U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres arrived at the BRICS summit in the Russian city of Kazan on Oct. 22, despite criticism from Ukraine, Voice of America reported.

The BRICS group, a bloc of countries that includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates, is convening in Kazan for a three-day summit from Oct. 22-24. According to Moscow, 36 world leaders are participating in the conference.

Guterres is expected to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of the event on Oct. 24, according to Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov.

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry criticized the U.N. secretary general’s visit.

MBFC
Archive

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    You can keep whatabouting your way back as far as is convenient. Like the other respondent also did.

    It’s true that Israel and Russia are not analogous here, but they’re both breaking humanitarian laws pretty hard.

    • DarthJon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      LOL, every time someone provides contrary evidence to your accusation it gets labeled “whataboutism.” I know all the anti-Zionist propaganda tricks.

      Russia invaded a sovereign nation to take over their land. Israel is fighting back against a genocidal regime that has sponsored terrorist violence against it for decades, and has promised to destroy it. Big difference.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        It’s because most Zionist arguments are whataboutisms. You want to make it about history, you want to make it about culture and religion, you want to make it about technicality. About anything except the hard numbers of what’s happening on the ground, because that’s devastating to your case.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            12 days ago

            Well, let’s see. 80% of commercial or public buildings in Gaza, and 60% of homes are rubble, and there’s ~50,000 dead Palestinians and twice that number injured. Meanwhile, Isreali deaths amount to ~2,000 (let’s say 4000 adjusting for the extra cruelty) and I can’t even find data on infrastructure damage because it probably amounts to a few buildings. In addition, something like three-quarters of the Gazan population have caught a contagious disease, such as cholera, do to the destroyed sanitation system, and >90% have had food insecurity, while Israel is unaffected by both.

            That doesn’t really sound proportional, just or humane to me.

            I checked the numbers with Al Jazeera for convenience, but everyone else watching gives similar values, including the UN, so it’s not just a Qatari opinion. War is starting up In Lebanon now, as well, and the West Bank is getting more and more lawless as a blind eye is turned to violence from settler groups. Gaza continues to be economically isolated and suffers all the various social ills caused by the resulting poverty, on top of the direct war damage.

            • DarthJon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              12 days ago

              That’s not what the principle of proportionality means. It has nothing to do with the death toll on each side. It’s a principle that’s applied to each individual strike and requires armed forces to ensure that any civilian deaths are proportional to the military objectives of the strike. Hamas and Hebollah are terrorist organizations that don’t respect the laws of war, so that’s a pretty big point in favor of Israel.

              Second, many military experts have agreed that, given the conditions in which Israel is fighting this war, the civilian-to-combatant ratio in Gaza is among the lowest in the history of urban warfare. You’ve seen what Israel is capable of over the past year - it’s patently obvious that the death toll could have been much, much higher.

              Third, the moral judgment of rightness or wrongness in a conflict isn’t determined by the death toll on each side. The winners of a war will typically suffer fewer casualties than the losers because that’s a big part of how winners in war are determined. The fact that very few US civilians died in WWII compared to German civilians doesn’t make the US the bad guys in that war.

              There is one side in this conflict that is openly genocidal: the Iranian regime. They have literally admitted their goal is to destroy Israel. They have a doomsday clock in Tehran counting down to the death of Israel in the year 2040. And they are willing to sacrifice every single Palestinian life to make that happen.

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                12 days ago

                That’s not what the principle of proportionality means.

                Says who? The entire philosophy of a just war is about trolley problems - kill someone now, to protect someone later. Killing for anything else is just murder. Certainly, the UN doesn’t say what you’re suggesting, and Israel’s arguments under international law have focused more on all of Gaza being a military target somehow, as opposed to it being okay simply because of their goals, or because proportionality doesn’t apply outside of some very narrow situation.

                Nothing is above human rights, and definitely not Bibi’s career, which is really what’s driving things here. Israelis themselves would rather make a deal. Everyone on the other side and Israel’s allies would definitely rather make a deal.