Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations

Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations

Statements by Mr.Alexander Radovitskiy, the representative of the Russian interagency delegation, at the Fifth Session of the UN open-ended Working Group on security of and in the use of ICTs 2021-2025

First statement:

Distinguished Mr. Chair,

Dear Colleagues,

Following the recommendation of the consensus final report of the first OEWG which says that duplicating efforts to ensure information security within several structures is unadvisable, and also taking into account the provisions of the UNGA resolution 77/36, we believe that the OEWG should remain a single negotiating mechanism under the auspices of the UN on international information security until the completion of its mandate. A decision on the future format of regular institutional dialogue – whether by continuing the activities of the Group or by transforming it into a permanent mechanism – can and should be worked out by States on the basis of consensus within the framework of the existing OEWG – in accordance with the aforementioned UNGA resolution 77/36. In this context we support the joint statement made by the delegations of Brazil, India and South Africa, as well as the interventions delivered by Cuba, Pakistan and Vietnam. It is unacceptable to divert the exchange of views on this matter to other, parallel platforms, doubly so to impose on countries ready-made solutions beneficial for a narrow group of States.

In this regard, the section on regular institutional dialogue needs to be balanced. At the moment, the course of discussions on this topic is not reflected objectively in the draft report. First of all, this concerns the provisions on the Programme of Action (PoA) in the use of ICTs. In the current wording, the initiative is unreasonably highlighted, and it is presented as a settled matter. Such an approach is absolutely unacceptable. As discussions in the OEWG showed, not all states share the idea of a PoA, which we propose to reflect in paragraph 49b. There was no detailed discussion within the Group of the scope, content and structure of the Programme of Action, hence the relevant provision should be deleted from paragraph 49b. Finally, the PoA is only one of the proposals put forward in the OEWG on regular institutional dialogue, which should also be taken into account in the future report (para. 49b). We consider it fair to discuss any initiatives of states aimed at ensuring security in the use of ICTs on an equal footing, without singling out one of them.

Mr. Chair,

At the fourth session of the OEWG, Russia presented its vision of the future regular institutional dialogue on international information security at the UN. Our proposal, supported by a number of countries as co-sponsors, deserves no less attention in the framework of the OEWG and its annual report. We note that the essence of our considerations was objectively stated in the original wording of paragraph 49c in the “zero” draft of the second progress report. In particular, the need to focus the efforts of a future body on the recommendations of the current OEWG and provide for the possibility of developing within its framework a draft of a legally binding instrument in the field of ICTs. We insist on restoring the appropriate wording.

It seems appropriate to recommend to the OEWG to study in more detail the existing proposals on regular institutional dialogue (para 53). At the same time, it is fundamentally important to emphasize the key role of the principle of consensus in deciding on the future negotiation format (para 52).

Thank you for your attention.

 

Second statement:

Distinguished Mr. Chair,

Dear Colleagues,

We are grateful to Mr. Chair, Ambassador Burhan Gafoor, for his tireless work on the draft of the annual progress report of the Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) on Security of and in the Use of ICTs 2021-2025. We take note of the attempt to improve certain provisions of the document. 

Nevertheless, we regret to state that the key concerns of the Russian Federation and a number of other States, as reflected in the joint statement on behalf of a like-minded group on 27 July, have not been taken into account.

The draft report is still seriously unbalanced in favour of the implementation of rules, norms and principles of responsible behaviour of states to the prejudice of the task to develop new norms, which is no less a priority for the OEWG.

Mr. Chair,

This is not about our preferences. This is about the mandate of the OEWG, which, I need to recall, is enshrined in the UNGA resolution 75/240 and supported by consensus of all UN Member States in resolution 76/19. Attempts to rewrite, pervert the mandate for the benefit of a narrow group of States are absolutely unacceptable.

Furthermore, the main body of the report still does not contain any reference to the concept of a UN convention on international information security, presented in the OEWG and submitted as an official document of the UNGA 77th session.

