Head of the Subject of International Law –

Non-governmental organization «Yakutia — Our Opinion»

Stepan Petrov is ready to end the armed conflict

between Ukraine and Russia in a new status

 

Statement on the need to establish

a new International Institution:

Independent Mediator on the Settlement

of Armed Conflicts between States

 

 

«THIS MATERIAL IS PRODUCED, DISTRIBUTED AND (OR) SENT

BY FOREIGN AGENT №247 PETROV STEPAN YURIEVICH,

№296 AUTONOMOUS NON-COMMERCIAL ORGANIZATION FOR PROTECTION

 OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND PUBLIC INFORMATION «YAKUTIA — OUR OPINION» OR CONCERNING THE ACTIVITIES OF FOREIGN AGENT №247 PETROV STEPAN YURIEVICH,

№296 AUTONOMOUS NON-COMMERCIAL ORGANIZATION FOR PROTECTION

 OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND PUBLIC INFORMATION «YAKUTIA — OUR OPINION»

 

Sequence numbers are indicated in accordance with

the registry of foreign agents of the Ministry of Justice of Russia

 

 

The war in Ukraine, initiated by Russia, continues.

 

I, Stepan Petrov, as a Head of Subject of international law — Non-governmental organization «Yakutia — Our Opinion» in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council stand for an end to the armed conflict between Ukraine and Russia.

 

War led to a number of catastrophic consequences.

First of all, people are dying en masse.

The war must be stopped.

 

In these conditions, the priority of international organizations, states and individuals became assistance in ending the war.

But so far these efforts have not led to a positive result.

 

The leading role in maintaining international peace and security is assigned to the UN, whose members are almost all the sovereign states of the world.

However, we have to admit that at the moment the UN has not coped with the task of preventing and ending this armed conflict.

There has been a situational exhaustion of the UN Security Council’s ability to end the war between Ukraine and Russia.

At the same time, the UN remains the only international organization within which effective consolidation of peacekeeping efforts is possible.

I believe that for this reason it is necessary to look for ways to end the war within the UN.

To increase the effectiveness of the UN in maintaining international peace and ending wars, I propose to establish a new International Institution within the UN structure.

 

I also propose to adopt a new norm of international law «On Conducting Peace Restoration Operations by International Security Forces».

 

* * * * *

 

I, Stepan Petrov, Head of Subject of international law propose to establish a new International Institution — Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States.

 

I am ready to become one of the first Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States and, in a new status, begin to end the armed conflict between Ukraine and Russia.

 

The name for new International Institution is borrowed from the list of entities operating in the legal sphere of various countries.

According to the definition, a mediator is a third neutral, independent person (mediator, conciliator) who helps the parties resolve an existing conflict or dispute.

Professional activity in the field of alternative conflict resolution and disputes is called mediation.

The main approaches and methods of work for International Institution can be taken from the practice of these entities.

 

I will give a rationale for the need to create this international institution.

The reasons for the armed conflict between Ukraine and Russia were a number of significant contradictions that arose within several decades after the end of the existence of the USSR and the formation of independent states.

 

The aggravation of relations between Ukraine and Russia has occurred over the past 10 years. At this time, the following documents were adopted, which could become the basis for a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

The Minsk Protocol is an agreement signed on September 5, 2014 in Minsk, which provided, in particular, for a ceasefire in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions of Ukraine.

The Minsk Memorandum is a memorandum signed on September 19, 2014 in Minsk, in pursuance of paragraph 1 of the Protocol.

The Second Minsk Agreement (official name — Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements) is a document agreed upon at a meeting in Minsk on February 11-12, 2015 by the leaders of Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia in the Normandy Four format and signed by a contact group consisting of representatives Ukraine, Russia and the OSCE, with the aim of de-escalating the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine.

 

In my subjective assessment, I believe that the pre-war process of resolving the conflict between Ukraine and Russia was not effective enough, which led to a direct armed conflict.

 

1. The main events took place in the “Normandy format” with the participation of the OSCE.

I believe that it was necessary to expand the number of participants in this process, including among the participants in the negotiation process countries that:

-have a significant influence on the parties to the conflict;

-take a neutral position;

-do not unambiguously accept the position of one of the parties to the conflict.

These are countries such as Turkey, China, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland and others.

2. Representatives of countries and other mediators in resolving the conflict have not been sufficiently consistent, systematic, comprehensive and serious about this process.

This is evidenced by the fact that, according to experts, there was vagueness in the text of the agreements and uncertainty in the sequence of actions, which led to the failure of the Minsk agreements. There were cases of disruptions to scheduled meetings.

 

In general, it is necessary to note a fundamental point that influenced the effectiveness of the negotiation process and the possibility of a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

This is that the list of priority goals of representatives of mediators — countries and international organizations, often did not include the priority of respecting the rights of people living in countries — parties to the conflict, first of all, the right to life.

They pursued, first of all, the interests of their countries or groups of countries united in blocs, as well as international organizations uniting groups of countries.

And they were predominantly guided by “bloc thinking,” that is, their actions were subordinated to the interests of groups of individual countries.

As a result, the priority of preventing armed conflict and respecting the right to life has become secondary.

