The ruling party in the Congress of the Argentine Nation in the face of the Russian Federation's invasion of Ukraine

The ruling party in the Congress of the Argentine Nation in the face of the Russian Federation's invasion of Ukraine

Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (CFK) is Vice President of the Argentine Nation and President of the Senate (2019/2023). She has been President of the Nation twice, for the periods 2008/2011 and 2011/2015. She has been a member of both houses of Congress as a senator or a national representative for several terms. She was a conventional constituent during the 1994 reform. In addition, her husband was President of the nation during 2003-2008, and her son is a national deputy. Of the last twenty years, she has governed sixteen. In other words, she is likely the person with the most experience in terms of high-level political leadership in the entire country. She is also one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful, of all Argentine politicians.

For this reason, it seems coherent to interpret that her decisions as the maximum leader of her political space today in government and the field of the presidency of the Senate are adopted knowing the normative plexus, the rules, the principles, and the values that regulate our public institutions, as well as the democratic spirit that sustains them. If she deviates from them, it is because she wants to, not for lack of knowledge or due to disparate interpretations. The reflection is not minor. Acting in an anti-democratic, arbitrary, and discriminatory way in a frontal manner denotes a hazardous level of institutional violence and intolerance, to the point that it poses a particular risk to its recipients.

On February 24, 2022 (F24), the Russian Federation invaded Ukraine, in an unprecedented event for contemporary European history, which had a record of more than seventy years of peace since the Schuman Declaration of 1950 and the Treaty of the European Community of Coal and Steel of the following year.

While there were suspicions, it is essential to understand that the invasion occurred amid the COVID-19 pandemic. In Argentina, the situation room of the Ministry of Health reported that day, F24, about 97 deaths and 10,298 infected in the last 24 hours; a total of 8,878,486 confirmed since the start of the pandemic, of which 123,960 were active and 8,628,654 had recovered; and the death of 125,872 people. Neither Ukraine nor Europe escaped contagion. Neither did Russia.

CFK's social networks were silent for four days. In the fifth, she referred to events from the past. Although she cited the principle of territorial integrity, she omitted to condemn the invasion, in line with countries like Cuba and Venezuela.

Her sympathy with Vladimir Putin is public knowledge, as is her foreign policy of alignment with Russia. The evidence is incontrovertible.

In 2008 her first government signed a strategic association, and in 2015 her second government elevated it to a "comprehensive" strategic association.

So far, as head of state, as a national legislator -in the past-, and as vice president of the Nation and President of the Senate -currently-, she has the right to promote close relations with the Russian Federation. You can disagree, but that's what the institutions are for, particularly Congress. The problem is blocking that same right to other political expressions, violating the institutionality.

Let's go by parts.

As President of the Nation, CFK enjoyed the powers recognized by Article 99, paragraphs 1, 7, 11 and concordant with the National Constitution. But as President of the Senate, the situation is very different.

The Congress of the Argentine Nation also has direct competencies and attributions in matters of foreign policy or linked to foreign policy (defence, security, integration, international trade, external financing, etc.) and from there derives its function of parliamentary diplomacy ( Article 75, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and concordant of the National Constitution).

The main difference between official and parliamentary diplomacy is that the first is vertical and univocal since the government recognizes a single leadership. In contrast, the second is horizontal and plural.

Beyond the principle of complementation of parliamentary diplomacy concerning official diplomacy, parliament, which is expressed through laws, declarations, communications, or resolutions of one of the chambers or the institution (in the case of both chambers for the Argentine bicameral system), the different blocks and inter-blocks; and even individual legislators may not only have nuances regarding official foreign policy but also directly contradict it.

Good practices indicate that the ideal is for the executive branch, led in the case of Argentina by the President of the Nation, and the legislative branch, always with plural representation, to be aligned. However, if these are not foreign policy cases of "State" but of "government", this principle yields the freedom of the political actors in Congress.

An example of "State" foreign policy is the Argentine ratification of its legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty over the Malvinas, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and insular spaces, as they are part of the national territory, as contemplated by the first transitory provision of the National Constitution. There it is clearly expressed that "The recovery of said territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respecting the way of life of its inhabitants, and by the principles of International Law, constitutes a permanent and inalienable objective of the Argentine people."

The Congress of the Argentine Nation as an institution, the different blocks and inter-blocks, and the national legislators considered individually must respect this foreign policy without exception. Also, the President of the Nation himself, the members of his cabinet and all public officials; judges, prosecutors, and public defenders; and, in general, all the country's public institutions.

