Any decision that needs to be made in the US Congress, the British Parliament, the UN or any other parliamentary institution requires answers to two questions: is there a legal way to do what you want, and is there a political weight to do so?. Sometimes political initiatives are so unrealistic that it makes no sense to instruct lawyers to look for legal ways to implement them.. Or vice versa, the legal procedure is so contrary to the initiative that it is not worth looking for political support for it..

However, each of these two situations does not address the idea of \u200b\u200bexcluding Russia or at least suspending its participation in the UN Security Council, Thomas Grant, a senior fellow at the Lauterpacht Center for International Law at the University of Cambridge, said during a discussion at the Atlantic Council.. He is confident that there is a legal procedure for doing so..

[see_also ids\u003d"

“The UN at least twice practically suspended the participation of participating countries. It was in 1956 when the USSR invaded Hungary. And her government was overthrown by force. The UN General Assembly prevented Hungary from representing itself for three years in a row. It also happened in 1974, when the UN tried to reason with South Africa to abandon apartheid.. South Africa refused for many years. Therefore, in 1974, the UN, for practical purposes, suspended the participation of the country. Both South Africa and Hungary remain members of the UN. But their participation was de facto temporarily suspended. This is the constitutional history of the UN organization,” Grent explained..

He noted that the UN Security Council has its own rules for conducting procedures. However, he pointed to the 9-member Security Council Credentials Committee appointed by the General Assembly. Grent emphasized that there is a protest procedure in the work of the Credentials Committee. The Security Council has never dealt with this procedure before.. Because no one has ever used it. However, a protest may be expressed by any member of the Council against any other. And if such a protest is nevertheless expressed, then the Security Council should appoint an appropriate procedure for the representative of the country to which this protest concerned. The right of veto does not apply in this case and only the support of the majority is required..

“If we look at the composition of the UN Security Council, there are 5 permanent members and 10 other members. Let's imagine that each of them is Russia's best friend, there are 10 North Koreas, Cuba and Venezuela. Then one could say that from a political point of view, the initiative to exclude Russia is a failure.. But today the Security Council does not lean so strongly towards Russia. Against. Depending on how you count, there are 9-10 friends of Ukraine there,” Grent emphasized..

[see_also ids\u003d"

He explained that he included countries in the club of "

“Such a political background illustrates that this cannot be considered something unthinkable.. Will it be easy to do? Of course not, that's a big step.. But we are not dealing with a slight or serious violation of international law.. No, this is an unprecedented attack against the fundamental principles of the UN,” the expert said, adding that since the founding of the UN, there have been cases in the world when conflicts flared up over territorial disputes..

However, no one attempted to erase an entire country from the map.. Only Saddam Hussein tried to do this when he ordered the Iraqi army to invade Kuwait. But that's why the whole world intervened to cancel his plans.. Today, Russia is also seeking to see Ukraine disappear from the map..