 

As a result, a situation arose where mediators of a peaceful resolution of the conflict, first of all, pursued goals and objectives other than preserving people’s lives.

Some mediators pursued the geopolitical interests of their countries or groups of countries.

Other intermediaries pursued the economic interests of their countries or groups of countries.

And third intermediaries, under the influence of subjects of influence, generally lobbied the interests of manufacturers and dealers of weapons and military equipment, escalating tensions.

At the same time, they formally declared the goal of preventing armed conflict.

 

I have a subjective impression that the mediators of the peaceful pre-war settlement of the conflict thought about anything, but not about preventing the loss of life.

 

Analyzing the pre-war situation, one gets the impression that the process of diplomatic settlement of the conflict proceeded at a sluggish pace.

And the heads of state spent time on the peaceful negotiation process on a residual basis, without showing proper initiative.

It is clear that heads of states have many of their own government affairs.

However, it was obvious that failure to resolve this conflict could lead to extremely serious negative consequences.

And if at one time they had paid due attention to this, then now they would not have to think about the ongoing war and the negative impact on their countries.

 

In my subjective assessment, the mediators of the peaceful resolution of the conflict between Ukraine and Russia acted rather melancholy and frivolously, not realizing, or rather, not wanting to realize the seriousness of the situation and that this could lead to a full-scale war, which would be recognized as the largest military conflict in Europe since Second World War.

 

The mediators of the peaceful resolution of the conflict behaved like careless workers who were forced to work on Friday evenings after the end of the working day or on a day off. And they approached the matter superficially, just to get rid of this responsibility.

As if it was not about the possibility of a war starting, but about plans to organize a barbecue picnic on the weekend. It didn’t work out, it didn’t work out that way.

Well, they didn’t thoroughly work out the text of the agreements, allowing for the vagueness of the text of the agreements and the uncertainty of the sequence of actions.

Well, the next round of negotiations broke down.

Well, they didn’t want to invite representatives of countries that have significant influence on the parties to the conflict to participate in the process.

Well, it didn’t work out to do much as normal, it didn’t work out that way. And that will do.

It happens, no big deal. At the next meeting we will correct all the shortcomings.

I have the subjective impression that it was precisely this leitmotif and style of “careless” work that prevailed throughout the entire process of pre-war conflict resolution.

 And this approach of the mediators of the peaceful resolution of the conflict led to what happened in February 2022.

Ultimately, the losers were the people — ordinary citizens of the countries on both sides of the armed conflict.

 

On October 24, 1945, the UN was established.

The organization’s charter was ratified by the majority of signatory states.

It was created to maintain and strengthen international peace and security, as well as develop cooperation between states.

I believe that armed conflicts are unacceptable at present, since after the creation of the UN, all the necessary legal instruments and mechanisms exist to resolve absolutely any conflicts.

There are 193 countries in the UN. Currently, there could theoretically be 96 wars going on in the world simultaneously—one war for every pair of countries—if all the countries in the world followed the example of the countries waging wars.

In this case, a logical question arises about the meaning of the creation of the UN: why is this organization needed if the heads of states, who have voluntarily committed themselves to resolving conflicts peacefully, calmly, without any twinge of conscience, wage wars in which people die ?

It is obvious that such behavior by heads of state is unacceptable and must be stopped by all available means.

 

Citizens of Ukraine and Russia are required to obey laws, pay taxes, and provide for their families.

And they do not have to take part in the war in order to kill and be killed.

They are not obliged to participate in resolving geopolitical conflicts by military means, which since October 24, 1945 can be resolved peacefully within the framework of international law.

The participation of citizens in wars could be justified before 1945 — the time of the creation of the UN, and now in the event of an attack on the earth by aliens.

 

Currently, absolutely any conflict between countries can be resolved without war.

But the heads of these countries chose a different path.

Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees the right to life.

However, the current war is taking people’s lives, which violates the basic right to life guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Constitution of Ukraine and the Constitution of Russia.

 

The guarantors of the rights of citizens of Ukraine and Russia, instead of guaranteeing their citizens the fulfillment of a basic right — the right to life, are engaged in the opposite thing — violent and forced mobilization, sending people to slaughter.

At the same time, officials and deputies of both countries exempted themselves from military service.

Officials and deputies of Ukraine and Russia, instead of proving their commitment to the ongoing state policy right at the front in battle, not by word, but by deed with arms in hand, hid behind the backs of citizens, sending them to slaughter, while they themselves remain in warm offices.

It should be noted that the lives of citizens of  Ukraine and Russia do not belong to the presidents of these countries so that they can dispose of it at their own discretion.

Only the person himself can control human life.

Due to this citizens of Ukraine and Russia can independently exercise their right to life, guaranteed by international law and the constitutions of both countries, and not take part in the war.

And they may demand a non-military resolution of the conflict.

 

Meanwhile, the process of pre-war resolution of conflicts between countries that could lead to armed conflicts should be the object of close attention of all interested parties.

It is necessary to clearly understand the possible negative consequences.

After all, it is much easier to prevent a fire than to put it out.

As they say, “a bad world is better than a good shootout”.

 

The process of pre-war conflict resolution between countries should include a set of measures aimed at solving existing problems and resolving contradictions.

