Interview by First Deputy Permanent Representative Dmitry Polyanskiy to Sputnik
Q: The Ukrainian Permanent Representative to the UN, Mr Sergiy Kyslytsya, has made a number of statements and even published a large article contesting Russia's membership in the UN and its permanent seat on the Security Council. Do you think he is seriously trying to make a case here or is this some kind of bad political theatre?
A: He seems to be very passionate about this matter. And it's difficult to tell from his latest article whether he is intentionally ignoring international law or is completely ignorant in that domain. Mr Kyslytsya bases his position on a set of pseudo-juridical statements pretending that they are axiomatic. However, it doesn't take an international law scholar to see that his presentation is built around empty demagogy and the deliberate misrepresentation of facts. Most importantly, he juggles the terms "succession" and "continuity" as if they were synonyms. From a legal viewpoint, they have completely different meanings. His flawed basic assumption seems to be that applying for UN membership de novo, would be relevant to that of case of a "Successor State", like his own country, Ukraine, which inherited a portion of rights and obligations from the USSR and represents a new and distinct international law entity. The Russian Federation belongs to a totally different legal category, being the internationally recognised "Continuator State" of the Soviet Union. It means that the legal personality of the USSR did not terminate after 1991 – it continued under the name of the "Russian Federation". It's hard to ignore the key difference here: "Continuator State" is the same entity under international law. In other words, by equating "Continuator State" to a "Successor State" Mr Kyslytsya successfully proves only one thing – his complete legal illiteracy.
Q: By the way, how can Mr Kyslytsya make claims about applying for UN membership de novo, when his own country never did that?
A: Well, this only demonstrates how "consistent" his line of argumentation is. Mr Kyslytsya never misses a chance to boast about his country being among the "founders of the UN" and the original signatories of its charter. In fact, the UN Charter was signed by the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic – an integral part of the USSR. To reconcile internal inconsistencies in Mr Kyslytsya's own position it would take him to confess that he believes Ukraine to continue to be part of the Soviet Union. Not to mention that a separate UN seat for the Soviet Republic – Ukraine – was part of the deal struck by J. Stalin with the Allies during the San Francisco conference – he insisted on that so that the USSR would not get outvoted in the General Assembly. Thus, it can hardly be claimed Ukraine's own merit.
Q: The Ukrainian permanent representative claims that some documents on the matter in question are being kept "secret" by the UN Secretariat. What could he possibly mean by that?
A: Well, it's hard for me to guess what's going on in Mr Kyslytsya's head - maybe he wants to find proof of some sort of worldwide conspiracy theory. On a more serious note, he is obviously trying to create a "mystery" or "sensation" out of thin air. First, you don't need to go to the UN Secretariat to learn about the status of Russia as the "Continuator State" of the Soviet Union. There are no secrets or conspiracies whatsoever. Numerous documents, including relevant statements, verbal notes, international communiqués, and declarations recognising that fact are available in the public domain. If Mr Kyslytsya is not on friendly terms with internet search engines, our colleagues in the Russian MFA have accumulated some of the relevant sources in a recent commentary, he might find it useful. We would highlight one document in particular. The Decision of the Council of Heads of State of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) from 21 December 1991 confirmed in unequivocal terms that members of the CIS supported Russia in continuing membership of the USSR in the UN, including its permanent seat on the Security Council. The decision was signed by Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk. Thus, it would be more productive for Mr Kyslytsya to commence his self-education endeavour not in the UN Headquarters, embarrassing the UN Secretariat, but rather in the archive of his own MFA in Kiev. We hope that the original version of the 12 December 1991 decision did not fall victim to various dignity revolutions. In the unfortunate case it did, Ukraine can always ask one of its neighbours for a true certified copy. Finally, the Secretariat maintains a truly impressive audiovisual library on international law. Its staff, most surely, will be happy to assist the Ukrainian permanent representative and his team to learn more about the difference between "Continuator State" and "Successor State".
https://bit.ly/3uSHGyU
