Т-72 на АРМ. Фото: Википедија

It is extremely irresponsible to “sell” a disguised Russian position that Ukraine has no right to self-defence under the guise of “humanitarian concern for the Ukrainian”. This is exactly the political position of “Levica”, which is, in fact, a spin, because it not only takes away the right to self-defence, thereby endangering a number of other human rights, but also is too similar to Moscow’s position on the conditions for ending the war caused by their “special military operation”, writes Truthmeter.mk.

Under the syndicating agreement between Truthmeter.mk and Meta.mk, we republish the text below:

 

Author: Teofil Blaževski

 

“Levica” communicated to the public an opinion about the RNM’s donation of a part of the T-72 tanks to Ukraine, and part of the opinion is recognized as a spin:

Spin: The Ministry of Defense has confirmed the information that the pictures and videos showing that about 10 T-72 tanks are being sent to Ukraine are real. The tanks that have been sent are part of the limited tank corps of the ARM, which counts only about 30 tanks. This comes after a series of previous donations of military equipment from the ARM’s already limited arsenal….

…From a humanitarian point of view, such shipments will only prolong the agony of the ordinary Ukrainian, without changing the outcome of the special military operation.

[Source: Levica – announcement/web – date: 29.07.2022]

Counterspin: The parliamentary political party “Levica” expressed its political position in public regarding the RNM’s donation of an unknown number of tanks (at least 10) to Ukraine. Part of the announcement is recognized as twisted truth, i.e. spin, which is skillfully disguised behind the phrase “humanitarian aspect”.

In the announcement, “Levica” states four reasons why they believe that the donation of T-72 b tanks, part of the Army’s only tank battalion (ARM) is a wrong step, and in the penultimate justification, it is stated that “such shipments will only prolong the agony of the ordinary Ukrainian, without changing the outcome of the special military operation.” In other words, don’t send weapons to the people, they will suffer more.

Even from an ethical, ecclesiastical and logical point of view, this moralizing attitude is dubious and untrue. Such an attitude in free translation would mean – you give him love, he beats you, which is close to the Christian teaching about “turning the other cheek”, which, if we look at it from the perspective of principled respect for the church itself, is derogated to the maximum. Because, from the largest Orthodox Church in the world – the Russian one, not respecting the love between people and not doing evil to the other, and openly supporting the army and its actions in Ukraine do not respect the love of God, killing and war are encouraged.

 

However, from the point of view of fundamental human rights, this attitude of “Levica” is in conflict, with them, and is, therefore, a distortion of the truth. Because not sending weapons would mean not having the means of self-defence, which would lead to the subjugation of the aggressor who entered a foreign country and foreign territory with military force and power, which is contrary to international law. In addition, in reality, as it is today in Ukraine, that would mean in practice a series of people’s rights threatened. First, the right to life, freedom and security (Article 3 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights), then the right not to be a slave or be subjugated (Article 4 of the declaration), and the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 5 of the declaration). Finally, freedom of movement is also threatened (Article 13 of the declaration), etc.

But more importantly, this political attitude of “Levica” coincides too much with the attitude of official Moscow about the prospects for ending the war in Ukraine. Several such statements have been recorded from March until today, and here we will only highlight the last one by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Sergey Lavrov, who a month ago during his visit to Turkmenistan said:

The more weapons the West sends to Ukraine, the longer the conflict will last.

Simplified and translated, this coincides too much with the attitude of “Levica” and its concern for the ordinary Ukrainian. In other words, we should not send weapons as a donation in order for the Ukrainians to have means for their self-defence, so that it ends their suffering (by agreeing to be limited in their rights, from the right of movement to the right to life).

The other arguments of “Levica” are logical and amenable to public debate – whether the Government and the Ministry of Defense are weakening Macedonia’s defence position, whether this threatens the energy supply of the country due to the application of Russian sanctions, whether the black market of arms is encouraged, etc. Here, every responsible stakeholder would have something to say about the “third generation tanks” as the Ministry of Defense says, but also look at the real aspects and examples from the battlefield in Ukraine itself, where it is seen that modern anti-tank weapons of the type of American and British light anti-tank systems, this type of tanks, the very same and even more advanced T-84, are an easy target for destruction. This is an economic ratio of cost to cost (main battle tank vs. light anti-tank system), which is incomparable in favor of the opinion that the latter would be more effective for the needs of the country’s defence space.

When we mention fundamental rights, of course, we also have in mind Article 19 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, about the right of every individual to have an opinion and publicly express that opinion, including the right of the media to do so, without interference and to give and receive information regardless of borders.

However, this right also carries responsibility for the expressed opinion. Therefore, under the guise of humanitarian concern for the Ukrainians, it is extremely irresponsible to “sell” a disguised Russian position that Ukraine has no right to self-defence and that the war will end when official Kyiv capitulates.