Some of the current problems and contradictions that can become causes of armed conflicts are:

-territorial claims;

-violations of the rights of national and linguistic minorities.

One of the acceptable options for resolving territorial claims of one country against another country, in addition to diplomatic negotiations, may be an appeal to the International Court of Justice.

One of the acceptable options for eliminating violations of the rights of a national and linguistic minority is the introduction of a UN peacekeeping force to protect this category of the population.

In general, the international community needs to pay due attention to reports of violations of the rights of national and linguistic minorities and, if confirmed, take adequate measures.

The authorized UN bodies need, together with both countries, one of which claims a violation of the rights of a national and linguistic minority in another country, which in turn is the majority in the country that declared this, to develop a Set of measures to stabilize the situation, which may include the following measures:

-giving special status to certain regions of one country in which a national and linguistic minority lives, the violation of whose rights is claimed by another neighboring country;

-adoption by the interested country of the Compatriot Resettlement Program for the return of representatives of the titular nation who are a national and linguistic minority in another country;

-creating conditions for peaceful coexistence of representatives of different nations on the same territory.

This is necessary for the preventive elimination of negative factors that may become formal causes of armed conflict and the basis for a country that has declared violations of the rights of a national and linguistic minority in another country to protect them by military means on the territory of that country.

A set of measures for pre-war resolution of conflicts between countries that could lead to armed conflicts should be aimed at observing the basic principles of international law — ensuring the territorial integrity of sovereign states and their political independence, as well as the principle of resolving international disputes by peaceful means and the principle of non-use of force and threat by force.

 

The international community with all interested parties needs to suppress illegal actions on the territory of sovereign states by third parties with the aim of destabilizing the socio-political situation and violent seizure of power, such as:

-penetration of sabotage and terrorist groups;

-creation of illegal armed groups;

-creation of unconstitutional quasi-state entities.

 

In general, one of the areas of activity of the Independent Mediator should be the above-described activities for the pre-war resolution of conflicts between countries that could lead to armed conflicts.

 

Separately, it is necessary to highlight the issue of demilitarization.

A large amount of work in this direction is carried out by the Committee on Disarmament and International Security of the UN General Assembly and other authorized international bodies.

But the situation of overproduction of weapons and military equipment remains a problem. Significant amounts of them are stored in many countries.

A situation is emerging where arms manufacturers and dealers are directly interested in sparking new wars. They have their lobby in the government authorities of many countries. Their agents of influence — senior officials of different countries, receiving money and other benefits from them, are quite capable of provoking the escalation of existing armed conflicts and the start of new armed conflicts. For them, the loss of life is just a cost.

Proceeds from the arms trade are comparable to those from the drug trade.

In pursuit of profit, arms manufacturers and dealers think less about the consequences of using weapons.

It is simply impossible to ban such production. The manufacturer will always strive to increase production and increase its income. It is necessary to create a set of administrative and economic mechanisms to stimulate the repurposing of the production of weapons and military equipment, as well as their accelerated disposal.

For example, gunpowder production enterprises can reorient themselves to the production of chemicals for construction and industry; instead of tanks and armored vehicles, they can produce wagons and trucks; instead of small arms, they can produce non-lethal weapons for sport shooting.

I consider it justified to create an International Fund for the purchase of weapons and military equipment for the purpose of subsequent disposal and stimulation of the repurposing of military production.

And this Fund should be formed by the countries on whose territory weapons and military equipment are produced, in a share proportional to the volume of military production.

This will be a reasonable and better way to reduce the volume of military production than the use of these weapons and military equipment in existing wars and, moreover, the incitement of new wars by manufacturers and traders of weapons and military equipment in order to create new markets for themselves.

 

* * * * *

 

Based on the above, it can be stated that the entities involved in resolving conflicts between countries predominantly and often:

— do not have sufficient time for comprehensive peacekeeping activities, which negatively affects the quality of the documents produced and the effectiveness of the measures taken;

— have priorities different from the goal of protecting human rights and are focused on pursuing the geopolitical and economic interests of specific countries or groups of countries, as well as the interests of arms and military equipment manufacturers and traders;

— are unable to effectively assist in protecting the right to life directly in the armed conflict zone.

 

I believe that it is necessary to establish a new International Institute — Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States, which would:

-dedicate all his core working time to resolving conflicts between states;

-have as its primary goal the protection of the rights of people living in conflict-afflicted countries, primarily the right to life, with the subordinate aim of preventing or halting armed conflicts;

-carry out its activities in conflict resolution and humanitarian assistance directly in the zone of armed conflict;

-share universal, internationally recognized values established by international law and not be dependent on individual countries or groups of countries;

-be closely connected to the people living in conflict-afflicted countries, having experience working with individuals from these countries, understanding their mentality and traditions, and being able to convey their real interests to the international level;

-facilitate peaceful dialogue among civil society in these countries;

-consolidate and implement the peacekeeping potential of countries that have significant influence on the parties to the armed conflict and maintain a neutral position.

 

Civil activists from these countries and employees of international organizations working with the population and civil society of these countries meet these conditions.