The case of Ukraine is different, as is that of Venezuela, since the foreign policy of the ruling party does not necessarily constitute a "State" policy. Many times, what happens contrary to this is that the Positions promoted by those ruling parties violate, precisely, a valid foreign policy "State", that of the promotion and protection of human rights, as we will see below.

What happened inside the National Congress concerning Ukraine?

Martín Ezequiel Dinatale , a journalist specializing in foreign policy and parliamentary diplomacy, wrote a note in the newspaper El Cronista on March 3, 2022, in which he stated that "The Ukrainian embassy requested that both the Senate and Deputies issue a firm condemnation against the invasion of Russia. Furthermore, he expressed that "the strategic association that Cristina Kirchner forged with Putin for many years remains firm and a condemnation of Moscow would go against it."

According to the records of both chambers of the Argentine Congress, between February 24 and the date of this publication, about twenty bills from opposition legislators linked to the invasion of the Russian Federation to Ukraine were received in both the Lower House and the Senate, and none of the ruling party.

I repeat—forty legislative initiatives on Ukraine, none from the ruling party.

These projects express repudiation, rejection, concern, or outright condemnation of the invasion and use of violence by the Russian Federation on F24 and, later, before the annexation of Ukrainian territories; respect for the lukewarmness of the Argentine government in the face of the situation; and solidarity with the people of Ukraine. It also warns of the violation of human rights and the risk of human trafficking and exploitation due to the massive flight from Ukraine of young women and mothers with their young sons and daughters; the possible commission of war crimes is mentioned; the legal consequences of the aggression on the bilateral agreements between Argentina and Russia are consulted; and it is proposed to invite the President of Ukraine, Volodimir Zelenski, to address the Congress of the Argentine Nation by telematic means; among other initiatives.

Argentina's abstention from Guatemala's proposal in the 52nd General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS) framework in October 2022 was highly criticised. It was entitled "Continuous support for the end of Russian aggression in Ukraine".

One year after the invasion, none of the Foreign Relations and Worship Commissions of both chambers of the Congress of the Argentine Nation, whose presidencies are in the hands of the ruling party, addressed the issue seriously. Specifically, they avoided doing it, a conscious, planned and successfully executed omission.

The ruling party blocked the opposition's attempts to debate the issue, constituting an undemocratic, arbitrary, and discriminatory action, including a clear example of political intolerance.

However, the story is even more severe, unusual, and crazy.

Opposition figures raised this situation publicly, before the media and within the scope of these legislative committees but have yet to succeed.

In my case, I had the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the issue as deputy director of the International Centre for Parliamentary Studies, Research and Foresight of Escuela de Política, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales from the Facultad de Derecho | Universidad Austral , CIDEIPP, our think tank on parliamentary affairs.

On July 18, 2022, we organized a meeting between parliamentary leaders from Ukraine, Argentina, and other Latin American and Caribbean countries. Dr Oleksandr Merezhko, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations and Inter-Parliamentary Cooperation of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (Parliament) and his fellow parliamentarians Olga Sovgyrya, Mariia Ionova and Solomiia Bobrovska participated. On the Argentine side, Alfonso Santiago intervened for Universidad Austral; the ambassador Lila Roldán Vázquez de Moine and the former national deputy Cornelia Schmidt-Liermann for CARI; Senator Lucila Crexell and National Deputy Graciela Cama?o ; and Senator (mc) Pedro Del Piero for the Circle of Legislators of the Argentine Nation (CLNA).

Political leaders such as Federico Pinedo , former President pro tempore of the Senate, among many others, accompanied the debate, but no one from the ruling party, despite having been invited.

Subsequently, on October 1, 2022, I organized a particular class within the scope of the International Diploma in Parliamentary Diplomacy of the School of Government of Universidad Austral, Argentina , whose students are parliamentarians, civil servants, and legislative advisors from the region, with Professor Volodymyr Venher, from the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, and Ukrainian parliamentary leaders Maria Mezentseva and Mariia Ionova.

In both cases, I had the invaluable help of Igor Kogut , director of the USAID Program RADA: Next Generation , an institution supported by the Ukrainian parliament.

The Universidad Austral, for its part, organized many other academic events that brought together Argentine foreign policy experts, for example, to name just one, the Conservatory on "The Conflict in Ukraine".

It is proven that a university could organize these interparliamentary dialogues. It is logical to think that it is also possible to manage them among peers at the initiative of the ruling party in the Argentine National Congress. There was no will. I corrected myself because it was even worse: the ruling party decided to block the opposition in its attempt to debate the issue in Congress.

