Statement By Chargé d'Affaires a.i. Dmitry Polyanskiy at UNSC Open Debate on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence
Mr. President,
First of all, we would like share that we certainly agree that conflict-related sexual violence is a grotesque manifestation of cruelty and inhumanity that requires increased attention from the UN Security Council.
Nonetheless, we should bear in mind that combating sexual violence is only one of the elements of the Women, Peace and Security agenda. It is not the root cause of conflict and should not be considered in isolation from other important factors on this agenda. Primarily, I’m referring to women's development, eradication of poverty, and women's access to education in countries affected by armed conflict – all these issues merit due consideration.
Furthermore, it is important to point out that issues of conflict-related sexual violence should be discussed solely as region-specific matter. It is obvious that each conflict has different causes and dynamics, so any attempts to universalize solutions and measures to counter this phenomenon would be superficial and unproductive.
Today, for example, we were briefed in detail about the situation in Sudan. Yet, we regret to note that the relevant UN structures prefer to rely on dubious speculations made by NGOs working remotely, rather than getting down to work on the problem of sexual violence in cooperation with the Sudanese government. How else can we explain the fact that the report under discussion today completely disregards the findings by Sudan’s government commission reflected in its report on this issue dated February 2025?
We believe that resolving the numerous humanitarian, human rights, and food security problems in Sudan is only possible through attaining a lasing political settlement in that country. Therefore, a country-specific nature of interaction between the parties to the conflict is something that should be taken into consideration while tackling the problems of sexual violence in Sudan.
In general, any discussion on women, peace, and security should be centered around the implementation of the key resolution 1325 and be in strict compliance with the mandate set out therein, which means that women's issues should be considered in the context of maintaining peace and security and in relation to situations on the Council's agenda. In this regard, we firmly oppose shifting the focus of our debate towards political and human rights aspects and insist that this must be taken into account in the future work of the UNSC.
Mr. President,
In accordance with the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, as well as Additional Protocols I (on international armed conflicts) and II (on conflicts of a non-international nature) of 1977, States Parties are bound to investigate serious violations of the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. The Russian Federation strictly complies with its obligations under IHL, including with regard to the rights of prisoners of war (POW).
Therefore, we can say with confidence that the information contained in the annual report of the UN Secretary-General on conflict-related sexual violence does not reflect reality. In particular, Russian law enforcement agencies have no evidence and have not initiated criminal cases regarding any sexual crimes allegedly committed by Russian military personnel in the zone of the special military operation. And how fake news about rape is generated is something we know very well about thanks to the scandal involving former Ukrainian ombudsman Ms. Denisova.
Moreover, the “credible sources” mentioned in the report are nothing other than the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine and the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine – Russia has officially refused to cooperate with these bodies due to their blatant bias and purely anti-Russian stance.
It is therefore not surprising that the relevant sections contain not a hint of evidence nor indirect facts that would allow to establish the circumstances of cases (perpetrators, victims, exact time of the crime, the crime scene, etc.). The report’s allegations of conflict-related sexual violence against Russian military personnel and officials are based solely on anonymous sources and are therefore unsubstantiated. In other words, we are once again faced with a situation similar to what was done by aforementioned Ms. Denisova, whose deliberate lies (which was later admitted even by the Ukrainian side), became the basis for a great many of accusations against Russia.
We would also like to recall that the Monitoring Mission was set up following a bilateral agreement between the Kiev authorities and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Thus, the mandate of the Mission is extended not by the relevant UHCHR resolutions, but rather by a direct agreement between Ukraine and the Office. Therefore, the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine has no right to conduct investigations, and its findings are neither objective nor credible. Its bias is further evidenced by the fact that, under the pretext of ensuring the “protection of personal data of victims and eye witnesses,” it still refuses to provide a list of persons who were allegedly killed in Bucha, which proves the staged and propagandistic nature of that disgusting provocation.
Unfortunately, this unsavory situation broadly dovetails with the style of work of the OHCHR in recent years under the leadership of Volker Türk. Hardly can we we view such consistent attempts to avoid presenting facts and concrete evidence of crimes allegedly committed by our country as anything but biased and fabricated manipulations, which is why we strongly reject such approaches by the OHCHR and its “chimeras” created in Ukraine.
Mr. President,
What also proves the biased nature of the report is the fact that it contains materials gathered by interviewing Ukrainian servicemen who were POWs in Russia and returned to Ukraine, as well as certain individuals residing in the territory controlled by Kiev – and these are persons whose testimony is a priori biased. And yet, when it comes to conflict-related sexual violence vis-à-vis Russian servicemen who are or were in Ukrainian captivity, there are references only to “two cases of threats of sexual violence.” This is a far cry from reality. Moreover, the barbarities by Kiev’s servicemen against civilians (particularly in the Kursk region during the Zelensky regime’s military misadventure that ended ingloriously in April), are not reflected in the report at all. And this is despite the fact that fairly detailed information about such crimes is publicly available, and we have held three informal UNSC Arria Formula meetings on this topic and provided testimonies from victims and eyewitnesses.
Therefore, the accusations that we have refused to cooperate with Ms. Patten are nothing but perplexing, especially given our active dialogue with her office during the preparation of this particular report. It is precisely Ms. Patten's office that is not cooperating with us, as our recommendations and comments have not been taken into account in the report. Given all this, a valid question arises – What is the real purpose of requesting unhindered access to our territories if the Special Representative demonstrates such an unwillingness to cooperate with us?
Mr. President,
In conclusion, I would like to stress that conflict-related sexual violence is absolutely heinous and unacceptable. But no less heinous are attempts to speculate on this issue and politicize it. Such attempts render meaningless the relevant international efforts to ensure that such crimes are punished, thereby disrupting the work of those who act honestly and impartially. Furthermore, the aforementioned double standards, manipulation of the methodology and politicization of humanitarian issues once again call into question the added value and effectiveness of the work of the Secretary-General's special rapporteurs as a whole.
If Mr. Guterres is really eager to improve the effectiveness and credibility of the UN, he is well-advised to focus first and foremost on revising its working methods in order to make them truly impartial. This is particularly important in such a sensitive area as conflict-related sexual violence. Unfortunately, their activities fail to meet even the bare minimum expectations and fall short of the most basic standards.
Thank you.