 

To guide and coordinate the activities of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States, it is necessary to create a Contact Group of the UN Security Council, which should include countries that are members of the UN Security Council, except for countries that are parties to active wars (armed conflicts), that is, they are engaged in combat actions.

Also the Contact Group of the UN Security Council should consolidate the peacekeeping efforts of representatives of all countries of the world.

 

Independent mediators may have the following job titles depending on the stage of the conflict — the stage of pre-war settlement or the stage of settlement during the war:

-Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States;

-Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts.

The number of Independent Mediators is determined according to the international geographical classification and depending on the number of wars going on in the world.

There are 6 macro-regions in the world (Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Africa, America, Australia and Oceania) and 22 sub-regional groups.

To resolve each active war (armed conflict), a separate Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is appointed.

That is, the number of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is equal to the number of wars active in the world.

In the absence of wars in a particular macro-region, Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts is appointed for this macro-region.

He constantly monitors and controls all risks of armed conflicts in the macro-region, develops a set of measures to eliminate the risks of armed conflicts and periodically submits a report to the UN Security Council.

That is, the number of Independent mediators on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts, in a situation where there are no wars in the world, is equal to the number of macro-regions of the world.

 

In order to comply with the principles of objectivity, independence and impartiality, as well as ensuring adherence to the universally recognized principles of international law, the selection and appointment of Independent Mediators should be carried out from among persons related to the UN and other international organizations, the members of which may be various countries of the world from all continents.

In order to ensure independence and impartiality, it is prohibited to select and appoint Independent Mediators from among persons who have worked:

-in government agencies of various countries over the past 10 years in specialist positions;

-ever in government bodies of various countries in leadership positions;

-ever in block associations of countries such as NATO, OSCE, CSTO, SCO and others.

 

The most suitable candidates for the position of Independent Mediators are representatives of:

-non-governmental organizations with consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council;

-UN bodies that interact with civil society in terms of promoting the implementation of human rights (after resignation);

-other international organizations, the members of which may be various countries of the world from all continents, and not individual countries (after resignation).

 

The UN system has an institution of non-governmental organizations with consultative status.

Consultative status is a status assigned by the UN community to non-governmental organizations. Consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council is assigned on the basis of the UN Charter by decision of the Economic and Social Council to organizations interested in issues within the competence of the Council.

There are three types of advisory status: General, Special and Roster.

Representatives of these organizations are civil activists from different countries of the world and are closest to people; they deal with specific problems and restoration of violated rights of people and communities, and also broadcast and protect the interests of the population of their countries at the international level and in UN bodies.

 

There are also UN institutions that closely interact with civil society and the population of various countries, providing them with assistance in realizing the rights guaranteed by international law.

These are Special Rapporteurs, Independent Experts, members of Working Groups, representatives of Treaty Bodies, and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

UN Special Rapporteur, Independent Expert and Working Group Member are titles given to individuals working on behalf of the UN under “special procedures” who have a UN mandate on a particular country or topic from the UN Human Rights Council.

Human rights treaty bodies are committees of independent experts that monitor implementation of the major international human rights treaties.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is the UN agency that monitors the implementation and protection of human rights guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

This is only a basic list of individuals who have qualifications and experience, interacting with civil society in different countries and who are suitable to serve as Independent Mediators after resignation.

 

* * * * *

 

Recipient list:

Secretary-General of the United Nations

President of the United Nations General Assembly

President of the United Nations Security Council

Member States of the United Nations Security Council

Interested parties

(for internal use)

 

In connection with the need to enhance the effectiveness of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and ending ongoing wars worldwide,

I, Stepan Petrov, Head of the Non-Governmental Organization «Yakutia — Our Opinion» in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council,

propose to establish a new International Institution within the structure of the UN — Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States.

I am submitting the corresponding Draft Resolution of the United Nations Security Council with an explanatory note.

 

I am ready to travel to the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, USA, to participate in the development of the regulatory framework and regulations for the activities of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States.

It is urgent to appoint Independent Mediators for the resolution of armed conflicts between Palestine and Israel, Ukraine and Russia.

 

I, Stepan Petrov, am ready to become one of the first Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States and, in this capacity, to start the cessation of armed conflict between Ukraine and Russia.

 

* * * * *

 

Draft Resolution

The United Nations Security Council

“On the Establishment of an International Institution:

Independent Mediator on the Settlement

of Armed Conflicts between States»

The Security Council,

Recalling the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations,

Recognizing the insufficient effectiveness of the international community’s efforts to resolve armed conflicts between states,

Noting the need to enhance the United Nations’ efficiency in maintaining international peace and ending wars,

Recognizing the necessity of creating an independent specialized institution for resolving armed conflicts between states, as well as conflicts that may lead to armed conflicts,

Noting the need to involve entities in the non-military resolution of conflicts that are independent of the interests of specific countries or groups of countries,

Resolves:

— To establish an International Institution within the structure of the United Nations – Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States;

— To adopt the Statute on Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States.

 

Statute

on Independent Mediator on the Settlement

of Armed Conflicts between States

 

1. General Provisions

 

1.1. Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is an official of the UN, acting under the mandate of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council.

1.2. The primary purpose of his activity is the resolution of armed conflicts between states engaged in hostilities against each other.

