Русский
The 2024 BRICS summit has just finished, with the leaders of the attending countries issuing a ‘Kazan Declaration’. That document, which can be downloaded here contains clauses relating to global conflicts and can be taken to refer to Ukraine.
It states:
“We remain concerned about at the rise of violence and continuing armed conflicts in different parts of the world including those that have significant impact at both regional and international levels. We reiterate our commitment to the peaceful resolution of disputes through diplomacy, mediation, inclusive dialogue and consultations in a coordinated and cooperative manner and support all efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of crises. We stress the need to engage in conflict prevention efforts, including through addressing their root causes. We acknowledge the legitimate and reasonable security concerns of all countries. We call for the protection of cultural heritage, particularly in regions affected by conflict, to prevent the destruction and illicit trafficking of cultural property, which is vital for preserving the history and identity of affected communities.”
While not directly addressing Ukraine, the text does refer to ‘addressing root causes’ in conflict resolution. That is a reference to the on-going situation in Ukraine, which initially began in 2008 when political upheavals removed the sitting President and inadequate democratic procedures resulted in a divisive government. In 2014, the Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, unsatisfied with their treatment by Kiev (these regions are ethnically and linguistically Russian) held referendums to claim independence. 96.2% voted for independence in a referendum that Kiev declared illegal. That sparked what amounted to a civil war between pro-Western Kiev and pro-Russia East Ukraine. This conflict, in which Kiev bombed its own territory and citizens, consistently worsened with OHCHR estimates that between 14,200 and 14,400 people, including civilians and military personnel, were killed in relation to that conflict from April 14, 2014, to December 31, 2021. Of them, at least 3,400 were civilians. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was intended to stop this fighting and attacks upon civilians. Ukraine and the West explained the Russian moves as an invasion that was designed to threaten Europe. In September 2022, Russia annexed these regions and declared them part of Russia, although fighting is continuing. The differences in perceptions as to what actually occurred as opposed to what is being said is the driving force behind the phrase ‘addressing root causes’ when wanting to resolve conflicts.
“We stress that tolerance and peaceful coexistence are among the most important values and principles for relations between nations and societies. In this regard, we welcome the adoption of Security Council resolution 2686 and other UN resolutions in this regard which enjoy consensual support of UN member states.”
The UN Security Council resolution 2686 (2023) was adopted to share good practices promoting tolerance and peaceful coexistence and address hate speech and extremism in a manner consistent with applicable international law. Full Member States were called upon to have regard to inter-religious and intercultural dialogue as an important tool to achieve peace, social stability and internationally agreed development goals. It also condemns the use of misinformation, disinformation and incitement to violence. While not expressly aimed at Ukraine, the mentioning of it in the Kazan declaration is an acknowledgement that the resolution has not been properly adhered to.
“We reiterate the need for the full respect of the international humanitarian law in conflict situations and the provision of humanitarian aid in accordance with the basic principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence established in UNGA resolution 46/182.We call on the international community to seek collective answers to global and regional challenges and security threats, including terrorism. We stress the need to abide by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. We reiterate that differences and disputes between countries should be resolved peacefully through dialogue and consultation. We also underline the need to respect the legitimate and reasonable security concerns of all countries. We underscore the need for full, equal and meaningful participation of women in peace processes including in conflict prevention and resolution, peacekeeping, peacebuilding, post-conflict reconstruction and development, and sustaining peace.”
The UN General Assembly resolution 46/182 refers to “Strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian assistance of the United Nations”. It outlines a framework for humanitarian assistance and a set of guiding principles. The Kazan Declaration refers to the need for this to be implemented as well as to provide fully inclusive participation in peace processes. This is a general statement but can be illustrated by Ukraine’s refusal to negotiate with Russia and going so far as to pass laws making it a criminal offense to negotiate with the Russian President and Russian government. In short, the BRICS are saying that such stances are not helpful when trying to find peaceful solutions.
We mourn the tragic loss of civilian lives in the recent period and express sympathy with all civilian victims and their families. We call for urgent measures, in accordance with international law, to ensure the protection of lives.
We recall national positions concerning the situation in and around Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora, including the UNSC and the UNGA. We emphasize that all states should act consistently with the Purposes and Principles of the UN Charter in their entirety and interrelation. We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices, aimed at a peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy.”
The BRICS group, including Russia, have effectively called for UN charter standards to be applied directly to the Ukraine conflict, which means that decisions should be made by the collective United Nations as concerns both the conflict, and its resolution. At present the conflict is being managed by a coalition of the United States, European Union and the United Kingdom and has entirely bypassed the United Nations. It is interesting to note that Russia, which also signed off on the Kazan Declaration, is willing to accede to UN directives, while Ukraine and its allies are not.
What Ukraine Has Said
Ukraine has immediately condemned the Kazan Declaration and the BRICS. Its Foreign Ministry stated that “The BRICS summit, which Russia planned to use to split the world, has once again demonstrated that the world majority remains on the side of Ukraine in its quest to guarantee a comprehensive, just and sustainable peace.”
These comments have been widely reported amongst Western media (reference the point made earlier about UN Security Council resolution 2686) with most analysis taking Kiev’s viewpoint.
However, others differ. Indian Prime Minister Modi, who actually attended the summit, stated “This Summit was special because we welcomed the new BRICS members. This (BRICS) forum has immense potential to make our planet better and more sustainable.“
The Russian Duma (Parliament) Speaker, Vyacheslav Volodin merely said that the event illustrated that the West “had failed to isolate Russia.”
The UN Secretary-General, who was also present at the BRICS summit said “I salute (BRICS) valuable commitment and support for multilateralism and international problem solving.”
There was also some negative commentary from Kiev and the West about why the BRICS hadn’t focused more on Ukraine. Dmitri Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesman said “Because it is not the central issue for the BRICS. Not at all. Yes, this is an important issue of the Russian agenda, but it is far from being the central issue for the BRICS. And this was reflected as it was supposed to be on the BRICS agenda.“
Ukraine’s claim that it retains most of the world’s backing however is also somewhat disingenuous, as it really depends upon which world one is referring too. The G7 for example, which is pro-Ukraine and includes most of its supporters, represents 10% of the global population. The BRICS represents 45%.
Upcoming Article:
The Global Economic and Trade Implications of the Kazan Declaration
To secure your complimentary subscription to Russia’s Pivot to Asia, please click here.
To subscribe to our X (Twitter) feed, please click here.
Further Reading
BRICS 2024 Heads of State ‘Kazan Summit Declaration’ – Contents & Analysis
