political maps, besieging peoples and nations, and deterring aggression wherever it is. The victors of the Second World War, according to their interests, have always exploited the conditions of the international system and the theory of balance of power and interpreted it according to their national interests and not according to the interests of international peace and security, and their goal has always been to preserve their pivotal position in international politics and international balance by refusing the participation of other nations in the international balance legislated by the charter and working to marginalize the role of the General Assembly in it without legal support or international legislation that permits this. After the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the reconfiguration of international politics, the departure of the competing bipolar system in international politics, and the shift of responsibility for managing the international system to unipolarity, diagnosed in the US of America, the UN turned into a nominal international institution through the American unipolar control over the outputs of the SC.

The international responsibility of this organization is at a crossroads. What are the features of the lost international responsibility of the UN? Is the control of the victors in the SWW over the interpretation of the Charter and its public adaptation to the interests of their national states, without an international mandate for them, a logic that reflects the purposes for which the Charter was established? 
The Charter of the UN, as well as previously the Charter of the League of Nations, did not give any member state in the UN system wide privileges in running the organization because this contradicts the purposes of the Charter of the UN in justice and equality, and even under the SC system is not granted such a right, the veto is only for each member in it.

The UN, through its General Assembly, has, in accordance with its charter, broader powers of its international responsibility towards international peace and security, and it is the body legally authorized to determine what is contrary to that, not the SC. However, the interference of the strongest in the SC in the work of the Secretary-General and the limitation of international behavior and violation, makes the international organization lose its international responsibility and his actions are hostage to the strongest in the international organization.

The actions of the Secretary-General of the UN decades ago only reflect the role of the strongest in the SC. Through our examination of the random roles of the Secretary-General of the UN, and during many wars and international and regional crises, we did not find anything that strengthens the performance of their roles as reinforced by the Charter of the UN, in how they deal with third world issues, most of which did not contemplate the birth of the Charter. Towards a new world Hence, the reasons for calling for the formulation of a new world order that begin with its Secretary-General and the extent of his commitment to reversing the purposes, principles and purposes of its charter become clear. In light of the low performance of the Secretary-General of his international responsibilities towards the purposes of the Charter in return for higher rates of the strategic interest performance of the victors in the SWW and the permanent members of the SC, the space for international responsibility has always narrowed with him. Hence, the most dangerous manifestations of the collapse of the international system in the context of unipolar, multipolar or bipolarity is the strengthening of the principles of forged international legitimacy and the decline of international responsibility as the charter wanted it to prevail in the world. Israel and its regional and international behavior are a tempting example.

For the past forty years, this entity has enjoyed an exceptional rule in the beginning, then it has turned into a legitimate rule in the behavior of the UN, especially in the presence of the SC. And here is NATO, which is playing the role of the new colonizer in Europe under the pretext of its security, and today it is putting Europe on the brink of collapse. 

The Charter of the UN is the Charter of the victors. This is a fact similar to the behavior of the UN organization through the various stages and through how to address the many crises and wars experienced by the international community. The continued control of the victorious strongmen in the wake of the SWW over the performance of this organization undermines its international responsibilities that were established for it towards the issues of peoples and nations, hotbeds of tension and crises, and its responsibility has shifted to the pole that controls. This in itself is a violation of the principles and powers contained in the charter. In an attempt to calm the consciousness of nations and peoples, one of the victors in the aftermath of the Second World War, who is in control of the contemporary balance of power, proposed expanding the membership of the SC to mitigate the criticism of the Third World countries for its performance, and from the countries that are expected to be pushed by Germany, India, Pakistan or Brazil before it rises The Iranian genie is also asking for a permanent seat in the SC. On the other hand, calls came out against the initiative of the holder of the balance of power demanding the necessity of adopting continental representation, meaning a seat for Africa, a seat for Asia and Europe, a seat for South America, and the last call for the final rule because it did not meet the desire of the victor once again. Because how can Britain or France accept to give up its nuclear and international role and to concede one to the other?? China and Russia are Asian countries, so how do they concede one to the other??

India and Pakistan are Asian countries, so how can they concede one to the other? By appreciating this reading, the dilemma lies in how to find a new international system capable of reformulating its charter in accordance with the building of the independent national state, and then assuming its international responsibility, and how the General Assembly becomes the master of the international balance of power and adherence to its right to choose its Secretary-General and subordination to it, leaving all that It is decided by the General Assembly in implementation of the powers of the SC, and this in itself does not contradict the principles and purposes of the present Charter of the UN. Because the loss of international responsibility from the portfolio of the Secretary-General of the UN constitutes in itself an issue that calls for reforming this organization because it is linked to the future of international peace and security, issues of development and stability, and the achievement of justice and equality among nations and peoples. Hence, we say that the idea of victory that produced the Charter of the UN after the SWW cannot be an eternal right in managing the interests of the rest of the peoples who joined the organization and managing the affairs of the world through those who control the balance of power and in the name of the false international legitimacy.

