Statement by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia at a UNSC Briefing on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict
Mr. President,
We thank the briefers for their contributions to the discussion.
The Russian Federation has been systematically supporting efforts aimed at protecting civilians in armed conflict. We are convinced that saving civilian lives is one of the paramount principles of international humanitarian law, which should not become hostage to any short-term interests.
The relevant report by the UN Secretary-General reflects the fact that the situation in this area continues to require close scrutiny. The document provides the following data: there were 37,000 civilian casualties in 20 armed conflicts in 2025, as compared to 36,000 in 14 conflicts in 2024. This hardly supports the authors’ conclusion about the overall reduction in civilian casualties during the reporting period.
These grim statistics are still linked primarily to events in the Middle East. Despite the current ceasefire, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza, 856 people have been killed in the enclave and approximately 2,500 have been wounded. The total number of Palestinians killed by Israeli troops “as a result of unfortunate accidents” in 2026 reached 42, including 10 children and 2 women. In Iran, as of the end of April, the authorities reported at least 3,375 civilians killed and 32,314 wounded. More than a thousand educational institutions and two hundred medical facilities have been damaged. We all recall the tragic deaths of girls in a Minab school.
Once again, we are compelled to note the glaringly disproportionate coverage of certain regional issues – specifically, the Ukrainian crisis – and, as a consequence, a yawning gap in terms of accounting for violations committed by the Ukrainian army vis-à-vis the civilian population of Russia.
To bridge this gap, we will provide specific data. Over the 12 months of 2025, at least 6,483 civilians were affected by the actions of the Ukrainian side; of these, at least 5,418 were wounded and maimed and at least 1,065 civilians were killed. These people fell victim to deliberate strikes, indiscriminate attacks, extrajudicial executions, and other criminal acts perpetrated pursuant to the instructions of the political leadership of the Kiev regime.
Since February 2022, at least 7,746 civilians have been killed. The overall number of civilians who have suffered at the hands of Ukrainian fighters during this period amounts to at least 26,148, of whom at least 18,400 have been injured and maimed to varying degrees.
In 2014, the Kiev regime started the so-called “counterterrorism operation” – which in reality was an act of aggression targeting the population of Donbass (then Ukraine’s citizens), unleashed by the coup plotters who had usurped power in Kiev. The number of people who have suffered as a result of these criminal actions by the Kiev regime has reached at least 40,230 civilians, of whom 12,381 were killed.
This information is only about murders and injuries. Meanwhile, among the key trends of 2025 pertaining to the Ukrainian crisis, we have documented torture and sexual violence by the Ukrainian troops, as well as the practice of “double tap strikes,” which were systematically targeting rescue teams, medical staff, and utility service personnel who rushed to assist in the aftermath of strikes on civilian objects, as well as the deliberate destruction of energy infrastructure, including as a demonstrative breach of the ceasefire.
Mr. President,
As the Secretary-General’s report rightly notes, technological progress is fundamentally altering the nature of modern conflicts, generating new challenges for the protection of civilians.
We have repeatedly drawn the attention of those who gathered in this chamber to the fact that it is attack drones that remain Kiev’s primary means of killing and maiming civilians. In April 2026 alone, Ukrainian drones caused 701 civilian casualties, with 87 people killed. Thus, 9 out of 10 civilians affected by Ukrainian aggression were killed or wounded as a result of drone strikes.
This is taking place against the backdrop of an inhumane trend toward the gamification of hostilities. For example, under Ukraine’s “Army of Drones” program, a UAV operator gets bonus points for each confirmed target hit, and these bonuses can subsequently be exchanged for more advanced drones.
Such practices undermine the fundamental principles of waging warfare and generate additional risks, including for civilians. Since operators are now motivated by the desire to gain rewards rather than by the need to assess the legal status of a target, the obligation to observe the principle of distinction becomes diluted for them. Decisions on the use of force are driven not by military necessity and proportionality, but by the “advantageousness” of the target within the incentive system. From the moral standpoint, such practices distort the very perception of human life and responsibility for the use of lethal force. As a result, Ukrainian operators are essentially hunting for civilian vehicles.
Mr. President,
For our country, the month of May is associated with Victory Day commemorating the victory in the Great Patriotic War unleashed by Nazi Germany. In this context, what warrants our particular attention is the military activities of the Federal Republic of Germany, as it has become virtually the global leader in the production and sale of new types of weapons.
Indeed, this country is one of the main suppliers of weapons “fueling” military operations in Gaza: according to open sources, Germany accounts for approximately 30% of such weapons. This situation is currently under consideration by the International Court of Justice as part of Nicaragua’s case against Germany. During this proceeding, the Court recalled the obligations of States vis-à-vis arms supplies to parties to conflicts in order to prevent their use in violation of international law.
That notwithstanding, in December 2025, Germany and Israel signed an agreement expanding the weapons delivery program. The new deal increases the scope of the agreement signed about two years ago by approximately $3.1 billion. As a result, the overall value of the program has exceeded $6.7 billion. According to media reports, this deal is the largest arms sale contract in Israel’s history. In January 2026, Germany and Israel signed a document on cooperation in cybersecurity and the use of new technologies. This news is causing concern, insofar as the use of artificial intelligence during the war in Gaza has become notorious worldwide.
However, this news should be viewed through the lens of another report stating that, as part of the Brave Germany program, Berlin and Kiev have agreed to provide grant support to so-called Ukrainian and German startups working in the field of defense technology and developing new approaches to warfare. This involves uncrewed systems, artificial intelligence, next-generation communications technologies, and the development of missile systems. It is crystal clear what kind of “startups” are being referred to here – these are industrial capabilities of Germany.
More than $1 billion has been earmarked by Berlin for the development of intermediate- and long-range systems. Beyond that, over the past two years, Germany has allocated an additional 300 million euros for the Czech ammunition initiative for Ukraine, which is also being funded by other European countries, including Denmark. Cluster munitions from the Czech Republic are killing civilians, including children.
Thereby, two conflicts, which have become notorious for violations of international humanitarian law, including those having to do with the use of new technologies, are linked due to the involvement of one country: Germany. A country that twice initiated world wars has now become one of the leading donors to armed conflicts, inter alia, by supplying weapons for use in territories where its army was deployed twice in the 20th century alone.
We firmly believe that the role of Berlin in these crises requires a separate investigation. Let us point out that Germany is subject to restrictions on participation in armed conflicts under the 1990 Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany and under specific provisions of the country’s Constitution.
Mr. President,
The Latin aphorism “In times of war, the law falls silent” has long become obsolete. Today we adhere to a different principle: “Even war has its own rules.” And these rules were comprehensively set out more than half a century ago in the Geneva Conventions and the corresponding protocols thereof. These norms were developed as a reaction to the horrors that were perpetrated on our country’s territory during World War II. Our shared goal right now is to preserve and to uphold international humanitarian law.
States are bearing responsibility for ensuring compliance with these provisions. However, singling out the role of the so-called International Criminal Court in this context – as the Secretary-General’s report does – is something we consider unacceptable. This pseudo-judicial body, mired in machinations, politicization, and neocolonial practices, has nothing to do with genuine justice.
Finally, let us recall that seeking artificial gaps in existing legal frameworks or creating additional platforms for their discussion will hardly bring about progress in the implementation of IHL. In this regard, any “additional” projects, such as the ICRC Global Initiative, are something that we view as redundant. This goes beyond the framework of this branch of international law, dilutes normative provisions and paves the way for interpretations that go beyond the established international legal basis.
Thank you.
