Informal comments to the media by H.E. Mr. Vitaly I. Churkin, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations on situation in Ukraine
Comments to the media by H.E. Mr. Vitaly I. Churkin, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations on the situation in Ukraine.
Full transcript:
V.Churkin: Before Mr. Šimonović left for Ukraine last time, he asked for a meeting with me, and we did meet and I asked him just one thing - to tell the truth about the events in Odessa on May 2. Unfortunately, the report they have produced fell short of telling the truth. It creates the impression that the people who died in Odessa torched themselves in that building to which they had to escape being pursued by a mob, by armed gangs, which clearly have been preparing for this kind of a massacre. As you know, our Foreign Minister sent a letter yesterday to the Secretary-General of the United Nations asking him to conduct an impartial investigation. There is good reason for that also because the use of chemicals is involved in Odessa and that has to be investigated as well and now we do have a good practice of cooperation between the United Nations and OPCW in investigating such matters. So, to us it is completely logical that the Secretary-General should take up the initiative and make sure that there is a proper investigation.
Today in consultations Mr.Šimonović responded telling us that there are four investigations going on in Ukraine, that the Council of Europe is involved in some form - it does sound very much like something which is aimed at creating chaos rather than a proper investigation which could lead to definitive results. Our initiative continues to be on the table and we hope that the Secretary-General is going to look constructively into this matter. Of course in consultations with authorities in Kiev and with others in Ukraine that have to be involved.
The second thing I’d like to mention is that we did criticize quite extensively the report which was produced by the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights. We believe that it basically repeats the Kiev narrative of events and does not reflect many aspects of the situation, which are of concern to the people in Eastern Ukraine and to all those in Ukraine, who want to have a normal political process and want to have a normal life in that country. We drew attention to the fate of journalists who have been captured in the past few days by the Kiev authorities in a very brutal manner. Unfortunately, we did not hear any criticism of that from our western colleagues in the course of the discussion. Those are same colleagues, who in numerous meetings of the Security Council tend to speak about the need to protect journalists. We did draw the attention to the fact that the report did not speak at all about, even though it does refer to Crimea, the fact that the Kiev authorities have cut off water supplies to Crimea, of course, is a violation of a number of rules and standards of international law. The response we received from Mr. Šimonović was quite surprising - he said that they were investigating it. How long does one have to investigate a situation, which is completely clear. I think even from high orbit satellite you can see that the canals through which water comes to Crimea, water paid for by people in Crimea incidentally, has not been going to the peninsula. This kind of a prolonged investigation seems to be surprising. A clear-cut position of High Commissioner for Human Rights should’ve been taken on this a long time ago. And we had another rather strange discussion about the use of force in Eastern Ukraine. I asked Mr. Šimonović about his attitude to the artillery bombardment which is going on in the town of Slavyansk. The response again was that they were investigating. In the course of this discussion I was pleased to note that many colleagues watch Russian television very carefully. All those who do watch Russian television could have seen numerous examples particularly of shelling of Slavyansk in the past few days. Moreover, I asked this question in a different form: “Can you say that if the allegations of artillery bombardment were proven that would be an excessive use of force by Ukranian authorities in Slavyansk?” Again I have not received an answer.
In the course of the discussion some of our colleagues were speaking of de-escalation, some colleagues were speaking of the need to investigate events in Odessa on May 2. Some were speaking of the need to involve people from the Eastern Ukraine in the political discussion that Kiev authorities have been reluctant to accept. But when it came to sum up our discussions again, unfortunately, members of the Security Council did not have political courage to put those positions into something which the President of the Security Council could share with you after the meeting on behalf of the Security Council. You will recall that even on the May 2nd, the last time we discussed the situation in Ukraine, the members of the Security Council could not simply say that violence must stop. There was an initial proposal for some language from the Russian delegation then the President of the Security Council came up with this very short phrase, but even that short phrase didn’t turn out to be acceptable to our Western colleagues.
