Remarks to the press by Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, following the UN Security Council meeting on Syria
V.Nebenzia: We are fully committed to the universal goal of achieving a world free of chemical weapons and very concerned about the continuing recurrence of acts of “chemical” terrorism in the Middle East.
The position of the Russian Federation is unfailing – we condemn the use of chemical weapons by anyone whatever the circumstances are. The perpetrators of such crimes must be held accountable.
For the past three years the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China have made numerous attempts to initiate an adequate response of the UN Security Council to such a threat. Unfortunately, they were not met with due understanding by our Western partners.
In March 2016, Russia proposed at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to elaborate a new International Convention on the Suppression of Acts of Chemical and Biological Terrorism. This was also met without any particular enthusiasm by some Western countries.
From the very beginning the Russian Federation has not only supported the idea of the creation of the JIM, but also co-sponsored UN Security Council Resolution 2235 and later supported the JIM’s extension in 2016 with the hope that it would correct its flaws and pay more attention to the chemical activities of non-state actors in the region.
It was our expectation that this Body would carry out its very important task in an independent, impartial and professional way being able to identify perpetrators and instigators of such crimes on the basis of robust and credible evidence.
Unfortunately, the JIM’s two years of work have clearly shown a whole series of fundamental deficiencies in its investigation. In particular: remote methods of work without ever visiting the crime scene; use of dubious evidence received from opposition groups as a foundation for its work; failure to make full use of the methods and means provided by the Chemical Weapons Convention.
The conclusions of the JIM’s Seventh report with regard to the investigation of a chemical incident in Khan Shaykhun resulted to be a nonsense contradicting the laws of physics and ballistics. It was full of gaps and inconsistencies. Russian experts found a great number of them, and their comprehensive analysis can be easily accessed by those who may wish to better understand the Russian position.
Despite an obvious failure the JIM dared to make attribution accusing the entire Syrian Arab Republic of having used chemical weapons. For this reason the need was clear to rectify the way the JIM has conducted so far its investigations.
In the interests of raising the efficiency of the JIM, we submitted to the UN Security Council a draft resolution on its extension and mandate's reinforcement by tailoring the JIM's activities to the highest standards of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Some Council members refused to support our draft and now bear all responsibility for terminating the JIM’s work. This just proves again that anti-Damascus fever is the only real priority for them and they have manipulated the JIM for their own purposes.
Q: Ambassador, are you still willing to compromise after this veto? You have vetoed the US draft and your draft did not get enough support…
V.Nebenzia: We are always willing to compromise and find a common ground but it should not only be our desire but the will of the whole membership of the UNSC. Despite accusations that we heard today in the Council, we didn’t see much willingness to compromise on the part of our partners.
Q: Do you see the possibility of the short extension tomorrow?
V.Nebenzia: We don’t know. Definitely not today. We heard something about it. We have to live through what we had today during the meeting and we will see what happens tomorrow.
Q: American Ambassador said that according to the vote today this one proves that Russia can not be trusted in political process in Syria…
V.Nebenzia: That’s what I said in the explanation of vote. In fact, they betrayed what they were trying to hide all the time. In fact, the whole thing was envisaged and invented to show that Russia could not and should not be trusted in the Syrian political process. And it is not coincidental, because political process in Syria is gaining momentum and Russia is very instrumental in it. So this is a very opportune moment to tell that Russia should not play a role here.
Q: Do you think that what just happened in the UNSC is going to be detrimental for the Geneva talks which start again soon?
V.Nebenzia: I don’t think so. Geneva talks is something separate which we are very much hopeful for. We wish good luck to Staffan de Mistura, UN Special Envoy for Syria. We are trying to be helpful there, too.
Q: Ambassador, can you help us understand your position – how come you accept the outcome of the investigation when it comes to ISIS attacks and you reject the outcome when it comes to the Syrian government?
V.Nebenzia: I was asked this question. It is not the issue of us accepting only those investigation outcomes that blame non-state actors (ISIS or somebody else) and refusing to accept those that blame the Syrian government. We have always been saying that our decisions will be made on the criteria of professionalism. But the way the report is made – I read it personally, I’m not a specialist, but I could notice so many deficiencies, flaws and gaps in that report that you cannot ignore them. But when specialists went to investigate and analyze it came out that the report is a joke, complete nonsense. We said it before, we said it on November 7th, we had a joint briefing of the MFA, Ministry of Defense & Ministry of Industry and Trade, explaining why technically it was impossible, why the Syrian air force plane couldn’t bomb Khan Shaykhun at that moment. Because it was on a completely different track where the bomb could not reach the city. That’s just one little thing. And the whole report is just permeated with all these flaws. Then we received an answer from High representative on disarmament affairs to questions we posed during UNSC meeting on November 7th and these were answers that were referring us to the same report on which we had questions. This is ridiculous.
Q: Are you critical of Mr. Mulet? Do you think he should stay or leave?
V.Nebenzia: That’s not for me to decide. We have not come to that yet. But in our view the credibility of the JIM has been seriously undermined.
Q: Ambassador when is the exact moment when JIM’s mandate expires?
V.Nebenzia: You mean day and hour?
Q: Yes.
V.Nebenzia: There was an argument about it – November 16th or 17th – I heard both, but I can’t tell you exactly. It really doesn’t matter even if it expires, because if there is a decision to renew it, then 1, 2, 3 or 4 days really won’t matter.
