Are we facing a new world order?

It has been three years since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine began, and there is still no light at the end of the tunnel. The change in the US presidency has caused a 180-degree turn; one only has to look at the direction of the votes that took place yesterday Monday at the United Nations ( UN ), where our northern neighbor voted against the Ukraine resolution, siding with Russia and dictatorships such as North Korea, Nicaragua, Belarus, and Hungary and openly displaying its support for Vladimir Putin .

What has attracted attention, however, is the setback suffered by the White House in this new position regarding the war in Ukraine, which international media describe as “a resounding defeat” at the United Nations, after the General Assembly approved two resolutions that did not satisfy US diplomacy, which ended up voting against the first and abstaining on the second.

According to the EFE news agency, Monday's session was seen as a "thermometer" to measure the support for the new position of the Trump administration - closer to Russia and seeking to negotiate peace in Ukraine without even taking Kiev into account - which is openly opposed on this occasion to its former European allies.

The confrontation has been so open that in the moments before the vote, the acting representative of the United States, Dorothy Shea , went so far as to ask from the rostrum that Ukraine withdraw its resolution - co-sponsored by more than 50 countries, including almost all of those in the European Union - "in favor of a strong declaration that commits us to ending the war," she said.

The United States had submitted a very brief resolution that spoke of a generic “conflict between Russia and Ukraine” and called for urgent peace negotiations, without condemning Russia in any way, but European countries introduced three amendments at the last minute that were approved by a majority and that completely distorted the American resolution.

These three amendments included a reference to the “large-scale invasion of Ukraine” by Russian forces, called for “a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations” and demanded respect for “the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.”

When the amendments were adopted, the Ukrainian delegation was enthusiastically pleased to hear the applause. In contrast, the cameras showed the Russian and American delegations, both clearly bewildered by the turn of events.

The new meaning introduced by the three amendments was such that the United States ended up abstaining from its own resolution, approved by 93 votes in favor, 8 against and 73 abstentions.

The Ukrainian resolution achieved similar figures, as it basically reflected the same ideas.

However, the vote cannot hide one fact, and that is that diplomatic support for Ukraine's demands for a return to the pre-war status quo - that is, full Russian withdrawal and accountability - no longer garners the same overwhelming support it has achieved on previous occasions in this very General Assembly.

Thus, the votes held in 2022 and 2023 in this same Assembly achieved resounding support for Ukraine from 141 countries (of the 193 that make up the UN), at a time when the United States and the European Union were going hand in hand in their unwavering support for Ukraine.

Diplomatic sources told EFE that the new stance of the Trump administration was expected to drag many countries in the ' global south ' into more lukewarm positions with Ukraine, which is joined by the feeling in much of Africa and Asia that there is a ' double standard ' when it comes to Ukraine or Gaza .

In Monday's vote, powers such as China and India, and countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan chose to abstain, with several of them stating in the chamber that it is necessary to move forward in negotiations to end the war in order to move beyond the mere repetition of rhetorical formulas. In addition, Hungary broke European unity and voted against Ukraine.

Yesterday afternoon, the United States was to reintroduce its resolution (without amendments) to the Security Council at another session dedicated to Ukraine. The fate of this resolution could be very different, since it needs nine votes in favor (out of 15) and that no country with the right to veto uses it against the United States.

Will France or the United Kingdom, a traditional diplomatic ally of the United States, use their right of veto? Will they allow themselves to make Donald Trump uncomfortable?

The truth is that, as has been said, in just one week, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin have put the balance of power on the chessboard of international politics in check.

It all began on February 12 with a call in which the two leaders pledged to restore bilateral relations and seek a solution to the war in Ukraine three years after the Russian invasion.

Then came the Munich Security Conference, where Europe and the United States confirmed their differences over the Ukrainian conflict and other international issues.

This preceded the image that went around the world: the foreign ministers of Washington and Moscow met in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, on Tuesday in the first meeting between the two powers since the invasion of Ukraine.

The result has been a diplomatic earthquake: Europe and Ukraine remain voiceless in negotiations that aim to determine their future, Trump distances himself from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky , whom he blames for the war and calls a “ dictator ,” and the official Russian narrative declares victory.

Are we facing a new global order?

With information from the media

X: @salvadorcosio1 | Email: Opinió[email protected]