UNITED NATIONS: The United States told the UN Security Council on Thursday that its proposal for a ceasefire in Ukraine was “Russia’s best possible outcome” and President Vladimir Putin should take the deal.
The United States wants Russia to agree to a comprehensive 30-day land, air, sea and critical infrastructure ceasefire. A first round of direct talks between Russia and Ukraine on May 16 failed to reach an agreement on a ceasefire — which Moscow has said is impossible to achieve before certain conditions are met.
“We want to work with Russia, including on this peace initiative and an economic package. There is no military solution to this conflict,” Acting Deputy US Ambassador John Kelley told the Security Council. “The deal on offer now is Russia’s best possible outcome. President Putin should take the deal.”
US President Donald Trump began his second term in January vowing to swiftly end Russia’s three-year-old war in Ukraine. Kelley said the first US step was to put forward a proposal for an immediate, unconditional and comprehensive ceasefire, which had been accepted by Ukraine, pending Russia’s agreement.
“Since then, we have been urging Russia to accept a ceasefire,” he said.
“If Russia makes the wrong decision to continue this catastrophic war, the United States will have to consider stepping back from our negotiation efforts to end this conflict,” he warned, adding that Washington could also impose further sanctions on Russia.
Kelley said that after Trump and Putin spoke by phone last week, Russia was now expected to provide a term sheet broadly outlining its vision for a ceasefire in the conflict, which began when Moscow invaded its neighbor in February 2022.
“We will judge Russia’s seriousness toward ending the war, not only by the contents of that term sheet, but more importantly, by Russia’s actions,” said Kelley, condemning Russia’s recent attacks on Ukraine as not demonstrating “a desire for peace.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Wednesday that Moscow had drafted a memorandum outlining a settlement position in the Ukraine war. But Ukraine said Moscow has not yet shared its proposal.
Russia’s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said Moscow intended to continue serious, direct negotiations with Ukraine. Russia has suggested a second round of direct talks take place on Monday in Istanbul.
“The ball is in Ukraine’s court: either talks, followed by peace, or the unavoidable defeat of Ukraine on the battlefield with different conditions for the conflict’s end,” Nebenzia told the Security Council.
Ukraine’s Deputy UN Ambassador Khrystyna Hayovyshyn said Russia was “not signaling any genuine intention to stop its war” and urged countries to impose stronger sanctions on Moscow.
“Ukraine has consistently demonstrated commitment to diplomacy and remains open to any format that can yield tangible results,” she said, but added that Kyiv would never recognize Russia’s claim to any occupied Ukrainian territory.
“We will not tolerate interference in sovereign decisions, including our defense or alliances. There must be no appeasement of the aggressor. Such attempts only embolden future aggression,” Hayovyshyn told the council.
At UN Security Council, US urges Russia to take Ukraine ceasefire deal
https://arab.news/ghgtn
At UN Security Council, US urges Russia to take Ukraine ceasefire deal
- Threatens to step back as mediator if Russia makes wrong choice
- Moscow responds that the ball is in Kyiv’s court now
UN experts concerned by treatment of Palestine Action-linked hunger strikers
- Eight prisoners awaiting trial for alleged offences connected to the group have taken part in the protest
LONDON: UN human rights experts have raised concerns about the treatment of prisoners linked to Palestine Action who have been on hunger strike while on remand, warning it may breach the UK’s international human rights obligations.
Eight prisoners awaiting trial for alleged offences connected to the group have taken part in the protest, reported The Guardian on Friday.
Among them are Qesser Zuhrah and Amu Gib, who were on hunger strike at HMP Bronzefield from Nov. 2 to Dec. 23, and Heba Muraisi, held at HMP New Hall. Others include Teuta Hoxha, Kamran Ahmed and Lewie Chiaramello, who has refused food on alternate days due to diabetes.
Zuhrah and Gib temporarily resumed eating this week because of deteriorating health but said they plan to resume the hunger strike next year, according to Prisoners for Palestine.
In a statement issued on Friday, UN special rapporteurs, including Gina Romero and Francesca Albanese, said the handling of the prisoners was alarming.
“Hunger strike is often a measure of last resort by people who believe that their rights to protest and effective remedy have been exhausted. The state’s duty of care toward hunger strikers is heightened, not diminished,” they said.
Three of the prisoners were in hospital at the same time on Sunday, with Ahmed admitted on three occasions since the hunger strike began.
The experts said: “Authorities must ensure timely access to emergency and hospital care when clinically indicated, refrain from actions that may amount to pressure or retaliation, and respect medical ethics.”
Prisoners for Palestine has alleged that prison staff initially denied ambulance access for Zuhrah during a medical emergency last week, with hospital treatment only provided after protesters gathered outside the prison.
“These reports raise serious questions about compliance with international human rights law and standards, including obligations to protect life and prevent cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment,” the experts said, adding: “Preventable deaths in custody are never acceptable. The state bears full responsibility for the lives and wellbeing of those it detains. Urgent action is required now.”
Families and supporters have called for a meeting with Justice Secretary David Lammy, while lawyers claim the Ministry of Justice has failed to follow its own policy on handling hunger strikes.
Government officials are understood to be concerned about the prisoners’ condition but cautious about setting a wider precedent.
