IRIA News

5 minute read

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has declined to host a visit from United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, citing Guterres’ recent appearance at a BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, and his meetings with the Russian president.

The decision comes amid heightened sensitivities as Ukraine remains entrenched in a conflict with Russia, following the full-scale invasion in 2022. Guterres’ decision to attend the summit in Kazan, where he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin, was widely criticized by Ukrainian officials and the public alike.

Guterres reportedly expressed interest in visiting Kyiv following his participation in the Kazan summit, but his trip was swiftly dismissed by Ukrainian authorities. “The president did not confirm his visit,” a source in Zelenskyy’s office told the BBC. “After Kazan and after he shook hands with the war’s instigator and spent UN Day on the territory of the aggressor country, it would be somehow strange to host him here.”

Guterres’ presence in Kazan coincided with UN Day, a symbolic event for the organization that promotes global cooperation and peace. Ukrainian administration interpreted this timing as adding insult to injury.

In a statement issued before Guterres visited Kazan, Ukraine’s foreign ministry condemned his choice to engage with Russia at this level. “This is a wrong choice that does not advance the cause of peace. It only damages the UN’s reputation,” the ministry said, criticizing the secretary-general for his participation in what it termed an “insensitive” diplomatic engagement.

The ministry’s disapproval was amplified by its reminder that Guterres had turned down an invitation to attend Ukraine’s inaugural Global Peace Summit, held in June in Switzerland while accepting a Russian invitation instead.

“The UN secretary general declined Ukraine’s invitation to the first Global Peace Summit in Switzerland. He did, however, accept the invitation to Kazan from war criminal Putin,” the statement added.

Ukraine’s Global Peace Summit, held with support from more than 90 nations, was designed to generate diplomatic momentum for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. The summit strongly condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and proposed pathways for a durable peace in the region. Russia, notably absent from the summit, dismissed the gathering as “meaningless.”

Calls for peace during BRICS summit

During the BRICS summit in Kazan, Guterres as well as other BRICS leaders emphasized the need for a “just peace” in Ukraine, appealing for a resolution in line with international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter. He underscored this view in his conversations with Putin, reiterating the UN’s position that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine constitutes a violation of international law and the UN Charter.

Despite Guterres’ public rebuke of Russia’s actions, the symbolism of his presence in Kazan raised eyebrows, with some questioning the UN’s stance and effectiveness in fostering peace in Ukraine. Guterres’ office defended his participation, citing the significance of BRICS’s emerging influence in fostering global cooperation.

The BRICS bloc, comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, with recent additions of Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the UAE, represents a diverse grouping with members that have often positioned themselves as a counterbalance to Western-dominated alliances like the G7.

The presence of BRICS countries that either openly support or are neutral in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, including Russia and China, has led analysts to view BRICS as a forum that could challenge the G7 economically and diplomatically.

ICC arrest warrant

The decision by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2023 to issue an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin over alleged war crimes in Ukraine looms heavily over interactions between international leaders and the Kremlin. Ukraine has frequently called attention to Putin’s alleged criminal activities and criticized any semblance of normalization or diplomacy extended toward Moscow.

Russia, which does not recognize the ICC’s authority, has thus far disregarded the warrant and continued to assert its geopolitical influence, utilizing platforms like BRICS to present itself as a central player on the global stage. The ICC, which maintains close cooperation with the United Nations, has limited enforcement power over countries that reject its jurisdiction, such as Russia. Nevertheless, the ICC’s indictment has heightened global scrutiny of any international interactions with Putin.

The fallout from Guterres’ visit to Russia reflects a broader dilemma facing the United Nations as it attempts to navigate one of the most polarizing international conflicts of recent decades. For Ukraine, a country fighting for its sovereignty, Guterres’ engagement with Russia strikes at the heart of its ongoing struggle for international solidarity and support.

Ukraine has leaned heavily on multilateral support from the West, including economic and military aid from the United States, the European Union, and G7 nations. However, with BRICS emerging as a possible counterweight and hosting nations like Russia, which are accused of international law violations, the UN finds itself attempting to mediate without alienating one bloc or the other. Guterres’ efforts to emphasize peace were thus interpreted by Ukrainian officials as contradictory, given his choice of setting.

Ukraine’s position

As Guterres leaves Russia amid questions about his diplomacy choices, Ukraine continues to grapple with a grueling war that has taken a profound toll on its population and infrastructure. The refusal to host Guterres underscores Ukraine’s sensitivity to what it perceives as mixed messages from global institutions.

In the meantime, Ukraine’s efforts to end the conflict persist, buoyed by international sympathy and support from allies. With Ukraine’s rejection of the UN chief’s visit, Kyiv has signaled a clear message: any form of diplomacy or peace talks with Russia must fully consider the aggressor’s accountability and cannot be seen as tacit approval of the ongoing conflict.