Explanation of Vote by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia after the UNSC Vote on a Draft Resolution on the Middle East Settlement
Mr. President,
The Russian Federation abstained in the vote on a US-drafted UNSC resolution in support of “President Trump's Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict.” This is a draft that we simply could not support.
We appreciate the efforts by the United States and other mediators, which have made it possible to halt the “hot” phase of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and prevent mass starvation, as well as to achieve a ceasefire, secure the release of Israeli hostages and Palestinian detainees, and exchange the bodies of those killed. We see that these efforts are welcomed both in the Middle East region and all over the world.
At the same time, when it comes to the decision by the UN Security Council, which is the principal charter body tasked with maintaining international peace and security, we should bear in mind what responsibility rests upon this organ. That is exactly why, from the very beginning of negotiating the document, we have consistently insisted that Security Council members be granted a statutory role with the requisite tools of accountability and control.
Moreover, we took as a starting point the premise that the resolution must reflect the universally recognized international legal basis, reaffirming fundamental decisions and principles, first and foremost the cornerstone formula of “two States for two peoples.” After all it is precisely this approach that was endorsed by an overwhelming majority in the New York Declaration, adopted following two fora in support of the two-state solution.
Colleagues,
This is not a theoretical issue, but a very practical one, and it remains particularly relevant in light of the unequivocal public statements coming from the highest echelons of Israel’s leadership asserting that creating a Palestinian State is nothing but unacceptable. Unfortunately, these key components did not make it into the US draft. Neither is there any clarity in the draft regarding the timelines for the transfer of control over Gaza to the Palestinian Authority (PA), nor any certainty vis-à-vis the Board of Peace and the International Stabilization Force (ISF), which, judging by the text of the resolution adopted today by the Council, will be able to act absolutely autonomously, without any regard for Ramallah's position and opinion. This may entrench the separation of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank, and it is reminiscent of colonial practices and the British mandate for Palestine granted by the League of Nations, when the opinions of the Palestinians themselves were not taken into account whatsoever.
What also raises questions is the mandate of the ISF. President Trump's Comprehensive Plan did not specify that the ISF would be engaged in demilitarizing Gaza nor disarming local armed groups, using all available means. The resolution, however, confers on the ISF such extensive peace enforcement mandate that the Mission may actually transform into a party to the conflict going beyond the confines of peacekeeping. As far as we understand, not a single one of the potential troop-contributing countries (TCCs) agreed to this.
At the same time, we would like to note that the members of the Council were not actually given enough time to do the work in good faith nor to find compromises. Arms-twisting in capitals or pressuring delegations here in New York can hardly be called working in good faith.
To sum up, the US document is yet another pig in a poke. In essence, the Council is giving its blessing to the US initiative relying exclusively on Washington's honor, we leave the Gaza Strip at the mercy of the Board of Peace and the ISF, whose working methods are still unknown to us. The most important thing here is making sure that this document does not become a smokescreen for unbridled experiments by the US and Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory (OPT) nor turn into a death sentence for the two-state solution.
Russia has taken note of Ramallah's position, as well as that of many Arab-Muslim States that spoke in favor of the American draft so as to avoid renewed bloodshed in the enclave. In this regard, we chose not to submit our own draft, which was aimed at amending the US concept to bring it in conformity with long-standing UN resolutions agreed previously. But there is no cause for celebration: today is a sorrowful day for the Security Council. Besides the wishes of the parties concerned, there is also such notion as the integrity of the Security Council. And today, with the adoption of this resolution, that integrity and the prerogatives of the Council have been undermined.
In this case, we wish we were proven wrong, and we do hope that we can count on the US demonstrating its peacekeeping potential in practice. And this potential will be assessed by its ability to successfully ensure a lasting peace, whereby Israel and Palestine coexist in peace and security within the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem becoming the capital of both States as per UNSC and GA resolutions, international law, and prior agreements that meet both the interests of Israelis in ensuring their own security and the right of Palestinians to have a State of their own. Now the implementation of President Trump's Plan falls squarely on the shoulders of its authors and supporters, primarily from among the eight Arab-Muslim nations that endorsed the Plan.
Regrettably, we’ve already had the unfortunate experience when decisions on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which were pushed through by the US, led to the opposite to what was intended. Don't say we didn't warn you.
Thank you.