There is another antecedent, very little known. At the initiative of three opposition legislators in both chambers of the Argentine National Congress, on November 3 and 4, 2022, the first Annual Forum of Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA) post-pandemic was organized in the Lower House and, simultaneously, the 12th—Consultative Assembly of Parliamentarians on the International Criminal Court (ICC).

It was a first-level activity in which the Ukrainian legislator Galyna Mykhailiuk participated, among others, who requested the creation of an ad hoc international jurisdiction that is capable of investigating, prosecuting and, where appropriate, judging those individuals who may have perpetrated the crime of aggression by exercising effective command and control over the armed forces of the aggressor State or States.

Oleksandra Matviichuk , from the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize-winning NGO, and the wife of Vladimir Kara-Murza , a Russian deprived of his liberty by the Putin regime for his political ideas, were also present. Both received the so-called "2022 Defender of Democracy Awards" by PGA. The ruling party did not participate in this award ceremony because it disagreed. Those responsible for the ruling party's parliamentary diplomacy tried to prevent it from taking place, an absurd and dehumanized position.

Recently, on March 13, a group of Argentine deputies received a delegation of Ukrainian civil society leaders, but once again, they were all from the opposition, none from the ruling party. They met with Jorge Miguel Danylyszyn , President of the Ukrainian Association of Prosvita Culture; Oleksandra Drik , Ukrainian human rights expert and civil society activist based in Kyiv; Professor Olexiy Haran , Professor of Comparative Politics Kyiv National University (UKMA); Anna Liubyma , Director of the Department of International Cooperation of the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (UCCI) and Head of the Humanitarian Group of the Headquarters of International Assistance for Ukrainians (AIHU) and Reverend Dr Ihor Shaban , Head of the Commission for Interreligious Dialogue and Ecumenical Affairs of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

Now, what happened strictly in international organizations of parliamentary diplomacy?

The reader knows that parliaments and parliamentarians' diplomacy have their organizations, commonly called IPI ("International Parliamentary Institutions"). Among them, the most important and oldest is the Inter-parliamentary Union (UIP), created in 1889.

The IPU holds two assemblies a year, one in March and one in October, in which thousands of parliamentarians worldwide participate. The Congress of the Argentine Nation is a member of the IPU, so, traditionally, each time a new two-year legislative period begins, a permanent delegation is formed at the proposal of the ruling party and opposition authorities.

After the nominations were made by the different political blocks of the Senate, on March 11, 2022, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, in her capacity as President of the Senate, formalized by decree DPP-15/22 the designation as a member of the "Permanent Argentine Delegation before the World Inter-Parliamentary Union (UIP)" to three senators for the ruling party (Adolfo Rodríguez Saá, Anabel Fernández Sagasti and Silvia Sapag) and two for the opposition (Luis Naidenoff and Lucila Crexell).

By then, the invasion had already taken place. The ruling party decided to block the participation of the opposition in the 144th Assembly of the IPU despite previous and express requests to that effect with specific mention of the situation in Ukraine. Most of the world's parliaments, however, fairly and with common sense, treated the issue as a matter of urgency.

Originally three proposals were presented in IPU, one from Ukraine; another from Indonesia; and a third from New Zealand, which merged into a single text.

Put to the vote by the Assembly, the parliaments of the whole world adopted a resolution under the title: "Peaceful settlement of the war in Ukraine, respecting international law, the Charter of the United Nations and territorial integrity." It was March 23, 2022.

Specifically, the IPU Assembly "condemns the ongoing Russian use of force against Ukraine as a violation of Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations, including the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity recognized by all UN Member States" (point 2).

"Deplores the use of missiles and artillery by the Russian Federation targeting civilian objects and populations in violation of international humanitarian law (point 3); and "Calls for full compliance with the rules of international humanitarian law" (point 5).

The representatives of the opposition in the IPU could not vote in favour of adopting that resolution because the ruling party blocked their participation.

It should be clarified that the statutes of the IPU, like the regulations of all IPIs, contemplate that the members of the national parliamentary delegations can vote in a different and even opposite direction precisely because they recognize plurality, that is, the existence of officialism and opposition, a typical note of parliamentary diplomacy, as I said at the beginning of this note.

The opposition filed a note of complaint with the Presidency of the Senate. It reiterated its request that its representatives be authorized to participate in the second Assembly of the year, the 145th, held in October 2022.

However, the ruling party in the Senate once again blocked the participation of the opposition, but with a miscalculation. The presence of a deputy allowed the opposition to exercise their rights and act accordingly. For the second time, Ukraine was at the centre of the scene.