Unfortunately, we have to come to the conclusion that the position of some of the members of the Security Council continues to be very uncertain. In our view, it is one of the factors which creates an atmosphere of an uncertainty in Ukraine. With very great delays some steps are being taken. Those round tables finally have been arranged, but, unfortunately, things have been done in a way which does not look as entirely persuasive to many people in Ukraine, including particularly in the East of the country. So we will see how things are going to proceed. As you know, as far as Russia is concerned all along we have been advocating inclusive dialogue, we have played a crucial role in preparing the Geneva Statement on April 17, we supported the OSCE “Road Map” which, incidentally, the Kiev authorities have not embraced publically so far. As far as we are concerned we are trying to make a positive contribution to the resolution of this crisis in Ukraine, which we played no part in creating, in contrast to some of our Western colleagues.
Q: Mr. Ambassador, what is Russia’s current position toward the Presidential elections to be held this Sunday, in the past it’s been criticized? Secondly, President Putin has made several times an announcement of the call back of troops from the border of Ukraine, but observers, at least from NATO, have indicated that they haven’t seen actual withdrawal of the troops. Could you give us a status on that? Thank you.
V.Churkin: Those who do want to see – they see. This is simply a political thing. Of course, there is a pullback of Russian forces from the region as it has been announced by President Putin. On the elections. From the outset we were open-minded and President Putin did say recently that it is a step in a right direction. But of course those need to be proper elections. I personally cannot see how one can claim that there are proper elections in the country when they are shelling towns and conducting a military operation in the eastern regions of Ukraine. One of my colleagues today said that we need to deescalate violence, my French colleague actually. I said: “Yes, lets ask the President of the Security Council to say that” - and unfortunately – again - they were not ready to endorse words on the de-escalation of violence. What we see is a very confusing situation. I suppose we need to make our judgment after the event. We will see what happens on May 25 and then we will take a position on that.
Q: Mr. Ambassador, do you plan to veto the Syria ICC resolution tomorrow? Can you explain your reasoning?
V.Churkin: Yes we do. I will give my reasoning tomorrow. The fact that the resolution is going to vote we regard as a simple publicity stunt which will have a detrimental effect on our efforts to resolve politically the crisis in Syria. But what will come will come.
Q. For the headlines – how would you describe the Mr.Šimonović’s report?
V.Churkin: I’m not going to write your headlines. One thing we agreed on – Mr. Šimonović did say that the events in Odessa on May 2 need to be independently investigated. We picked up that line and as I mentioned Minister Lavrov wrote a letter to Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. But unfortunately members of Security Council were unable to support our call to appeal to the Secretary-General for the arrangements of an impartial investigation.
Q. You’ve said that you are concerned about the elections in Ukraine under shelling. Are you also concerned about the elections in Syria under bombardments?
V.Churkin: Of course we are concerned. In different countries there are different things under different circumstances. In Afghanistan there were elections in the situation that is far from normal though our Western colleagues accepted this as a proper way to conduct elections. And previously in Afghanistan we had similar situations. Of course the elections in Syria are not going to be conducted under perfect circumstances. This is the decision they made. We will see what comes out of it.
Q. What kind of investigation would you like on Odessa? Like OPCW/Sellstrom investigation?
And what about UN-marked helicopters? I know that your Government asked the UN Secretariat to respond. Have you got an answer?
V.Churkin: I think the Secretary General needs to make up his mind since there are so many different investigations in Ukraine. I’m sure the UN could play an important role in bringing them all together, also bringing OPCW in. For this we now have a good practice in the destruction of Syrian chemical weapons. On helicopters - we’ve had no response. We’ll continue to double-check and I hope we will have response from the Secretariat.
Q. Are we back to the Cold War?
V.Churkin: No, we are not.
Q. What’s your opinion on the floods in Balkans?
V.Churkin: It’s horrible. We are watching it with a great compassion. And the EMERCOM of Russia is very active in bringing in humanitarian supplies.
Q. The German press was recently reporting on the rise of fascism in Ukraine. Did you discuss it?
V.Churkin: Not today. But obviously we are very concerned, to put it mildly, about the tendency of Nazi collaborators portraits being carried by young people. It must have taken years of indoctrination for the young people to be completely confused. Particularly in the situation when Nazis were killing Ukrainians in millions. We are disturbed that this is being exploited for purposes of inspiring hostility, including hostility towards Russia. For the past eight years we propose to the GA resolutions on combating glorification of Nazism and these developments show that this continues to be relevant.
Thank you.
