Statement by First Deputy Permanent Representative Dmitry Polyanskiy at Informal Interactive Dialogue with Candidate for UNGA President Annalena Baerbock
Mr. President,
Unlike many others, we have the courage to voice what many people here are thinking about, but for various reasons are afraid to say out loud. Ms. Baerbock has repeatedly proved her incompetence, extreme bias and lack of understanding of the basic principles of diplomacy; thus, the decision of the authorities in Berlin to push through her candidacy as President of the 80th anniversary session of the UNGA (instead of the candidate who had been previously announced and who suited everyone) is no less than spitting in the face of the World Organization and showing a blatant disregard for it. How else can we construe that in the year of the 80th anniversary of the victory over German Nazism, we are witnessing a nomination as President of the General Assembly (PGA) of a person who recommended against inviting representatives of Russia and Belarus to the commemorative events in Europe on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, and who openly declared that she was proud of her grandfather who served in the SS? By making such a provocative choice and being well aware that Russia is unlikely to interact with such an odious person, the German Government has once again proved to be irresponsible and exposed as unjustified its claims not only for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council but also for a temporary one.
We have every reason to doubt that, as PGA, Ms. Baerbock will be able to act in the interests of peace and dialogue. After all, as Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany and an officially nominated candidate, she purposefully limited the participation of certain states, including Russia, in the recent Ministerial Peacekeeping Conference under the UN auspices in Berlin, despite the fact that this decision directly contradicts the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. In addition, she has consistently blackmailed other countries, advocating for increasing military aid to the Kiev regime, as well as for boosting military budgets of European states.
She once stated that Germany’s anti-Russian policy should be advanced regardless of the opinions of German voters. What would prevent her from similarly ignoring the views of member states and focusing on advancing her own priorities in violation of the code of ethics? Does she even realize that President of the GA is not supposed to propound their personal views regarding conflict settlement or play any political role? Wouldn't we end up having simply a lobbyist for German interests in the PGA post, which, inter alia, could – in this milestone year – nullify all multiannual efforts to reform the UN Security Council?
In other words, we have a lot of questions, and it is highly unlikely that we will hear anything today that could change our deeply pessimistic expectations of the potential president of the upcoming GA session.
Thank you.
