Ben Norton Biden Admin Foreign Policy

Biden, Like Trump, Breaks International Law, Violating UN Neutrality By Blocking Countries

In violation of international law and its 1947 hosting agreement, the US government under both Biden and Trump has blocked foreign diplomats from the UN headquarters in New York, targeting Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and more.

By Benjamin Norton / Multipolarista

In a blatant violation of international law and its 1947 hosting agreement, the US government has blocked numerous countries from participating in events at the UN headquarters in New York City.

The Biden administration is banning Russian diplomats, while the Trump administration illegally prohibited top officials from Venezuela and Iran.

Reuters reported on September 2 that Russia has filed a formal complaint with the United Nations, after the US government has “been constantly refusing to grant entry visas” to Russian diplomats to participate in events at the UN headquarters, Moscow’s ambassador said.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his delegation have been denied entry to the United States, barring them from the UN.

This Joe Biden administration policy, which flagrantly violates international law, was likewise implemented by the Donald Trump administration.

In January 2020, Foreign Policy reported that Trump had banned Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif from addressing the UN Security Council in New York, after Washington assassinated top Iranian official Qasem Soleimani, in an illegal act of war.

Foreign Policy wrote, “The Iranian government was awaiting word on the visa Monday (January 6) when a Trump administration official phoned U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres to inform him that the United States would not allow Zarif into the country.”

The outlet noted that this US policy violates “the terms of a 1947 headquarters agreement requiring Washington to permit foreign officials into the country to conduct U.N. business.”

In April 2020, the US government similarly barred Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro from speaking at the United Nations.

A Justice Department spokesperson told CNN that Maduro would be “arrested immediately” if he stepped foot on US territory.

“Nicolás Maduro will be arrested if he is in the United States,” the spokesperson said, in remarks reported in the Spanish-language press. “The government of the United States does not recognize him as head of state. Executive immunity does not apply to him.”

The Justice Department spokesperson threateningly added that “Maduro would face a mandatory minimum sentencing of 50 years in prison and a maximum of life in prison.”

This policy also blatantly violated international law. The United Nations always recognized Maduro as the one and only legitimate president of Venezuela.

Moreover, even at the peak of the US-led coup attempt against Venezuela in 2019, more than two-thirds of UN member states – the vast majority of the international community – still recognized Maduro as Venezuela’s president, not US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó.

Foreign Policy magazine made it clear that this illegal US behavior is official, systematic government policy, in another report published in November 2019.

Titled “Trump Turns U.N. Visas, Travel Restrictions Into Foreign-Policy Cudgel,” the article noted, “If you’re deemed hostile to U.S. interests, you may face travel limitations, arbitrary visa denials, sudden airport checks, and other forms of harassment, diplomats say.”

Foreign Policy wrote:

The decision to withhold federal protection for a senior Syrian official is just one among a growing number of diplomatic slights experienced by delegates from a handful of countries with poor relations with the United States during their travels to New York City for United Nations meetings. It reflects the punitive nature of U.S. foreign policy under President Donald Trump, whose administration has sought myriad ways to sanction or penalize individuals and countries that are viewed as hostile to the United States, or that simply refuse to comply with U.S. demands. It reinforces the perception among some diplomats that the United States has contempt for the United Nations.

“Not exactly a high point in U.S. diplomacy,” said Larry Johnson, an American lawyer who previously served as the U.N. assistant secretary-general for legal affairs.

Johnson, an adjunct professor at Columbia University Law School, said it’s not the first time the United States has “resorted to delaying tactics and harassment” to keep unwanted foreigners out of the country. But he said Washington has acted under “weak or no legal grounds” in denying access to U.N. headquarters.

Representatives from the U.N. delegations of China, Cuba, Iran, Nicaragua, North Korea, Russia, and Syria say their diplomats and support staff are subjected to increasingly restrictive travel limitations, arbitrary denial of visas and driver’s licenses, additional airport security checks, and curtailed access to banking services needed to conduct their diplomatic work and pay their dues at the U.N., according to a report by a U.N. committee that monitors U.S. dealings with the U.N.’s 192 other states.

Those measures, they contend, violate the host country treaty, or Headquarters Agreement, signed by the United States in 1947. In many cases, the U.N.’s lawyers agree. In an Oct. 15 statement, the U.N. legal counsel told the committee that U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres is “concerned” by recent measures, including the rejection of a visa for a Russian national hired by the United Nations and new travel restrictions imposed on the Iranian delegation and foreign minister after Tehran refused to participate in talks with Washington. The statement said the U.N. was maintaining its long-standing position that the United States lacks legal authority to impose travel restrictions on states in retaliation for restrictions on U.S. diplomats serving in those countries. “There is no room for the application of measures based on reciprocity,” according to the statement.

The lengthy claims of diplomatic retaliation are included in a 64-page report of the U.N. host committee that details a range of matters that bear on U.S. relations with the diplomatic community in New York.

Benjamin Norton
Benjamin Norton

Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the founder and editor of Multipolarista, and is based in Latin America.

13 comments

  1. The headquarters of the United Nations should be located in a neutral, unaligned country. It should not be located in the United States. A declining and desperate hegemon.

    1. What country is truly neutral these days?….Look how eager formally neutral Sweden and Finland were to join NATO?

  2. The Empire of Lies recognizes no international law except it’s own. Which can easily be changed at the slightest whim to justify whatever crimes against humanity and the natural world takes it fancy.

    But the days are numbered for this bloated and corrupted Empire and it’s minion states. All the arrogance, ignorance, greed, and incompetence has reached critical mass and we witness now in real time the collapse of this vile monstrosity.

    Indeed it’s death throws have already started. The only real question of true importance at this time is, will it take all of us down with it.

    Until proven otherwise I believe that answer to be yes it will. What else would you expect from the national equivalent of a psychotic narcissist.

  3. I would predict that this kind of behavior is going to start to come back at US officials soon. Expect bellicose US politicians and diplomats to start being grabbed off streets and hustled away to face trials and lengthy sentences. Its about time.

  4. Catch 22 and Slaughterhouse Five were great anti-war novels portraying the insanity of WW2. Deer Hunter and Platoon were great anti-war movies portraying the insanity of the Vietnam war. Where is the great anti-war novel portraying the insanity of the 20 year US murder of Afghans?
    Until then, take a look at this hilarious satirical political / scifi dystopian story downloadable for free (until it gets censored for too much truthiness):

  5. Did I misread that Trump, at this point in time, has the power to keep foreign officials from getting US visas?

  6. I hadn’t heard about this before. One more bit of evidence that there is no significant difference between the Democrats and Republicans, and that rather than abiding by any “rules based international order”, the US is a rogue state.

  7. Democrat administrations have disregarded international law, at least since the Clinton administration of the 1990s. This is done with bipartisan support. And yes, the international community has reached the limits of their tolerance, so we have “interesting times ahead.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: