Statement by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia at UNSC briefing on the situation of human rights in the DPRK
Point of order:
Mr.President,
Today, the international community is once again witnessing a shameful situation where a narrow group of states is trying to use the UN Security Council as a tool to promote its own geopolitical agenda.
We never had any illusions that, with all of Pyongyang's main opponents being members of the Security Council, instead of seeking constructive ways to resolve the crisis on the Korean peninsula, they would throw all their energies into making unfounded allegations and criticizing North Korean authorities on camera. Their only goal is to once again turn the situation on the Korean Peninsula inside out and divert public attention from the true root causes of the accumulated security problems in the region.
It would be worth recalling that by taking this step the organizers of the meeting violate several purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, including non-interference in the internal affairs of states and the commitment to develop friendly relations based on respect and equality. We note in this connection the statement by the Group of Friends of the Charter of the United Nations, which was issued this morning.
Opponents of the DPRK are well aware that their initiatives are counterproductive, undermine whatever faith member states still have in joint efforts at the human rights track and pursue purely propaganda purposes. However, this does not stop them, and they request such meetings on an all too regular basis.
The linkage between human rights and threats to international peace and security, especially in the context of the Korean peninsula, promoted by the initiators of today's briefing is more than just far-fetched. Attempts to introduce non-mandated tasks into the work of the Security Council dilute its attention, waste the Council's resources, politicize the debate and thus undermine the credibility of the Council as a whole.
We request a procedural vote on the agenda item of this meeting requested by the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. This issue does not fall within the mandate of the Security Council. For us, this is a matter of principle. We strongly urge other members of the Security Council to join us and vote against.
Thank you.
After the procedural vote:
Mr.President,
Seeking justification for their attempts to undermine the mandate of the Security Council, Western countries predictably appeal to cases of Russia allegedly raising in the Security Council the issue of human rights in one place or another. I will come back to this.
But first, I would like to say that when Russia insisted in April this year on holding an open briefing to discuss the consequences of NATO's aggression against Yugoslavia in 1998, our position was that any member of the Security Council can raise in the Council any issue related to international peace and security. This position remains unchanged. But I emphasize that it can be done in those cases where the proposed subject has a direct bearing on the Council's mandate. Even the ardent opponents of the idea of convening a meeting on NATO's aggression against Yugoslavia did not dare to argue otherwise at that time.
Human rights, what do they have to do with regional and global security? This is a separate topic that is discussed at specialized platforms that have a mandate and the relevant expertise.
As for Russia convening UNSC meetings on certain aspects of the Ukrainian crisis, which my British colleague called human rights-related, we are not talking here about a human rights issue as such, but about a topic that has a direct projection on the causes of the crisis and, consequently, on the prospects for its resolution. In a broader context, the oppression of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine, declaring them a "second class" has become one of the key factors, a trigger of the conflict.
Therefore, in this case, parallels with the topic of today's meeting are categorically inappropriate.
Thank you.
Main statement:
Mr.President,
Today our Western colleagues have dealt another heavy blow to the reputation of the UN Security Council, which, in accordance with its mandate, bears the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. Yes, any member of the Council has the right to request a meeting on any issue, but that that issue must fall within with the mandate of UNSC, whereas the latter does not cover discussions of human rights. While the world looks to the Council in anticipation of solutions to complex global problems, it is wasting its energies on unsubstantial and deliberately politicized subjects.
In that regard, the situation on the Korean peninsula suffers the most. The United States and its allies in the region are ready to consider in the Security Council any issues other than those that really need to be resolved to normalize the situation. Meanwhile, the United States, which is located across the Pacific Ocean and thousands of miles away from Korean shores, continues to increase its military activity in the region together with Japan and the Republic of Korea. The military drills of "decapitating strikes" against the DPRK and other numerous hostile acts provoke a response in the North Korea, which is forced to take measures to strengthen national defense capabilities. Washington demonstrates its nuclear capabilities in dangerous proximity to the DPRK's borders. It has been repeatedly noted that this brings the situation to the dangerous line of an open armed confrontation with unpredictable consequences. Let the initiators of today's meeting not be surprised if members of the Security Council rightfully propose to discuss this very topic.
In reality, the path to normalization lies through cessation of provocative military activities by the United States and its allies, a thorough review of the sanctions regime and confidence-building measures. From these points of view, today's meeting is a clear step in the opposite direction. We have noted regularly that discussing the human rights situation in a one-sided and intrusive manner undermines mutually respectful cooperation, and there are plenty of examples of this. Instead of playing along with the Western narrative, the relevant United Nations mechanisms should pay the most serious attention to the role of the overwhelming burden of sanctions in violating the fundamental rights of North Korean citizens.
We reaffirm our position that the indefinite sanctions regime against the DPRK should be reviewed. There are no mechanisms for adjusting the restrictions as regards the DPRK and no procedures for fair decisions on the delisting of certain individuals. All other restrictive measures against individual countries have ultimate realistic goals and are subject to regular revision. They fall under initiatives to prevent unfair punishment, such as the mandate of the Ombudsman. Essentially, the DPRK is the only exception that is denied everything.
It is noteworthy that those who advocated today's meeting directly complement this inhumane policy with their illegal unilateral restrictive measures. Ms. E. Salmon described to us today the suffering of the North Korean population, particularly children. Does Ms. Salmon know where this "suffering" came from? It occurred once the initiators of today's meeting cut off all supply channels, including medical and life saving equipment for the treatment of DPRK citizens, including the children. These actions exacerbate the suffering of the population, provoke poverty, inequality and deprive people of access to normal health care, medicines, education and technology. You are the ones violating the basic rights of the citizens of the DPRK. And all of this is done - by rich and prosperous countries – to achieve their geopolitical goals. No humanitarian exemptions, which we have heard of many times, and no crumbs of humanitarian assistance bestowed by Western do-gooders, can in any way remedy the consequences of the policy of strangling the North Koreans. Such hypocritical steps are designed only to camouflage their unchanging goal of dismantling the political system of the DPRK, which has been firmly resisting Washington's geopolitical "appetites" for many decades. The rights of North Koreans are of no concern to any of Pyongyang's opponents.
This shows once again the pointlessness of today's discussion, the only purpose of which is to serve Western "double standards", both with regard to the work of the Security Council and in the field of human rights.
If Western colleagues were really interested in resolving human rights problems, they would turn to the Universal Periodic Review procedure, which allows the relevant issues to be dealt with in a professional manner.
Some colleagues mentioned 1718 Panel of Experts today. The Panel is now defunct, which it fully deserved by its anti-professional activities. The so-called report by former sanctions experts from the United Kingdom, South Korea and Japan (the selection of countries not accidental) was clearly made to order and based on material that had been compiled by non-professionals, with numerous procedural violations and logical inconsistencies, and then kindly slipped into the hands of so-called experts by the Kiev regime.
Instead of promoting propaganda narrative, we urge our Western colleagues to realize that steps they are taking are counterproductive and to move to a concrete and constructive discussion of the entire set of problems on the Korean Peninsula. Against this background, the Council should be aware that delaying the start of a relevant discussion is extremely dangerous.
Thank you.