1.3. Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States enjoys international immunity and inviolability status.

1.4. Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is guided by international law norms and executes decisions of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, the UN Security Council, and other UN bodies.

 

2. The Contact Group of the UN Security Council

 

2.1. To consolidate the peacekeeping efforts of all interested parties, a Contact Group of the UN Security Council is created, which includes member countries of the UN Security Council, excluding those that are parties to armed conflicts (i.e., are at war and engage in hostilities against each other).

2.2. The overall guidance and coordination of the activities of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is carried out by the Contact Group of the UN Security Council.

2.3. The Contact Group of the UN Security Council initiates the negotiation process between the parties to the armed conflict, ensuring the participation of all interested parties, including representatives of countries with significant influence on the conflicting parties and those holding a neutral position.

 

3. Classification of Independent Mediators

 

3.1. Positions of Independent Mediators can have the following titles depending on the stage of the conflicts – the stage of resolution during war or the pre-war resolution stage:

— Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States;

— Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts.

The abbreviated title of the position is: Independent Mediator.

3.2. For the resolution of each ongoing war (armed conflict), a separate Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is appointed.

That is, the number of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States equals the number of ongoing wars in the world.

3.3. The number of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts is determined according to the international geographical classification.

In the absence of wars in a specific macro-region, one Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts is appointed for that macro-region.

That is, the number of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts, in the absence of wars globally, equals the number of macro-regions in the world.

 

4. Leadership of Independent Mediators

 

4.1. The Chairman of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council provides overall strategic leadership for all Independent Mediators.

4.2. The direct supervisor of a specific Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is the overseeing Deputy Chair of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council.

He provides overall and operational guidance to the Independent Mediator, coordinating his activity plan.

4.3. When operating in the zone of armed conflict and active hostilities, the Independent Mediator makes independent decisions on significant operational actions, guided by the activity plan, regulations, current legal acts of the UN, international law, and real factual circumstances.

4.4. One Deputy Chair of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council is appointed for each macro-region.

In the absence of wars in a given macro-region, He oversees one Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts.

In the presence of ongoing wars in the macro-region, He oversees one or several Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States, depending on the number of wars.

 

5. Functions of Independent Mediator on the Settlement

of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts

 

5.1. Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts constantly monitors and controls all risks of armed conflicts in the macro-region, develops Sets of measures to eliminate the risks of armed conflicts and submits a report to the Contact Group of UN Security Council once a year.

5.2. The sets of measures being developed for the pre-war resolution of conflicts between states that may lead to armed conflicts should be aimed at observing the basic principles of international law — ensuring the territorial integrity of sovereign states and their political independence, as well as the principle of resolving international disputes by peaceful means and the principle of non-use force and threats of force.

5.3. In the event of the outbreak of war (wars) in a certain macro-region of the world, the functions of Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts are transferred to the Deputy Chairman of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council, who supervises the Independent Mediator (Independent Mediators) on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States in a given macro-region and interaction with representatives of states in a given macro-region.

5.4. In the event of the outbreak of war, Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Conflicts between States that could lead to Armed Conflicts  is appointed to the position of Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States.

In the event of the outbreak of more than one war in a certain macro-region, an additional Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is appointed for each new war.

 

6. Accountability of Independent Mediator

 

6.1. Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States submits a quarterly report on the work done to the Contact Group of the UN Security Council, and also gives an oral report to it.

6.2. The Contact Group of the UN Security Council may request the submission of an extraordinary report or a detailed report on the implementation of individual activities.

6.3. Independent mediator, on behalf of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council, records and documents violations of international law that were committed in the zone of armed conflict and active hostilities, and presents them in the form of a special report.

 

7. Principles of selection and appointment

for the position of Independent Mediators

 

7.1. In order to ensure adherence to the universally recognized principles of international law, the selection and appointment of Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is carried out from among persons related to the UN and other international organizations, the members of which may be various states of the world from all continents.

7.2. In order to ensure independence and impartiality, it is prohibited to select and appoint Independent Mediators from among persons who have worked:

-in government agencies of various states over the past 10 years in specialist positions;

-ever in government bodies of various states in leadership positions;

-ever in block associations of states.

 

8. Guidelines for the Independent Mediator

 

8.1. In the course of carrying out activities and making decisions, Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States:

— guided by the principles of objectivity, independence and impartiality;

— takes a position of political neutrality and equal distance from both sides of the armed conflict;

— is based on the principle of the supremacy of international law over the national legislation of any country;

— implements the priority of respecting the right to life, enshrined in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, for all people, regardless of citizenship and nationality.

 

9. Activities carried out by the Independent Mediator,

 and Rules for their implementation

 

9.1. Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States carries out various activities to end the armed conflict and reduce its negative consequences.

They are divided into the following activities:

— activities aimed at ending the armed conflict;

— activities that influence the course of the armed conflict and are aimed at minimizing losses among military personnel of both sides and assistance to their relatives;

— humanitarian activities aimed at assisting the civilian population and minimizing threats from man-made objects.

9.2. During the implementation of these activities, the Independent Mediator interacts with representatives of government bodies and armed forces of both sides:

-political and military leadership;

-command and representatives of the armed forces;

-representatives of government authorities.

