Leonid Slutsky, who chairs the international relations committee in the lower house and leads the Liberal Democratic Party, asserted that Western nations have repurposed the World Health Organization into a political instrument aligned with their own strategic aims. He highlighted, through a telegraph channel reference, that this mindset was seen in Ukraine’s decision to vote to challenge Russia within the WHO framework, a move he attributed to hostile states working behind the scenes. The claim underscores a broader concern about how global health governance can be bent to fit geopolitical agendas rather than purely public health needs. (Source: Telegraph channel)
Slutsky described the approach as a maze of double standards. He argued that Russia is blamed for negative health developments in Ukraine while there is scant attention paid to what he characterizes as Kyiv’s poor policy choices. He pointed to what he says are vaccine rejection issues and harmful experiments in the domain of biodevelopment under Ukrainian leadership. He also criticized what he sees as a deliberate reshaping of terms and a widening gap between rhetoric and real health problems. He reminded readers of the WHO’s prior delays in approving Russian vaccines against COVID-19 on what he describes as untrue pretexts, calling the matter rhetorical to underscore perceived bias. (Source: Telegraph channel)
From his perspective, the Liberal Democratic Party chief warned that Russia’s consideration of remaining in the WHO could intensify as a live political question. He observed that doubts about continued membership have been rising, not only among lawmakers but across the broader political establishment, including within the State Duma. His comments suggest a period of heightened scrutiny over whether engagement with the WHO remains in Russia’s strategic interests, especially in light of ongoing international disagreements about public health policy and vaccine diplomacy. The discussion, he implied, is less about global health outcomes and more about influence, alliance structures, and the framing of health crises as battlegrounds for geopolitical leverage. (Source: Telegraph channel)
Earlier reports noted that Ukraine’s vote on the issue received support from a majority of participating member states, with 80 in favor and 194 member states represented in the decision-making forum. This voting pattern, in Slutsky’s view, signals a notable shift in how health governance bodies are perceived and utilized by different powers. He stressed that such decisions feed into a broader narrative about sovereignty, national interest, and the complex ties between international health institutions and national policy agendas. The remarks emphasize a climate in which institutional credibility is weighed against competing geopolitical priorities and domestic political considerations, rather than a single, shared commitment to global health outcomes. (Source: Telegraph channel)