Chile first presented the emergency point to GRULAC, the Latin American and Caribbean geopolitical group, obtaining majority support, including a positive vote from the Argentine opposition. Taken to the Assembly, and despite competing with two other projects (one from Iraq and another from Pakistan on issues other than Ukraine), it was adopted by broad consensus.

The new resolution, voted in favour by the IPU Assembly on October 14, 2022, is entitled: "Condemnation of the invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent annexation of territories, in defence of the territorial integrity of all States".

In its operative part, the resolution "Reiterates its call for an immediate end to the Russian military occupation of sovereign Ukrainian territory, restoring its territorial integrity back to its internationally recognized borders, extending to its territorial waters, and consequently the rule of international law" (point 1).

"Condemns in the strongest terms the severe violations of human dignity and the flagrant human rights abuses perpetrated in the regions of Kyiv, Kharkiv, Sumy, Chernihiv and others (point 2).

"Also condemns the use of extrajudicial executions, sexual and gender-based violence, and inhuman or degrading treatment as a weapon of war, in open violation of the Geneva Conventions relating to the treatment of prisoners of war, the care and assistance of the wounded and sick, and the due protection of the civilian population" (point 3).

"Also supports the creation of courts with specific jurisdiction to investigate possible crimes perpetrated in wars of aggression and to hear cases of war crimes and human rights violations committed on Ukrainian territory" (point 6).

During the Assembly, this proposal also received the favourable vote of the representative of the Argentine delegation for the opposition.

What happened to the ruling party?

Cristina Fernández de Kirchner had a higher priority issue: the assassination attempt against her person, which occurred on the night of September 1, 2022. She ordered her representatives in the IPU to promote the approval of a declaration through which the world's parliaments would stand in solidarity with her and condemn the media as responsible for transmitting hate messages. But this did not happen. With difficulties, the ruling party took the issue to GRULAC, where it received lukewarm support, unlike the proposal on the situation in Ukraine, which, in addition to obtaining forceful approval in that instance, managed to prevail in the Assembly.

However, the official communication in Argentina placed titles that led to believe that CFK had obtained the support of the Assembly of the IPU, which is different.

The blockade of the opposition in the Senate did not go unpunished. The presidents of the opposition inter-block and each of the opposition blocks presented CFK with a scathing letter of complaint, reserving the right to go directly to the IPU for arbitrariness and violation of the guarantee of plurality.

This year it was the turn of the first IPU Assembly between March 11 and 15. This time the participation of an opposition member in the Senate was authorized.

The ruling party once again brought to the IPU as an initiative, under the format of an emergency point, a declaration of support for CFK and repudiation against "false news" without any consultation and not even prior communication to the representatives of the opposition, who were completely unaware of it. The same thing happened in the previous Assembly, which they learned about the same day the Assembly began.

Under a pompous title, the ruling party's proposal was for the IPU Assembly to approve a resolution on "The urgent need to combat violence against women in politics, particularly in light of the proliferation of hate speech, fake news and violent incidents".

In its operative part, it hoped that the IPU Assembly would express that it "Strongly condemns the assassination attempt against Ms Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, President of the Senate and Vice-President of Argentina, as well as similar acts of extreme violence, taking into account that such acts are part of a framework of violence against women in politics, and of misogyny and incitement, and calls for an emergency to be declared on this issue" (point 1).

And "calls for the defence of democracy, emphasizing the seriousness of acts of violence against women in politics, which erode the foundations of democracy and go against the values espoused by the IPU, which are linked to respect for diversity and the fight for equality, as well as to dialogue, peace and the rule of law" (point 6).

In the recitals of the proposal, the IPU intended to express itself -always using CFK as an example-: "Deeply concerned by the magnitude of violence against women in politics and parliament globally, as demonstrated by the IPU studies on this issue and by the testimonies of women political leaders around the world who have been targeted by psychological, economic, physical, and sexual and gender-based violence, both online and offline (recital 2);." Stressing that such violations of the human and political rights of women are among the main obstacles to women's participation in politics and to their total contribution to political processes, and have long-lasting and harmful effects on those affected and their families, on political institutions, on the democratic process on society in general (recital 3); and "Acknowledging also that violence against women in politics and parliament reinforces gender inequality, discrimination and negative stereotypes" (recital 4).

What happened?

In GRULAC, the ruling party came across another proposal for an emergency point, presented by the Chilean delegation and the opposition representatives of the Argentine delegation, but which also had the approval of the geopolitical group +12, made up of the parliaments of European countries and Canada.

The topic?