When interacting with them, the Independent Mediator is guided by the principles of objectivity, independence and impartiality, and also takes a position of political neutrality and equal distance from both sides of the armed conflict.

9.3. When performing activities, the Independent Mediator is guided by the regulations provided for the implementation of each type of activities or group of activities.

9.4. Interaction with representatives of both parties is strictly formal in accordance with the regulations. Any informal contacts and relationships with representatives of both parties are not allowed.

9.5. An independent mediator is prohibited from accepting any money or any type of material or non-material assistance from representatives of both parties and third parties.

9.6. Any types of informal influence of a malicious nature against the Independent Mediator are prohibited.

9.7. To ensure personal safety and self-defense, the Independent Mediator has various types of automatic weapons and special technical means of protection.

9.8. In the event of informal malicious actions on the part of representatives of one of the parties or on the part of third parties, such as threats, attempted bribery and others, the Independent Mediator records and documents these actions.

A report of this, accompanied by relevant evidence in the form of audio and video recordings, paper and electronic media, and testimony, is submitted to the Contact Group of   UN Security Council for taking appropriate measures.

 

10. Control over the activities of the Independent Mediator

 

10.1. To monitor the activities of Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States, various types of control measures are provided, carried out by authorized employees of the UN Security Council Contact Group.

10.2. When performing certain activities, the Independent Mediator is required to use body-worn video recording equipment.

10.3. The Independent Mediator is obliged to timely and completely submit all types of reports and comply with instructive legal acts.

10.4. In case of detection of violations of legal acts regulating the activities of UN officials and current regulations on the part of the Independent Mediator, he will be held accountable.

 

11. Financing the activities of an Independent mediator

 

11.1. The only source of funding for the activities of Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is the UN budget.

The activities of the Independent Mediator are financed within the limits of the approved cost estimate.

11.2. When carrying out activities, it is prohibited to apply for material or non-material assistance to representatives of both parties and third parties.

11.3. If additional excess funding is necessary, the Independent Mediator makes a request for additional funding with justification for the need for costs.

11.4. Independent mediator is prohibited from receiving any personal income from any sources other than funds from the UN budget.

He submits a declaration of income and expenses annually. At the same time, verification measures are carried out in relation to him for compliance with international anti-corruption legislation.

 

12. Activities aimed

at ending the armed conflict

 

12.1. Activities aimed at ending the armed conflict are activities to develop plans for a non-military settlement of the armed conflict, initiate the negotiation process, stop hostilities and interact with interested parties.

When implementing them, he points out to both parties to the conflict the need to comply with the principles of international law: the principle of resolving international disputes by peaceful means and the principle of non-use of force and the threat of force.

12.2. During their implementation, the Independent Mediator interacts with the political and military leadership of both sides.

Independent mediator develops and submits to the political leadership of both parties to the armed conflict plans for a non-military settlement of the armed conflict between them after agreement with the UN Security Council Contact Group.

12.3. Independent mediator initiates and organizes the negotiation process between the parties to the armed conflict.

12.4. Independent mediator participates in a peaceful dialogue between the civil society of both states at the international level to find a way of non-military resolution of the armed conflict and help convey their anti-war position to the political leadership of the states — parties to the armed conflict.

12.5. Independent mediator, within the limits of his authority, interacts with representatives of states that have significant influence on the parties to the armed conflict and occupy a neutral position, with the goal of a non-military settlement of the armed conflict.

 

13. Activities that influence the course of the armed conflict

and are aimed at minimizing losses among military personnel

of both sides and assistance to their relatives

 

13.1. Activities that influence the course of the armed conflict and are aimed at minimizing losses among military personnel of both sides and assistance to their relatives are activities aimed at temporarily suspending hostilities, minimizing dangerous situations, providing assistance to captured military personnel and their relatives, as well as relatives of the dead military personnel.

13.2. During their implementation, the Independent Mediator interacts with the command of the armed forces of both sides:

— management of the Ministries of Defense;

— chiefs of the General Staffs;

— commanders of all military formations, units, subunits;

— authorized representatives of the armed forces.

In particular, interaction is carried out with commanders and authorized representatives of units of all types of armed forces of both sides:

-ground forces (army, corps, division, brigade, regiment, battalion, company, platoon, squad);

-naval forces (fleet, flotilla, naval base, squadron, division of ships, brigade of ships, division of ships, ship);

-air force (division, squadron, regiment, squadron, detachment, aviation unit).

13.3. Independent mediator initiates a temporary truce or short-term ceasefire to evacuate the wounded and bodies of the dead from the battlefield.

To do this, he ensures a personal physical presence in the zone of armed conflict, including in the zone of active hostilities, where he acts as a guarantor of the ceasefire and security.

13.4. In order to prevent massive losses among military personnel of both sides in cases of encirclement, blockade or other dangerous situations, Independent Mediator invites the parties to conclude a temporary truce for the withdrawal of individual units, units, military formations of one side or both sides from the danger zone.

In order to ensure security and monitor the ceasefire, Independent Mediator personally accompanies columns of military equipment and the movement of military personnel during their withdrawal from the danger zone.

