PRESS RELEASE
Guterres pressed to condemn rapporteur after she used her UN platform to argue against defending a country under invasion, on issue outside her remit
GENEVA, September 22, 2026 — UN Watch today called on United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres to publicly condemn Francesca Albanese after Russian propaganda began amplifying the UN special rapporteur’s campaign against military assistance to Ukraine, a matter entirely outside her mandate.
In a formal letter to Guterres, UN Watch said Albanese violated the Human Rights Council’s Code of Conduct by using the authority of her UN office to promote personal political views on NATO, European security, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Speaking on September 19 at the Festival di Open in Parma, Italy, Albanese acknowledged that Russia had invaded Ukraine, but immediately added that there were “a number of reasons that led to that war.” She alleged that a “political calculation” originating within U.S.-led NATO favors “a weak Europe” and is responsible for keeping the war’s “front” open.
Albanese called for an end to weapons deliveries to Ukraine, while offering no alternative by which the country could defend itself or end Russia’s invasion. “I don’t have the solution because I’m not an expert,” she acknowledged.
Her remarks were swiftly promoted by Russia Direct, a Russian propaganda account, which highlighted her UN title while broadcasting her demand: “We should stop sending weapons to Ukraine.”
UN Watch said the episode demonstrates the foreseeable damage caused when a UN mandate-holder lends the organization’s authority to narratives that serve the aggressor.
“Russian propaganda immediately seized on Albanese’s words and her UN title to validate Moscow’s narrative,” said UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer. “Having acknowledged Russia’s aggression, she insinuated that there were ‘reasons’ for it and then sought to deprive its victim of the means to defend itself.”
UN Watch cited Article 3(d) of the Code of Conduct, which requires mandate-holders to “focus exclusively on the implementation of their mandate”; Article 7, which requires “strict observance” of the mandate and prohibits recommendations exceeding it; and Article 12, which requires that personal political opinions not prejudice the mission and that experts exercise “restraint, moderation and discretion.”
UN RAPPORTEUR: “WE NEED TO STOP SENDING WEAPONS TO UKRAINE”
Russia invaded Ukraine, but “there are a number of reasons that led to that war…”
She accuses “NATO led by the United States” of “a political calculation to have a weak Europe. . .That’s why that front remains open.” pic.twitter.com/HH6J1T3Qek— UN Watch (@UNWatch) September 22, 2026
Selective Silence on Iran
The watchdog also accused Albanese of applying mandate limits selectively. On January 12, when challenged to condemn the Iranian regime’s slaughter of protesters, she insisted that Iran fell outside her mandate. Yet she has repeatedly commented on Iran when doing so allowed her to condemn the United States or Israel. UN Watch documented those interventions in a review of her record.
“She invokes the boundaries of her mandate to avoid condemning a brutal dictatorship, then disregards those same boundaries to condemn the democracies helping Ukraine resist another,” Neuer said. “This is not principled respect for her mandate. It is the selective misuse of a UN office to advance her personal political agenda.”
Guterres recently acknowledged that “many rapporteurs are totally out of control.” UN Watch said Albanese exemplifies the problem, while both the Human Rights Council and the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures have repeatedly refused to hold her accountable.
“What is at stake is larger than one rogue mandate-holder,” Neuer said. “The credibility of the United Nations now depends on whether its leadership will defend the Charter and enforce its own rules, or allow the UN’s name to be used with impunity to excuse aggressors and abandon their victims.”
###
About UN Watch: UN Watch is a Geneva-based non-governmental organization accredited in special consultative status to the United Nations Economic and Social Council. It monitors the performance of the United Nations according to the principles of its Charter and promotes human rights worldwide.
BREAKING: U.N. Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, Hamas’ de facto spokesman, calls for weapons embargo against Ukraine.
Shame on Amnesty for honoring her as 2026 keynote speaker. Shame on Reuters, Politico & NYT for glorifying her.
And shame on @antonioguterres for refusing to act. https://t.co/SgA22zgJY1
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) September 21, 2026
Transcript:
Francesca Albanese: War is declared — an act of aggression there has been an act of aggression; there’s no doubt about it. Russia has invaded Ukraine. Now, there are a number of reasons that led to that war — but war is still war. I think there’s a political calculation at play and that it doesn’t no, it doesn’t necessarily originate in Europe, but rather within NATO and NATO led by the United States.
I cynically believe that it’s convenient to have a weak Europe, and that’s why that front remains open. In other words, I’m deeply steeped in the legal tradition that, in this country, led to the Constitution we have — one that rejects war as a means of resolving disputes and in international relations.
So I agree with those who think we need to stop sending weapons to Ukraine. And — and that doesn’t mean… I don’t have the solution because I’m not an expert and I’m not going to speculate, but I’m convinced that the situation in Ukraine is almost being used as a pretext it’s being exploited to justify that horrible narrative that we’re already at war, and that it’s a hybrid war.
Transcript:
Enrico Mentana: No, you help Kyiv, because if you stop helping Kyiv, Ukraine capitulates, Russia wins the war, and so you create a precedent that says whoever is stronger can wage war and the other side has to stay silent.
Francesca Albanese: Unfortunately, that precedent already existed. Unfortunately, that precedent already existed, and the United States created it through its wars over the past 30 years.
But no, I repeat, I don’t believe that continuing to provide weapons is actually helping, because you can’t win a war like this militarily. I mean, what is the outcome of continuing to provide weapons? That at some point Russia will retreat?
Enrico Mentana: Well, I mean, someone recalled how weapons were given to Italian partisans to fight the invader. And without the weapons that were parachuted in by the Allies, the resistance would not have taken place and would not have won.
Francesca Albanese: So perhaps we could give weapons to the Palestinians.
Enrico Mentana: What?
Francesca Albanese: Should we give weapons to the Palestinians? I’m saying that provocatively, because I don’t think that, even in the case of Palestine, victory can be achieved through force.
Enrico Mentana: By giving weapons to the Palestinians, you mean… who, for example? Hamas? What Palestinian army is there? You said earlier that there isn’t one in the West Bank.
Francesca Albanese: They don’t have one.
Enrico Mentana: Exactly. So, the issue there is stopping someone’s aggression. But here there is a war between two sovereign states represented at the UN, Russia and Ukraine.
I mean, I’m not saying this to challenge you; I’m just trying to understand.
Francesca Albanese: But that doesn’t mean abandoning Ukraine.
Enrico Mentana: But if you don’t help Ukraine, Ukraine loses. As the former U.S. Secretary of State said: if Russia stops fighting, the war ends; if Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. This is a fact.
Francesca Albanese: I repeat what I said at the beginning. I’m giving you my opinion, and I don’t believe that weapons are being given to Ukraine simply to help it win the war against Russia.
It seems to me that there is also the destabilization of Europe through this war. It’s not just that. At least, that’s the impression I’ve formed from the outside.
