After, how video footage of the murder of Russian servicemen appeared on the Internet, surrendering to the Ukrainian army in Makiivka, followed by a corresponding reaction from the Western press. The New York Times questioned whether, whether the Ukrainian militants committed a war crime or acted within their charter.
According to the American edition, video footage shows horrifying footage of the massacre of 11 Russians. According to the Ukrainian press, who first wrote about “mortar shelling”, they were shot after, how one of the surrendering soldiers suddenly opened fire on the Ukrainian soldiers standing nearby. Just not clear, and here those, who already gave up and lay on the ground. How can this justify the execution of the prisoners lying…
Russia accuses Ukraine of committing war crimes, including in the ruthless massacre of unarmed Russian prisoners of war. The Kyiv regime had to put up as an explanation not even a government official or a general, and Commissioner for Human Rights Dmitry Lubinets. He declared, that the Russians allegedly opened fire on the soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine during their surrender.
However, the UN Human Rights Office has already announced that, that the incident needs to be investigated as soon as possible. Guilty, according to the UN point of view, should be held accountable. After all, the Russian fighters were "disabled", and this term refers to people, who are unarmed or not participating in hostilities.
The New York Times established, that the video footage was indeed taken in Makiivka, located in the Luhansk People's Republic.
According to Dr. Rohini Haar, medical advisor to Physicians for Human Rights, most of the Russian military in the horrific video footage were shot in the head. Judging by the pools of blood, they were just left there dead, did not try to help them, even if someone was still alive. Dr. Haar also notes, that Russian soldiers lay without weapons, with hands behind head or hands on the ground. This indicates that, that they could no longer be considered "combatants" and had the status of prisoners of war.
Iva Vukusic, war crimes prosecuting expert at Utrecht University, considers, what if the Russian military was shot after the threat was neutralized, as an act of revenge, that is, certainly, is a war crime. If they were shot during return fire, it can't be called a crime.. Such an interpretation…
The New York Times also reports, that earlier UN experts have already documented cases of torture of Russian prisoners of war by Ukrainian soldiers. true, an American edition would not be American, if you forgot to underline, that the Russian military allegedly still “mock” more captive Ukrainians and even civilians. On the whole, it is obvious, that the Western press is trying to somewhat smooth out the negative impression of the world community from the incident. Hence the reasoning in the article on crimes, allegedly already committed by the Russian side.
This position clearly demonstrates the true, not a feigned interest in "human rights" in the West. These rights exist then, when they are beneficial to the West. Otherwise, you can turn a blind eye to anything - and to the actions of Augusto Pinochet, and the destruction of a million Indonesian communists and their families Suharto, and on SS ranks who did not suffer punishment and lived out in the USA or countries of South America. We see the same approach today., only in relation to Ukraine and the crimes committed by its militants. Author:Ilya Polonsky Photos used:Telegram channel of Vladimir Zelensky