If it is necessary to ensure synchronous movement of both sides, an authorized employee of the Independent Mediator’s office simultaneously accompanies columns of military equipment and the movement of military personnel of the opposite side.

If only one side withdraws military personnel from the dangerous zone, in exchange for this, the opposite side is provided with positions of equal value that are advantageous to it by liberating previously captured positions by the first side, or other actions are taken that are beneficial to the party that provided the other side with the opportunity to exit the dangerous zone.

13.5. Independent mediator initiates the exchange of prisoners of war and accompanies this process.

13.6. Independent mediator assists relatives of military personnel of both sides in searching for missing persons, identifying the bodies and remains of the dead, and transporting them to burial places.

13.7. Independent mediator assists relatives of military personnel of both sides in searching for missing persons in places of forced detention on the territory of the other side of the armed conflict.

Independent mediator monitors the observance of the rights of prisoners of war in places of forced detention in accordance with international law.

If necessary, when visiting places of forced detention of prisoners of war, Independent Mediator personally delivers letters and parcels from relatives, provides personal means of communication for prisoners of war to communicate with relatives.

If requested by a party to armed conflict, he ensures confidentiality and non-disclosure of information obtained during contacts with prisoners of war.

 

14. Humanitarian activities

 

14.1. Humanitarian activities are activities to provide feasible humanitarian assistance to the civilian population located in the zone of armed conflict, and to minimize threats from objects that are potentially dangerous to humans and the environment.

14.2. During their implementation, the Independent Mediator interacts with representatives of government authorities of both parties.

14.3. Independent mediator organizes the delivery of humanitarian supplies to the civilian population, medicines and medical equipment to civilian medical institutions, and also organizes transportation to other countries for the treatment of civilians who cannot receive medical care in the zone of armed conflict.

14.4. In the event of the outbreak of active hostilities or if there is a current need, the Independent Mediator initiates the creation of humanitarian corridors and participates in the evacuation of the civilian population.

Independent mediator provides financial guarantees for compensation of costs within the established limit to government authorities of various countries that have agreed to accept refugees on their territory. Further payment is made according to the submitted estimates of actual costs.

These countries are given priority access to the financial resources of UN agencies, as well as other assistance in the field of socio-economic development of countries.

14.5. In order to minimize threats from objects potentially dangerous to humans and the environment, Independent Mediator provides support for the activities of employees of the IAEA and other international organizations to maintain the normal functioning of nuclear power plants, hydroelectric power plants, dams and other potentially dangerous objects or their conservation.

 

15. Office of the Independent Mediator

and ensuring its activities

 

15.1. For operational work, the office of Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States is located in a country that has a neutral attitude towards the armed conflict and the closest geographical location to it.

Independent mediator has a full-time staff and all types of resources sufficient to fulfill his goals and objectives.

Employees of the Office of the Independent Mediator have international immunity and inviolability status.

15.2. The Office of the Independent Mediator is divided into employees who have permission to work in the zone of armed conflict, and employees who work outside the zone of armed conflict.

A limited number of employees with special training and relevant experience are allowed to work in armed conflict zone, taking into account the increased risk to life and health.

To work in armed conflict zone, the staff includes specialists with military experience, including knowledge of mine-explosive and sapper operations.

15.3. To work in an armed conflict zone, the Independent Mediator and his staff are provided with armored all-terrain vehicles, various types of automatic weapons, satellite phones, special technical protective equipment and other necessary equipment.

15.4. Independent mediator has premises for work at UN Headquarters in New York (USA), Geneva (Switzerland), Vienna (Austria).

Independent mediator acts in cooperation with UN bodies and uses UN infrastructure facilities.

Independent Mediator is assigned a personal high-speed aircraft.

Air, land and water transport is available upon request.

15.5. Deputy Independent Mediator does not participate in activities directly in the zone of armed conflict and active hostilities in order to avoid a threat to his life and health.

If Independent Mediator dies, is seriously injured, or other circumstances arise that make it impossible for him to exercise his powers, all powers are transferred in full to his Deputy.

All interested parties are notified of this. At an extraordinary meeting of the Contact Group of  the UN Security Council, Deputy Independent Mediator is appointed to the position of Independent Mediator. His new Deputy is also appointed.

 

 

* * * * *

 

Recipient list:

Secretary-General of the United Nations

President of the United Nations General Assembly

President of the United Nations Security Council

Member States of the United Nations Security Council

Interested parties

(for internal use)

 

In light of the need to enhance the effectiveness of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and ending ongoing wars worldwide,

I, Stepan Petrov, Head of the Non-Governmental Organization «Yakutia — Our Opinion» in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council,

propose to adopt a new international legal norm «On Conducting Peace Restoration Operations by International Security Forces».

I am submitting the corresponding Draft Resolution of the United Nations General Assembly with an explanatory note.

 

This would establish the principle of the obligatory inadmissibility of resolving conflicts between countries by military means.

The UN Security Council would no longer be a place for fruitless polemics between conflicting parties.

 

Given the need to overcome, in some cases, the inability of the UN Security Council to fulfill its primary duty of maintaining international peace due to disagreements among its permanent members,

it is proposed to bring the draft resolution to the United Nations General Assembly, which has the authority to make recommendations to UN members regarding collective measures, including the use of armed force to maintain or restore international peace and security.