Mr. Chair,

We are troubled by the trend to dilute the mandate of the OEWG by issues that are out of the scopes of the Group’s agenda. The OEWG is tasked to discuss a range of issues concerning security in the use of ICTs, on many of which we are far from reaching consensus. Instead of focusing on finding mutually acceptable solutions on these matters, we are discussing interaction with non-governmental entities, human rights and gender issues that are hardly related to ICT security and to the Group’s work.

Mr. Chair, unfortunately, the document cannot become a basis for consensus as yet. However, we believe there is a chance to save it. We suggest considering our work after lunch. We would also like to propose, on behalf of Belarus, Burundi, DPRK, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, Sudan, Syria and Venezuela the following surgical amendments:

In para 23 b we suggest changing language to a direct quote from UNGA resolution 76/19, which reads as: “States reaffirmed that voluntary, non-binding norms of responsible State behaviour can reduce risks to international peace, security and stability, and do not seek to limit or prohibit action that is otherwise consistent with international law but nonetheless to set standards for responsible State behaviour, while also reaffirming that, given the unique attributes of information and communications technologies, additional norms could be developed over time and, separately, noting the possibility of future elaboration of additional binding obligations, if appropriate”.

In para 27 we suggest adding “the development and implementation of” after the words “to further discuss [rules, norms and principles]”.

At the end of para 32 we suggest adding a sentence which reads as: “In this regard, a concept of a UN convention was presented”.

The group of like-minded states is still disappointed by the inclusion of language on human rights, international humanitarian law, as well as the overemphasis on gender issues, despite clear disagreement of our delegations. Such contentious topics should not have been incorporated in the draft report without achieving a consensus.

Thank you for your attention.

 

Third statement:

Distinguished Mr. Chair,

Dear Colleagues,

The Russian Federation has joined consensus on the annual progress report of the UN Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) on Security of and in the Use of ICTs 2021-2025 because we managed to reflect in it a number of key initiatives, including the concept of a UN convention on ensuring international information security, as well as to reach agreement on the establishment of a directory of Points of Contact, initially proposed by Russia.

Nevertheless, we are troubled by the selective treatment of the mandate of the OEWG by some States, disbalance towards the implementation of voluntary rules, norms and principles of responsible behaviour to the prejudice of the development of new ones. Russia will continue to resolutely advocate for a strict observance of the Group’s mandate. We will not allow making its work serve the interests of certain States.

The Russian Federation does not consider itself bound even by voluntary commitments stemming from those provisions of the report that contradict our legislation and national interests.

I request the Chair to include our intervention in the compendium of statements with explanations of positions of States on the OEWG’s progress report.

Thank you for your attention.

 

Fourth statement:

Distinguished Mr. Chair,

We would like to thank you for your efforts in preparing a new version of the annual progress report (APR) of the Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) on Security of and in the Use of ICTs 2021-2025. This night the Russian delegation has forwarded the text to the capital for consideration. Given the time difference, it will take time to get the final instructions. We assume that many delegations face the same situation. In this regard, Mr. Chair, we believe it would be reasonable to start a substantive discussion on the updated version of the APR not earlier than at the afternoon session.

As per our preliminary assessment, the document as it is now, to our regret, cannot garner consensus support. It still bears most of the systemic misbalances that our delegation as well as many others referred to. The APR is focused exclusively on the implementation of rules, norms and principles of responsible behaviour of states in information space. We do not understand such a selective approach to the mandate of the OEWG, which, I must recall, provides for a twofold formula consisting in the implementation of the existing and further development of new norms. We do not understand either why the APR does not reflect the initiative of Russia, Belarus, DPRK, Nicaragua, Syria and Venezuela on the concept of a UN convention on ensuring international information security. Such a discriminatory approach to the proposals made by states and discussed within the Group is absolutely unacceptable.

Mr. Chair, this is just a minor part of our concerns. We will additionally transmit our detailed text proposals.

Thank you for your attention.