The whole world contributed to the idea of the allies' victory over the axis and the remnants of old and new colonialism, racism, terrorism, backwardness, and the promotion of human rights and democracy. If the idea of the Charter of the UN goes back to these victors and with it exercises hegemony over peoples and national states as one of the historical rights, then there is a historical fallacy that should be refuted. We know that what drives the system of major interests in the world is the theory of power and the mechanism of the alleged and unjust balance of power, but history reminds us that the peoples of the world, whether they were independent or otherwise, contributed to achieving victory for the allies, with human or logistical support or opening their lands to them to manage their battles over them.

North Africa is not far from us in time, it had nothing to do with the Allied and Axis conflict, but it gave its lands and sons to support the so-called victors in World War II. With this angry explanation of the need to reform the UN, the victors have no legitimacy or entitlement to control the international project that guarantees rights and stability and achieves justice and equality between nations and peoples. The possibility of reconsidering the mechanisms of the UN action towards achieving international responsibility is a matter of the future of international stability and peace, and therefore limiting the extent of the control of the victors in the SWW can only be achieved through more exercise by the international organization of its international and moral responsibilities. The new Russian discourse and the new international balances President Putin's speech constituted an important international turning point in the history and future of power balance theory, international alliances and international politics, and the importance of the future impact of this on power relations in international politics. 

The discourse of peoples and nations did not leave out all the disadvantages of the international system that the victors formulated after the SWW in the Charter of the UN, and its preamble that contradicts the provisions of its charter. The evidence and facts presented by the speech in its rejection of the de facto international order were a reminder to the international conscience that the time and circumstances of drafting the charter were not the current conditions and data for managing the affairs of international responsibility. The Charter was born from the womb of wars, strife, colonialism and exploitation, and that era is over, and it is no longer a justification for the continuation of the international project that was born from its womb. The connotations and meanings of the new Russian discourse were manifested in highlighting the stages of failure through the inequality between peoples and nations in establishing the rules of justice and equality between them, and the observance in its charter, and replacing it with the powers of the SC, which was born with its General Assembly on the same day and date.

The indications were its witness and present to the impotence of the international organization since its establishment in responding to more than 70 international and regional wars, knowing the fate of the assassinations of international leaders, presidents and employees, the execution of the presidents who are members of their international organization, the recurrence of manifestations of invasion and occupation in many regions of the world, and the identification of those responsible for the spread of biological diseases and epidemics. Globally, who is responsible for the spread of the phenomenon of coups, and who is responsible for the spread of poverty, environmental bottlenecks, famine and illegal immigration, and his inability to set borders and solutions to the crises of nations and peoples with an equal measure of justice and equality.

These are the indications of the speech of the Russian leaders to rebuild an international system based on the data of his time and not on the data of victory from past centuries, and to reconsider a map that distributes it in line with the phenomenon of the rise of global and continental spaces in a vision that may seem ideal at the first glance, but it remains a legitimate demand for peoples and nations aspiring to justice and equality. The Russian discourse’s obstacle to nations and peoples was preoccupied with the need to awaken the international conscience with the fall of the current balance of power theory, which is marketed to it as a safe haven to ensure international peace and security, and that it protects peace. Achieving the missing balance of power in the international system if powers were given to it through the application of its charter, because it is the majority and it represents all peoples and nations. 

And the bomb that broke the back of the unilateral international system, the monopoly of the US of global decision-making at the expense of the peoples and countries affiliated with it, and from here, American thinkers began talking about another type of chilled demons in international politics as a secret biological weapon that America prepares outside its borders. These began to dissect American policies towards the human being inside and outside America? Where these demons mean malicious and bacterial genes, which are made inside biological laboratories, and kept in refrigerators for long periods of time as a weapon for the mass destruction of humanity, and the locations of these demons are those countries, which are adjacent to Israel, Russia, China, Korea, Venezuela and Iran as an open field for making these ice demons? The Russian operation discovered hundreds of biological laboratories underground in hundreds of countries in exchange for a few dollars and economic and political dependency, as Ukraine was an international theater for these biological demons, as it was the largest biological laboratories in the world for the production of frozen demons, and it is the largest European country in terms of poverty, and it was planned to produce a system A new world based on ice wars of demons as an alternative to the wars of the Corona era. Frozen demons’ wars only exterminate humans and do not affect the infrastructure of countries? It was the first use of ice demons in North America against the American Indians during the English colonization of North America, so these ice demons are the least expensive and most destructive?!

This leads to the so-called genetic bomb, which kills humans only as a weapon for the mass destruction of humans, and to preserve the pure race, the racial Corona as a model? The “Botox” derivative is the most dangerous and most important ingredient in human nervous wars in the manufacture of iced demons with the current situation of the role of the international community, the only beneficiaries of it are the people of the luxurious and powerful north who dominate the capabilities of the south. The Russian position was alert to the extent of the pragmatic adaptation of international conventions in favor of the luxury and power of the north in the face of the south.

The call is directed to awakening the south and its forces against the north in order to rebuild a world equal between north and south. The wealth of the north is conjured from the south and exploited by factors of power and hegemony, and the natural resources on which the north feeds are replaced by the south, hence the meaning of the south by the connotations of the Russian move in Ukraine, but the question remains who will transform this vision of the Russian Century for nations and peoples into a reality that humanity enjoys in her third millennium???