 

The legal basis for this is Resolution 377 of the United Nations General Assembly dated November 3, 1950, «Uniting for Peace,» which includes the following.

 

“The General Assembly,

Recognizing that the first two stated Purposes of the United Nations are:

“To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace», and

“To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace”,

Reaffirming that it remains the primary duty of all Members of the United Nations, when involved in an international dispute, to seek settlement of such a dispute by peaceful means through the procedures laid down in Chapter VI of the Charter, and recalling the successful achievements of the United Nations in this regard on a number of previous occasions,

Finding that international tension exists on a dangerous scale,

…………………

 

Conscious that failure of the Security Council to discharge its responsibilities on behalf of all the Member States, particularly those responsibilities referred to in the two preceding paragraphs, does not relieve Member States of their obligations or the United Nations of its responsibility under the Charter to maintain international peace and security,

Recognizing in particular that such failure does not deprive the General Assembly of its rights or relieve it of its responsibilities under the Charter in regard to the maintenance of international peace and security,

Recognizing that discharge by the General Assembly of its responsibilities in these respects calls for possibilities of observation which would ascertain the facts and expose aggressors; for the existence of armed forces which could be used collectively; and for the possibility of timely recommendation by the General Assembly to Members of the United Nations for collective action which, to be effective, should be prompt,

1. Resolves that if the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in any case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, the General Assembly shall consider the matter immediately with a view to making appropriate recommendations to Members for collective measures, including in the case of a breach of the peace or act of aggression the use of armed force when necessary, to maintain or restore international peace and security”.

 

Also, the above Draft Resolution on the establishment of an International Institution: Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States may be submitted to the UN General Assembly if it is not accepted by the UN Security Council.

 

 

Draft Resolution      

The United Nations General Assembly

«On Conducting Peace Restoration Operations

by International Security Forces»

 

Adopted pursuant to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 377 of November 3, 1950, «Uniting for Peace».

1. In the event of the outbreak of war (armed conflict), both sides of the armed conflict shall be excluded from the Contact Group of the UN Security Council.

Countries that are at war and conducting military actions against each other shall not be included in the formation of the Contact Group of the UN Security Council.

2. The Contact Group of the UN Security Council shall develop up to five non-military conflict resolution plans within 30 days from the onset of the armed conflict.
3. The Contact Group of the UN Security Council shall issue a written directive to both sides of the conflict, requiring the cessation of the armed conflict and proposing its resolution using one of the presented non-military conflict resolution plans or based on their own plans.

A 10-day period is provided for the consideration of the written directive.

4. If the armed conflict is not ceased within the specified period, the Contact Group of the UN Security Council shall issue a written warning, offering both sides of the armed conflict 3 days (72 hours) to cease hostilities and start resolving the conflict by non-military means.

The warning shall also inform that a Peace Restoration Operation will be conducted if the conflict continues.

5. If one or both sides refuse to comply within the specified period, the International Security Forces shall commence the Peace Restoration Operation.

The International Security Forces shall enter the conflict area to forcibly disarm and neutralize both sides.

The force applied shall be proportional to the resistance encountered.

6. The International Security Forces shall restore the «status quo ante bellum,» i.e., the situation before the start of the armed conflict.

To achieve this, the armed forces of both sides and all movable material and other resources shall be relocated to their positions as they were before the conflict began.

7. Thus, if the armed conflict began on the 2nd day of a specific month and year, the situation shall be restored to its state as of the middle of the previous day.

That is, the situation shall be restored to the state as of 12:00 PM on the 1st day of the respective month and year.

8. Thereafter, the conflict between the countries shall be addressed exclusively by non-military means and within the framework of international law.
9. To organize and conduct Peace Restoration Operations, a Joint Group of International Security Forces shall be formed, consisting of military units from UN member states in proportional ratios.

Representatives from all countries in the Contact Group of the UN Security Council shall be included in the Headquarters of the Joint Group of International Security Forces.

10. The entry of the International Security Forces into the conflict zone shall be from the territories of different countries and, as much as possible, from different directions: north, east, south, and west.
11. Independent Mediator on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States, responsible for the given conflict, shall be part of the command of the Joint Group of International Security Forces.

 

* * * * *

 

The UN General Assembly is requested to consider this proposal.

It may be accepted or rejected.

I will respect any decision made by the UN member states.

If accepted, it will send a clear message to all states that conflicts between states must be resolved at the negotiating table, not on the battlefield where lives are lost.

The two world wars cost tens of millions of lives, a price too high to pay again.

And this must never be repeated.

We must not betray the legacy of previous generations, who fully experienced the bitterness of loss and hardship during the two world wars.

To prevent future wars, they established the United Nations, whose primary goal is to maintain peace and global security.

The decision to adopt or reject this norm will be made by the UN member states that bear responsibility for the future of all the world’s peoples.

If this norm is not adopted, activities will continue within the existing norms of international law.

 

In any case, I, Stepan Petrov, am ready to become one of the first Independent Mediators on the Settlement of Armed Conflicts between States and to achieve the cessation of the armed conflict between Ukraine and Russia in the shortest possible time.

 

Go to the project contents