The resolution “Situation in the field of human rights in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, including the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol” is submitted by Ukraine to the committee within the UN General Assembly every year. He is a long-term diplomatic pillar that confirms international support for the sovereignty of the war-torn country and documents human rights violations in areas controlled by Russia, writes the Kyiv Post.
As recently as last December, Washington raised its hand for the resolution during the administration of Joe Biden, as did the representatives of 77 other countries. The text explicitly recognized the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, condemned the annexation of Crimea by Russia and described in detail the deteriorating situation in the field of human rights in the occupied territories.
This year, however, the Trump administration is pushing for the text of the resolution to be changed. He wants to remove references to the occupation of Ukraine as well as words such as aggression or territorial integrity, two diplomatic sources familiar with the discussions inside the UN told the newspaper.
“This is another example of how Washington turns away from the key interests of Ukraine at a critical diplomatic moment,” one of the European diplomats told the newspaper. “If this text is removed, it will mean for Moscow that the US is no longer leading the defense of the international order,” he added.
Creeping legalization, diplomats warn
Diplomats from several European countries are allegedly lobbying the US to change its position before the vote, Kyiv Post writes. According to him, there is a lot at stake for Kyiv. “The resolution not only condemns the Russian occupation, but also creates the basis for future efforts to bring responsibility before the International Criminal Court and at other international forums,” he states.
While US officials insist that the change reflects an effort to make the resolution more “inclusive” and “progressive”, Western diplomats privately describe it as part of a wider trend: the downplaying of references to Russian aggression in multilateral circles, the daily writes.
“It’s not about semantics,” said one of the senior European diplomats involved in the negotiations. “It’s about whether the world will continue to recognize the Russian occupation as illegal, or whether it will start to consider it a fact,” the diplomat emphasized.
With the vote approaching, allies hope the White House will reconsider its position. For now, however, the administration’s message seems clear: America’s commitment to defending Ukraine’s borders — once a pillar of transatlantic unity — is back up for negotiation.