"Raising awareness and calling for action on the serious humanitarian crises affecting the peoples of Afghanistan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Ukraine, Yemen and other countries, and on the particular vulnerability of women and children".

Approximately 90% of the world's humanitarian needs are concentrated in 20 countries representing at most 13% of the world's population and 1.6% of the global GDP.

It is estimated that 340 million people this year require humanitarian assistance to survive; raising particular concern for women and girls exposed to sexual violence, particularly at the hands of combatants; stressing that rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, forced pregnancy, forced sterilization and all other forms of sexual violence of comparable severity constitute crimes against humanity.

Besides including the 20 countries where humanitarian crises are registered, the proposal considers those of greater severity. The earthquake that severely affected Türkiye and Syria was also included.

In the case of Ukraine, it is stated that according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as of February 2023, approximately 17.6 million people require urgent humanitarian assistance and about 8 million refugees are scattered throughout Europe, 90% of them are women and children; according to the International Organization for Migration, there are 5.3 million internally displaced persons.

Based on that and other arguments, it is resolved:

"Strongly condemns any attack on the lives, integrity and well-being of civilians, and calls upon parliaments and governments to take action against impunity for international crimes that cause humanitarian crises and persecution, in particular through support for the International Criminal Court , through national prosecution efforts and appropriate legal mechanisms for the punishment of aggression and other international crimes" (point 8).

"Deplores the practice of forced deportation, which is a crime under international criminal law, international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and the forced deportation of children in particular, and calls for urgent action by United Nations Member States to stop this practice and to return children to their families" (point 17).

"Calls upon all governments and parliaments to ensure that there are no obstacles, including under immunity provisions or procedural law, that prevent the award of compensation to victims of international crimes, either through their governments or directly" (point 19).

This emergency point project was approved in GRULAC and the 12+ and presented to the UIP Assembly as an initiative project of Argentina (opposition), Chile, Germany, the Netherlands and Ukraine, with the support of said geopolitical groups.

Despite this resounding support (we are talking about 24 member parliaments of GRULAC and 47 of +12), the ruling party insisted on its proposal.

The reading of many members of GRULAC and other geopolitical groups is that the ruling party in Argentina, despite losing the vote at the meeting of its geopolitical group, decided to go ahead and compete against the entire group.

The proposal from Latin America and Europe won with those votes plus the votes of other geopolitical groups and was adopted by the IPU Assembly on March 14, 2023.

Unfortunately, most parliaments that voted in favour of this proposal simultaneously voted against Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's proposal under the label "Argentina."

This would never have happened if the Senate's parliamentary diplomacy worked adequately.

Among other remarks, the general theme of the 146th Assembly was "Promoting Peaceful Coexistence and Inclusive Societies: Fighting Intolerance". Moreover, as a central issue chosen by the IPU for this Assembly, the participating parliamentarians were invited to exchange points of view and promote concrete actions in this regard.

CFK could have been better advised. Instead of the point of urgency, which generated rejections from parliaments in the region and around the world, it would have been more intelligent to participate in the debate on the central theme of the Assembly, promoting the inclusion of the attempted assassination, which was not done.

The Assembly approved the Manama Declaration on "Promotion of peaceful coexistence and inclusive societies: the fight against intolerance". Of course, it says nothing about CFK because no one bothered to request its inclusion, or at least to try.

As a result, this is a costly leading case for Argentine parliamentary diplomacy.

The ruling party has been acting undemocratic, arbitrary, and discriminatory manner against opposition representatives before the Inter-Parliamentary Union (UIP) and its collaborators, constituting institutional violence and a clear case of political intolerance.

At the same time, the ruling party denounces before the IPU attacks against CFK, its highest leader, responsible for violating the rights of opposition legislators. It is not a political minority, not even a person with limitations. In addition to governing the country for 16 years, I reiterate that she is Argentina's most powerful politician.

Unfortunately, this is the story of unusual and crazy behaviour.

The main culprits are the officials in charge of official parliamentary diplomacy, whose acts affect not only the interests of their political leader but also the image and prestige of the Argentine Republic.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued this Friday, March 18, just three days after the end of the 146th Assembly of the UIP, an arrest warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin for alleged war crimes in Ukraine, consisting of the deportation of Ukrainian children.

Despite discrimination and constant obstruction by the ruling party, this solemn fact had been warned in the IPU resolutions supported and promoted by the IPU delegation of Argentina members representing the opposition in the Senate.

The underlying problem is that the ruling party is violating Argentina's foreign policy on the promotion and protection of human rights, an actual "State" policy that, as such, should be respected by all blocs, mainly including those who govern us.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了