The USA is not against the Nazism revival. And Ukraine supports it...

The general assembly of the United Nations adopted the resolution against the Nazism glorification with overwhelming majority. It wasn't supported only by the USA and close allies of this country. The critics of the Americans note that, voting against the resolution, they de jure supported the policy of the authorities of a number of the states of Eastern Europe, in particular the countries of the Baltic States which have actually rehabilitated those who in days of the Second World War was on the party of Hitlerite Germany. Washington very clumsily objects such conclusion, but doesn't hide that the freedom of speech more disturbs America than expression of extreme views, including the Nazi.

The resolution is called: “Nazism glorification: inadmissibility of certain types of practice which promote the escalation of modern forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and the related intolerance”.

It was offered on consideration of the Third United Nations committee prosecuting the social and humanitarian issues and also culture questions, Russia. The delegations of 42 more members of the United Nations worked over the document together with the Russian Federation.

The concern of the Russian Federation is expressed in the resolution by growth of the numerous neo-Nazi and extremist organizations, movements and groups which adhere to ideology of fascism and a racial superiority. On Monday the resolution was exposed on vote.

A third of the states participating in vote consider that they oblige nothing to future generations. 120 members of the United Nations expressed for the resolution, 57 refrained and three voted against. Among refrained all European Union countries which are familiar with horrors of Nazism not by hearsay.

Special bewilderment, told in the statement of a permanent representative of the Russian Federation at the United Nations, is expressed by the position of Ukraine which hasn't supported the resolution against glorification of Nazism too. The position of EU was explained by the representative of Cyprus, now presiding over a rotational basis in the European Union. He complained on resolution imperfection. Europe considers that too big emphasis is laid on Nazism in it and all other forms of intolerance (to racism, xenophobia, racial discrimination etc.) are given not enough attention and places.

Canada and the Marshall Islands voted also against the resolution. It is no wonder because just in Canada the Congress of the Ukrainians of Canada actively acts which consists of Adolf Hitler's remaining servants and their aggressive descendants, supporting the revival of neo-Nazism and Bandera rabble in Ukraine in every possible way including financially. And the Marshall Islands in general are the exemplary partner of the USA as always vote in the United Nations, as they.

Recently the Canadian authorities sometimes defend the point of view on important international questions different from the American one. Nevertheless Canada goes along with the foreign policy of the USA. The same, only in much bigger measure, it is possible to say about the Marshall Islands. This tiny island state in the southern part of the Pacific Ocean is associated with the USA and, naturally, never defends the point of view which is not coinciding with that which Washington supports.

As to the United States, the freedom of speech appeared more important for them than inadmissibility of Nazism glorification. The vote “against” was explained to journalists by the representative of the United States at the United Nations Susan Rice whom many, by the way, designate in Secretaries of State instead of the leaving Hillary Clinton.

According to her, the USA support many provisions of the resolution and extremely negatively treats any attempts of revival of Nazi ideology. Washington completely supports efforts of the United Nations on condemnation of a Holocaust and all forms of expression of racist views. However in the resolution text, according to the American delegation, there is nothing about differentiation between expression of views and actions on their implementation. The White House opposes all attempts of restriction of a freedom of speech. America is for possibility to express the views, whatever shocking and disgusting they were. That is, de facto Washington doesn't object to Nazism promotion. We came...