Explanation of vote by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia before the UNSC vote on a draft resolution (put forward by the Russian Federation) on Syria's cross-border humanitarian aid mechanism
Mme.President,
Today we have to witness another act of West-performed show under the title “Cross-border humanitarian aid mechanism for Syria”. Its main characteristic feature is total negligence of the interests of the Syrian people for whom Western states claim to care so much, and a willingness to provoke a veto by Russia.
Today we have heard (and maybe will hear more) blame game that Russia “killed” the CBM. These allegations are unfair and deceitful. In exchange for a twelve- or nine-month renewal of the CBM, our Western partners were going to give a “donut hole” to the Syrians. When we tried to facilitate a compromise “in good faith” as you call it, we saw what our colleagues wrote in communications. They would argue that they already had made a lot of concessions to Russia – on cross-line, mine action, return of refugees, early recovery. Do you really think that what I just listed are concessions? You give yourselves away completely when you call something that must be in the resolution by default a concession to Russia and Syria. This betrays you true attitude towards the CBM. You are only interested in using the cross-border mechanism for recharge of terrorists in Idlib.
We are being told that the CBM is a matter of life and death. But this is double-dealing and hypocrisy. There are ways to aid people without the CBM, given the good will to do so. We are being told that the closure of Bab al-Hawa crossing will trigger a collapse of humanitarian assistance for the people of Idlib. At the same time, the fact that the Syrian government made a sovereign decision to open two additional crossings that remain operational is totally ignored.
We thank our colleagues from the UAE, African delegations, and Brazil, who made solid efforts to avoid this show today and tried to facilitate a compromise. The first thing to do for this purpose was to take into account the position of the state whose interests this draft resolution would touch upon. That is Syria. However our colleagues from Switzerland who basically monopolized the Syrian humanitarian file in the Security Council turned out completely unprepared for that. From the very start they only promoted the interests of Western delegations on the Council while disregarding Syria’s legitimate demands. This is how we ended up with a draft resolution that gave no hope for an actual improvement of the mechanism, the need for which many UNSC members were raising. This is not a compromise text as some our colleagues cunningly present it.
Colleagues, we are not going to “absolve” the scheme, thanks to which the terrorists can prevent with impunity access of humanitarian assistance to Idlib via cross-line channels (which is envisaged by a UNSC resolution), and Western states fund early recovery and humanitarian projects only in territories that are not controlled by the legitimate government while imposing suffocating inhumane sanctions on the rest of Syria. As if this were not enough, the CBM is also known to be a clear violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria, which could be tolerated in view of the circumstances 5-7 years ago, but is a complete anachronism today.
To the US representative we would recommend asking questions about the Syrian people to the Syrian people. Why not tell them about the Assad Anti-Normalization Act, which will smother Syria? As far as the sufferings, I suggest you tell the Syrians how your sanctions do not let them buy even life-saving medicines and equipment.
Mme.President,
The issue the Swiss penholders of the Syrian humanitarian file failed to solve today is not the one about the term of the resolution’s renewal. It is about the content of the resolution. Unfortunately, our Swiss colleagues got too preoccupied playing their game and led everyone into an impasse without making any effort to find a way out. Of course, there is a way to resolve this and save the situation. This can be done by supporting our draft resolution that will be put to vote after the Swiss draft and that provides practical measures to remedy the CBM. Let me warn everyone right away. If our draft resolution does not pass, the mechanism can as well shut down. In current circumstances, we will not agree to a technical rollover for whatever term. And our Swiss colleagues have demonstrated clearly these days that they are not ready to look for a compromise. The Council has got no time for that either.
I ask those who are interested in preserving the cross-border mechanism to take this into account when voting on the Russia-proposed draft resolution that is truly reflective of the interests of the Syrian people.
Thank you.
After the vote:
Mme.President,
I did not ask for the floor to start a polemics with my French colleague regarding the assistance to Syria that he says Russia does not provide. It was not my point to raise the Brussels Conferences either, where Syrian representatives are not invited. These conferences only raise funds for those who are situated outside Syria while offering nothing to Syria itself and even preventing the true assistance, including in the area of early recovery. I did not request the floor for any of that.
One of the explanations of vote referred to our subsequent work on the CBM. I will repeat what I said when explaining our vote on the Swiss-Brazilian draft. “There is a way to resolve this and save the situation. This can be done by supporting our draft resolution that will be put to vote after the Swiss draft and that provides practical measures to remedy the CBM. Let me warn everyone right away. If our draft resolution does not pass, the mechanism can as well shut down. In current circumstances, we will not agree to a technical rollover for whatever term.”
Thank you.
