Explanatioin of vote by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia after UNSC vote on a draft resolution on Myanmar
Russia abstained on the draft resolution on Myanmar.
It is our principled position that the situation in Myanmar does not pose a threat to international peace and security. By the way, this conclusion follows from the contents of the resolution, which is mostly focused on human rights aspects. We stand for a division of labor among all UN bodies in accordance with their respective mandates. In this case, the situation of human rights should be addressed by the Third Committee of the General Assembly rather than the Security Council. Human rights agenda must not be politicized or turned into an instrument for opposing the unwanted governments.
Besides, we must say that we are dissatisfied with the work of the authors of the draft, who apparently never even intended to endorse a well-balanced text accounting for the interests of all UNSC member states. There were no real negotiations on the draft. Our colleagues simply ignored all concerns regarding the text that the other delegations raised. In particular, they ignored the proposal to include the point about the counter-productiveness of unilateral restrictive measures that have a negative effect on the socio-economic situation in the country.
This approach demonstrates that care for the ordinary people of Myanmar and elaboration of decisions for the normalization in that country are not among the goals of those who drafted thisresolution. Their true goal is to promote political anti-Myanmarese agenda by pushing through this politicized document and claiming that the “progressive mankind” allegedly looks forward to a UNSC resolution on Myanmar.
The acts and policies of the military authorities may be given varying assessments, however Security Council must not play in the hands of those who would benefit from destabilization of the situation on the ground, undermining of ASEAN’s mediator efforts and a divide of the Security Council. It is our firm conviction that any product of this Council, especially a resolution, must aim at strictly the opposite – promotion of international peace and security. Judging by what our Western colleagues said today, they have no such task with regard to Myanmar, and they will continue shattering the situation in the country and try to drag the Security Council in this ploy.
We proceed from the assumption that all political forces in Myanmar need to act in a reserved manner and abstain from steps that may escalate violence and polarize the public sentiment. We see that the military do have such a goal. Naypyidaw reaffirms commitment to the constitutional provisions that stipulate the duration of the state of emergency. The intention to hold parliamentary elections in 2023 is a stabilizing factor, which renders Maynmar’s political vector more predictable. It is sad that the West would try to not notice either of that. The text drafted by the penholders is a clear proof of that. At the same time, since the effect of this non-consensual document is going to be rather limited, we decided not to veto it, despite its clearly provocative nature.
Russia will keep promoting the political dialogue and normalization in Myanmar, oppose attempts to interfere in its internal affairs. We support the willingness of ASEAN to facilitate settlement in and around Myanmar, i.a. address humanitarian problems and provide assistance to the people in need. We believe that collective efforts of ASEAN to implement the “Five-Point Consensus” must be based on close interaction with Naypyidaw.
We remain convinced that the situation in the Rakhine State should remain the only Myanmarese aspect on the UNSC agenda. In this regard, promotion of anti-Myanmar initiatives in the Security Council is both inappropriate and counter-productive.