Statement by Chargé d’Affaires a.i. Anna Evstigneeva at a UNSC Arria-Formula Meeting on
Distinguished Co-Chairs,
We welcome the initiative of our friends from China and Pakistan to discuss the failure to implement Security Council resolutions and the impact thereof on the maintenance of international peace and security. This is indeed a far-reaching and pressing issue. It is becoming more acute with each passing year, significantly eroding the international order based on the UN Charter and other norms of international law.
Russia consistently upholds the principle of good-faith implementation of Security Council resolutions. It is telling that today we are once again compelled to restate their binding nature, as well as the exclusive prerogatives of the Security Council in matters pertaining to the maintenance of international peace and security. Still fresh in our memory are the remarks made in March 2024 by the US Permanent Representative under the former administration, Linda Thomas-Greenfield: she suggested that Security Council decisions could be set aside for political expediency. Needless to say, no international order can exist if States choose to follow this harmful advice.
There is no need to look far for specific examples of a bad-faith implementation of Security Council decisions. Let us take Resolution 2202, which endorsed the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements. As soon as this resolution was adopted in 2015, its implementation was immediately dismissed by Ukraine, the EU, and the US. Kiev’s Western allies subsequently admitted that these agreements were needed solely to prepare the Ukrainian regime for war with Russia, while simultaneously misleading the international community. The consequences of this policy are well known.
Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999), which sets out the principles for a Kosovo settlement, continues to be disregarded, 27 years after its adoption, by both Pristina and its Western patrons. On the contrary, in direct contravention of the Security Council resolution, Pristina is stepping up efforts to build a full-fledged army and accelerate the integration into NATO, which is fraught with devastating consequences for the entire Balkan subregion.
The fundamental Security Council resolutions on the Middle East peace process, primarily Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), are likewise being steadily eroded. The prospect of a two-State solution is steadily eroding, with Israel maintaining control over most of the territories captured during earlier wars and the recent escalation, including areas surrounding East Jerusalem. The fact that the mediation initiative has been taken over by the Board of Peace may effectively result in sidelining the UN from further involvement in the Middle East peace process, which fundamentally contradicts the basic parameters for establishing peace in the region.
Another glaring example of blatant disregard for Security Council resolutions is the legal and procedural abuse perpetrated by Western countries in the context of the Iranian nuclear program. First, they sought to obstruct the implementation of Security Council Resolution 2231. Subsequently, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, having neither legal grounds nor authority to do so, unsuccessfully attempted to trigger the “snapback” mechanism provided for under the resolution. As a result, the Security Council was plunged into a procedural crisis, from which it has yet to extricate itself.
Distinguished Co-Chairs,
When discussing the issue of non-implementation of Security Council resolutions, we cannot but note the issue of goal-setting and the feasibility of certain decisions at the drafting stage. We are increasingly witnessing new draft resolutions that are divorced from reality in their substance, not coordinated with key implementing actors, confrontational in nature, and contain irrelevant objectives. Such documents do not contribute to achieving sustainable outcomes and are doomed to failure. As a result, the Council faces yet another round of criticism for inaction and inefficiency, which undermines its credibility in the eyes of the international community.
It has notably become the norm for Security Council penholders belonging to the Western camp to refuse to seek compromise on key issues of peace and security. Taking advantage of their numerical superiority in the Council, they often make no effort to find common ground in order to achieve unanimous decisions. However, are Security Council decisions adopted in this manner actually implemented? As practice shows, decisions that are not adopted by consensus also remain problematic when it comes to the implementation thereof. All of this attests to the need to reform the Security Council, so that developing countries would be more represented as a result.
Russia is convinced that the challenges associated with ensuring the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions are significant, but they can be surmounted if there is political will. The solution lies in establishing constructive engagement with due regard for the core interests of the key stakeholders during the decision-making process, followed by the strict implementation of the Council's decisions. Adhering to this approach would be the best example of upholding the UN Charter, the anniversary of whose signing will be observed on June 26.
Thank you.
