Explanation of vote by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia after the UNSC Vote on a Draft Resolution to Transform Multinational Security Support mission in Haiti
Mr.President,
Russia abstained in the vote on the US-Panama draft Security Council resolution concerning the transformation of the Multinational Security Support (MSS) mission in Haiti into the Gang Suppression Force (GSF). The decisive factor for us was the opinion of the Haitian authorities and neighboring states, who strongly requested that we not obstruct the adoption of this document. However, we maintain our view that the Council is once again being thrust into a highly dangerous and poorly thought-out careless undertaking.
We wish to emphasize that we do not dispute the need for decisive international measures to combat crime in this long-suffering country, which has been in a profound crisis and has appealed for assistance for several years. Regrettably, however, the tools of international assistance to Haiti pushed forward through the Council have hardly produced any durable results, and we have every reason to believe that this new mission, under yet another resonant name, will prove to be no different.
Two years ago, we consented to establishing the Multinational Mission, despite our then-existing, and as later became evident, entirely justified, concerns. Kenya and several regional countries demonstrated courage and political will by dispatching their contingents to Haiti, yet the MSS failed to achieve even half of its projected capacity due to unfulfilled donor pledges regarding its funding. And yet, the sums in question were very modest compared to the tens and hundreds of billions of dollars these same countries allocate to support their interests elsewhere in the world, as well as to supply weapons to conflict zones, in particular, to Ukraine.
Due to the chronic underfunding of the Mission, we have only witnessed further deterioration of the situation in the country and the expansion of gang influence beyond Port-au-Prince. No proper assessment of the effectiveness, achievements, and failures of the MSS has ever been conducted. Instead, the Council was presented with a new idea – to create a mission, independent of national and international oversight, with a virtually unrestricted mandate to use force against all who might be designated by the vague term “gangs.” There is no clarity whatsoever on the mechanism for the long-term voluntary financial support for this force, nor regarding the prospects for staffing its considerable contingent of 5,500 personnel – a contingent, let me remind you, that will be tasked not with patrolling streets and infrastructure facilities, but with conducting combat operations against gangs armed to their teeth on their own territory.
Another issue is the proposal to use the UN regular budget for operational and logistical support of this force. In the context of the Organization’s financial crisis, caused largely by the irresponsible actions of its largest contributor, expecting significant funding to support a new initiative that exists only on paper, and which lacks a sustainable foundation and clear prospects, is naive, to say the least. Let us put it straight: if that contributor failed to provide the promised funds for the MSS, what guarantee do we have that anything will be different this time?
Our delegation, alongside others, attempted to obtain clarity on these and other key aspects of the new mission’s operations. These attempts were dismissed with the excuse that “there is no time for discussions.” We are told that we must take action, and to do so immediately. This is exactly what happened in case of MSS. So, I ask you, colleagues, do you want action, or do you want results? Do you not understand that ill-conceived and rushed steps can lead to outcomes entirely contrary to our goals?
Regrettably, the authors of today’s document show little interest in identifying the root causes of this crisis or in assessing its long-term consequences. Otherwise, they would not be trying to shift the responsibility for the Haitian crisis from themselves onto the entire international community. Instead, they would be dealing with the real problem, one which is entirely within their power to solve. This requires first and foremost stopping the unimpeded flow of illegal weapons, as required by the existing Security Council arms embargo.
This initiative inspires even less trust in us given the escalating tensions in the Caribbean and the deployment of American armed forces near the shores of Venezuela. We have no confidence that it will not occur to the authors of today’s text to connect in some “creative” way their military activity against alleged drug cartels with the situation in Haiti.
It is our firm belief that the formula for responsible international assistance to Haiti lies precisely in addressing the root causes of the crisis, including the long history of harmful military interference in the country’s affairs. Interveners and foreign missions come and go, often leaving behind more problems than achievements. Still, no one seems willing to learn the lessons from this, let alone make a sincere effort to help strengthen the statehood and the Haitians’ own capacity to maintain law and order. It is only then that Haiti will be able to return to a constitutional path and ensure steady socio-economic development that the long-suffering people of that nation have long deserved.
Thank you.
