West vs the Rest
Today’s UNGA vote, 123 for, 3 against, 52 abstentions, is a clean ledger of where the world stands. The resolution declares the transatlantic slave trade “the gravest crime against humanity.” Three countries voted against: the United States, Israel, and Argentina. The UK and all 27 EU members abstained.
The 52 abstentions are the more revealing column. The EU’s stated objection was legal: calling this the “gravest” crime implies a hierarchy among atrocity crimes, which has no basis in international law. That’s a defensible position. It’s also a convenient one for countries that ran the trade.
The US was blunter; its representative objected to the “cynical usage of historical wrongs as a leverage point to reallocate modern resources.” At least that’s honest about what reparations actually means in practice.
The UN is essentially asking whether countries whether they were colonised or not?
The 123 is the story. This isn’t Russia and China championing the Global South; it’s Africa, the Caribbean, and most of Asia doing it themselves. This marks the first floor vote at the UN specifically on transatlantic slavery as a crime, and a call for reparations.
The resolution is non-binding, so nothing material changes today. But the vote is a data point: on a question of historical accountability, the West is either against or abstaining, and everyone else is not.
That’s the fault line. West vs the Rest; and the Rest has the numbers. Gaza, Russia, Iran: all proxies for the same fracture. Russia ran an empire, but its Soviet collapse was so total it no longer reads as imperial. China likewise. So both get to stand on the other side of the line.
And underneath the EU’s legal objection, the “hierarchy of crimes” argument, is something unspoken: the Holocaust has long held the position of singular atrocity in Western moral architecture. This resolution is, implicitly, a challenge to that. The Rest is saying: your crime towards us was graver, or at least as grave. Europe couldn’t vote yes without conceding the point.
one can understand that all ‘white’ nations either voted no or have abstained.
balkan states? but why? they were colonised by turks!!
however, fuji, cambodia, joining them is strange.
and eastern european countries, baltic states who cry about being colonised by russians are also abstaining. strange.
or does this only w r t african colonisation?
The Balkans are EU member states; they voted with the bloc. The Baltic states too.
Fiji and Cambodia are worth watching; small states often abstain to avoid friction with aid donors. It’s less ideology than dependency.
The resolution was always going to map onto the African colonial experience first; the broader “were you colonised” frame is a paradigm.
The exception that proves the rule are Russia’s European allies (staunch Orthodox countries): Serbia and Belarus both voted yes, surrounded by European abstentions.
Neither is on any realistic EU integration track; Serbia’s accession is stalled, Belarus is frozen out entirely.
Serbia (not in EU/NATO) is an exception in the Balkans.
Sorry, brain freeze. I see you already mentioned that in your comment.
that’s fine..
Little Russia. Interesting Bulgaria had deep affinities to Russia but has become EUcised
Conjecture but could the Balkans have abstained because the Slavs see their own enslavement throughout history right up to the end of the Ottoman Empire as one of the gravest crimes too and may be they perceive this to undermine their own suffering?
Victimhood is a competitive sport these days after all.
Israel’s vote is unsurprising, given the framing (language) of the statement. Clearly, they’d consider the Holocaust as the “gravest” crime against humanity. If the statement said “grave crime against humanity”, they probably would have voted in favor.
Also, under any other previous administration, we’d probably have seen the US also voting in favor of such a resolution.
I can understand abstentions from EU/NATO countries. They were probably arm-twisted by the US on this. I can’t understand abstentions from Bosnia, Cambodia, and Oman.
yes Biden would have at least abstained
EU weren’t armtwisted by the US; European nations were conducted the trans-Atlantic slave trade..
Bosnia, Albania are satellites
I didn’t see Oman but then it had a slave trading history of its own
The US is invoking the non-retroactivity of international law as a principle, which there is precedent for among the EU countries as well. Of course, exceptions will be made for special interest groups.
US seems very hostile right now now to such things
USA has paid a severe price for this atrocious period in humanity! Remember the American Civil War? Abe Lincoln’s proclamation?
How far back did they trace to call this as the gravest ? Definitely, in top 5 or 10 for sure but gravest ? Really ?
Did they count Mongol invasions ? Islamic invasions of India ? Or even the “Aryan Invasion” ?
I do understand that the African Americans were back stabbed on the land grant promise after Lincoln was assassinated and their lives could’ve been better.
Did Brazil pay such a price ?