Statement by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia at a UNSC Briefing on Sudan
Mr. President,
We are grateful to Mr. Edem Wosornu, OCHA Director of Operations, for her briefing. We thank Mr. Saad Bahr Eddin, Sultan of the Masalit, for the information provided. We welcome the participation in today's meeting of the Permanent Representatives of Sudan, Egypt, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. We have listened to the prosecutor-like lectures of Ms. Shayana Lewis, the “expert” on Sudan.
Mr. President,
Unfortunately, the armed conflict in Sudan has become protracted. At the same time, the situation on the ground has been evolving to a certain extent, although neither side has a strategic advantage. We are witnessing sporadic successes of the army in Khartoum and in El Gezira. Against this backdrop, the Rapid Support Forces tend to focus on “greater Darfur”, which results in a new wave of tension.
Economic and social problems in the country are deepening. International efforts to launch an inter-Sudanese peace process have stalled. A ceasefire in Sudan remains the main challenge at this stage. Otherwise, any steps to protect civilians, to provide full humanitarian access and to save women and children from violence will prove to be ineffective. Only the parties to the conflict themselves can agree on that. Imposing the parameters of such solutions or forcing them to negotiate through ultimatums is both inadmissible and unprofessional. In this context, we support the efforts of the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Sudan, Mr. Ramtane Lamamra, who is helping the parties to the conflict to find common ground. In order to achieve results, he needs to have the necessary time and the necessary space to work without external pressure.
The situation in Sudan is being adversely affected by external interference in the internal affairs of the country, which needs to be stopped. External support for the conflict, and efforts by certain states to implement dubious schemes of political engineering in the country do nothing but aggravate the plight of ordinary Sudanese. The nefariousness of such tactics has already been showcased by the policy of the UNITAMS, which is now the relic of the past. One thing is certain: any initiative to restore peace in the country without the full-fledged participation of Port Sudan is not viable.
On November 18, Russia cast the veto vis-a-vis the UK-Sierra Leonean UNSC draft resolution on Sudan, which ran counter to international law, undermined the role of the legitimate Government in protecting the interests and borders of its country. We stress that we will continue to resolutely suppress any attempts to encroach upon the sovereignty of this brotherly country and we’ll continue to prevent the adoption of one-sided and non-viable decisions designed to prop up the political forces that have lost authority with the Sudanese people, and to push forward plans that are at odds with the realities on the ground.
We categorically repudiate the fabrications spread by Western countries and their media that we are allegedly playing both parties to the conflict in an attempt to get advantage from what is happening in Sudan. We have consistently supported the prompt launch of intra-Sudanese dialogue with the involvement of Sudanese political forces that enjoy the support of broader segments of society and are seeking to unify the country. We are convinced that the Sudanese people can and should independently resolve all internal problems. In order to make this process inclusive, it is important to involve all influential political forces and the country's main ethno-religious groups in it.
Instead of levelling unsubstantiated criticism against Russia, we urge other members of the Council to pursue such a balanced policy and to cast aside their parochial short-sighted aspirations, which only aggravate the situation in the country.
I cannot remember our American, British or French colleagues putting forward lately any serious proposals for a settlement. We hear nothing but criticism, false equivalencies between the Government of the country and the forces that have decided to break away from the army and use force to cement their claim to power. You have consistently tried to pin labels on the leadership of Sudan, pejoratively calling them “the authorities” instead of “the Government”. By doing so, you are not only proving that you are biased, but also fueling centrifugal tendencies. We firmly object to such approaches, because for us the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of this brotherly country are not merely empty words and certainly not a bargaining chip. We regard the Sovereignty Council as the highest legitimate governing body in Sudan, which is capable of ensuring the resilience of State institutions and the continuity of governance. Having grasped the fact that there is no alternative to this policy, our American colleagues ultimately decided in November to dispatch Special Envoy Tom Perriello to Port Sudan to engage in contact with the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council, Abdel-Fattah Al-Burhan. However, as far as we know, the US Special Envoy distinguished himself merely with lectures and biased assessment regarding the humanitarian situation in Sudan.
Unfortunately, instead of facilitating dialogue in Sudan, they have adopted the tactic of the gradual and systematic stepping up of pressure on the country with regard to humanitarian, human rights and other issues. And this precisely what is prolonging the conflict. Let us recall that Sudan has already tested the whole range of tools at the disposal of the Security Council, including a peacekeeping operation and a special political mission. The Sudanese know firsthand what is it, how it works and how “effective” it can be. The Security Council also imposed the sanctions regime on the country, which is compounded by illegitimate unilateral restrictions. The result is nothing. Calm and stability have been observed in Sudan only at those rare moments when the country was left unbothered, and when the government was allowed to independently determine how to shape its domestic and foreign policy. I stress, Russia will block any schemes by our Western colleagues imposing restrictions against Sudan, and we will continue to move towards the lifting of the sanctions regime in Darfur as soon as the situation in the country normalizes. The restrictive regime of the UN Security Council should not obstruct the efforts undertaken by the country's Government to enhance national security and curb violence.
We regret to admit that the humanitarian situation in Sudan remains dire. Almost three quarters of medical institutions are not operating, medicines are in short supply, two thirds of the population lack access to health care. Dangerous diseases are reported to be spreading. What remains a major challenge is the underfunding of the UN humanitarian response plan, which is only 60%-funded. UN humanitarian agencies and their partners are well-advised to focus on bolstering the effectiveness of the distribution of aid to those in need. This is precisely what needs to be prioritized, not lamentations at the Council or other platforms about the failure by the Sudanese Government to duly cooperate. I recall that Port Sudan opened up a number of land border crossings, airports and maritime routes for the delivery of aid. These include the notorious Adré border crossing, the use of which was extended by the Government, even despite its major concerns about risks to its national security. Humanitarians should also prioritize measures to enhance the purchasing power of the Sudanese, including through the issuance of special vouchers.
Judging by what we have heard from our colleagues in the Security Council and beyond, significant resources are being allocated for Sudan. It is surprising against this background that the situation is only deteriorating both within the country and for the growing number of refugees and displaced persons in neighboring States. We would like to hope that the additional funds earmarked for Sudan will be used to meet the needs of the people in need, rather than to support the democratizing agendas geared towards reshaping the country on the basis of the Western templates. Democracy and prosperity cannot be bought or sold like goods in a shop.
Mr. President,
We would like to call upon certain members of the Council to use the common sense and acknowledge that there is no way forward other than engaging with the central Government. Any other way implies tacit incitement of violence and ongoing suffering of the population. We believe that the leadership of Sudan is perfectly cognizant that stabilization in the country is directly linked to a peaceful transition. And we know that the Government has relevant initiatives at hand, which are designed to attain these objectives. We have heard a number of calls from Council members to support various regional mediation efforts – such as the Jeddah process, UN-African Union cooperation, IGAD, the contribution of certain regional players and external actors. We believe that, by the same logic, it should be of no shame for the Council to support sincere efforts towards normalization undertaken by Port.
Thank you.
