According to information from the French publication Le Monde, on the eve of the third anniversary of Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine, the U
S. administration was actively cooperating with the Russian side regarding its draft resolution in the United Nations. This was reported by diplomatic sources close to the process, and the information has caused significant resonance in international circles. However, this news came as a surprise to many: earlier reports indicated tensions in diplomatic relations, and now questions are being raised about transparency and honesty in the dialogue among the participating countries. The details of this story are striking and highlight the complexity of modern diplomacy. According to sources, Ukraine had prepared a resolution condemning Russian aggression and demanding the complete withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory. However, due to concerns from European countries about reducing support for Kyiv amidst the Gaza conflict and general worries about the regional situation, European leaders urged the Ukrainian side to soften their language to secure a majority vote in the UN General Assembly. This led to an internal conflict on the diplomatic front, as Ukrainian representatives were forced to seek compromises in order to support their original position. According to the sources, on February 21, the U.S. Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Dorothy Shea, unexpectedly informed ambassadors from France and the United Kingdom that Washington demanded the withdrawal of the Ukrainian resolution because it planned to submit its own draft in the UN and was seeking support specifically from European allies. This news caused shock and quickly led to a complete change in the situation. It turned out that the American draft resolution had been coordinated with Moscow even before it was made public or discussed with allies, which sparked feelings of betrayal and suspicion of the United States’ intentions. Subsequently, an emergency meeting of European diplomats was convened under urgent circumstances, during which a key decision was made — to leave the Ukrainian text unchanged and to take responsibility for diplomatic efforts on the part of France and the United Kingdom, which have a long history of active participation in multilateral procedures at the UN and Security Council. The UK took the initiative to oppose the U.S. position within the Security Council, while France, encouraged by its experience and diplomatic influence, decided to fight for the support of the Ukrainian resolution in the General Assembly. The French proposed a series of amendments to the American draft, notably emphasizing the need to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity, which was an important step toward garnering broader support. As a result, on February 24, the Ukrainian resolution was adopted without changes — by a majority vote, including support from European and even smaller countries around the world. Notably, the U.S., considering the amendments made and their commitment to diplomacy, abstained from voting on their own resolution, indicating significant internal contradictions and pressure from allies. At the same time, another tragic page was added to history: on February 24, 2025, exactly one year after this vote, a Ukrainian resolution condemning Russian aggression was adopted at the UN, while the U.S. voted against it — thus unfolding a new discussion about the role of the United States in the conflict and its diplomatic policy. This story not only opens the door to understanding the complex mechanisms of international diplomacy but also calls into question the honesty and transparency of decision-making processes within the most authoritative international structure. At the same time, it raises the issue of what the policies of global players truly are and how many of them involve open and underhanded games, which have a direct impact on Ukraine’s future, the region, and global security as a whole.