Statement by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia at a UNSC Open Debate on Upholding the Purposes and Principles of the UN Charter and Strengthening the UN-Centered International System
Mr. President,
We welcome the participation of China’s Foreign Minister in the open debate initiated by the People’s Republic of China on upholding the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. We have closely listened to the statement delivered by the Secretary-General.
At the invitation of Minister Wang Yi, the Russian delegation should have been represented at this meeting by the Deputy Foreign Minister, Alexander Alimov, who oversees matters related to the United Nations. However, despite all our efforts to secure a visa for him from the US side, that visa was never granted. We view this not only as a breach by Washington of its obligations under the Headquarters Agreement, which stipulates that access to the UN headquarters must be granted to all officials of Member States without exception, but also as an egregious disrespect for China’s presidency of the Security Council and for the topic under discussion today, that is the UN Charter.
Mr. President,
The UN Charter was signed in the aftermath of World War II, the 81st anniversary of the victory in which we commemorated this month. It is, indeed, a unique document that helped to forge a system of international relations that enabled us to save the world from the scourge of a new global war, despite proliferating risks and challenges.
The postwar world order has been repeatedly tested. It once seemed that the greatest peril resided in the confrontation of incompatible ideologies during the Cold War. Years passed and the bipolar system was consigned to the past, but a global catastrophe is now much closer than ever before, as it is not only ubiquitous violations of the UN Charter that we are witnessing today, but also the questioning of the value of the Charter and the obligation to comply therewith. As a replacement, certain countries – mostly Western ones – are proposing a so-called “rules-based order,” which they themselves have designed, portraying what they call “rules” as universal.
Contempt for the UN Charter – which is the cornerstone document – has reached its peak today. Driven by the desire to preserve their dominance in the world, Western elites have shed any remaining qualms about using brute force to advance their political and economic interests. They continue to hunt for resources and influence in their former colonies, first and foremost in Africa. They are openly fighting sovereign nations that are not to their liking. They are expanding NATO-centric alliances into new territories in Asia, with these alliances being liable to undermine collective security there. With the help of organizations and media outlets under their control, they are diverting the international community’s attention away from the real root causes of conflicts, spawning “double standards” and muddying the waters for those who wish to uphold the UN Charter in good faith.
Under these circumstances, our duty is to cherish the Charter, its purposes and its principles – in their entirety and interconnection – as well as its mechanisms of “checks and balances,” designed to protect the interests not only of the majority but also of the minority. We must bear in mind that those who created the United Nations were not some armchair strategists but rather they were people who themselves endured the hardships and sufferings of World War II and who knew firsthand the price of peace.
What makes the UN Charter so unique is the fact that this is a document that vested all States with equal rights. It laid the groundwork for the United Nations to help peoples oppressed by colonialism to gain their independence and become the global majority. The UN Charter also proclaimed such goals as facilitating social and economic progress of all peoples without exception, as well as promoting respect for the dignity of all individuals “without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion”. It is indeed the Charter that established the principle of collective action, first and foremost in the area of security, spearheaded by the Security Council.
Currently, we hear a great deal of criticism vis-à-vis the UN. However, there is no denying the fact that the UN has transformed the international landscape and our mindsets. The UN Charter has set – and continues to set – the international standard for justice, which humanity did not have before. Indeed, the world we are living in is far from ideal: armed conflicts are spreading, people are being persecuted for their native language and faith, as is the case in Ukraine – but we know for certain that this situation is not in alignment with the UN Charter, and there is a need for us to revert to the principle of justice.
Mr. President,
The UN Charter has become a benchmark for justice, and not only in terms of its objectives and mechanisms, but also in the acknowledgement of the victory in World War II, the victory over Nazism and fascism. The reminder of this is reflected in Article 107 thereof, which stipulates the continued responsibility of what the Charter defines as “enemy states” for their grave crimes following World War II.
This applies, first and foremost, to the leader of such States – Nazi Germany. Let us recall that prior to 1973, West Germany was sidelined by the United Nations; it did not recognize the borders in Europe, and refused to commit itself to the non-use of force against its eastern neighbors.
The situation was changed by the 1970 Moscow Treaty between the USSR and Germany, wherein – 25 years after the defeat of Nazi Germany – Bonn agreed to recognize the territorial realities in Europe and eschewed the use of force. This Treaty paved the way for West Germany and East Germany to enter the United Nations and laid the foundation for cooperation in Europe.
The era of cooperation in Europe brought about prosperity, with the reunification of Germany being a part of that. However, short-sighted politicians in Europe decided to “be more cunning.” They came to the conclusion that cooperation was not their method and that it would be much more effective to use blackmail and exert pressure. They also determined that they needed once again to seize territories in the East, this time under the banner of the expansion of NATO and the EU. These imperialist designs are advancing eastward without any regard for the peoples in the countries they are seizing; what they bank on is bribing elites and orchestrating color revolutions.
But today, the European elites have decided to drop their masks and resort to the overt use of military force, actively engaging in the crisis in Ukraine, including through unprecedented deliveries of weapons. As we have already stated at one of the Security Council meetings, Germany has no scruples about fueling the conflict in Gaza by supplying weapons, including new technologies.
On April 22, the German Minister of Defense decided to disclose his country’s aggressive plans by publishing a new strategic framework for the Bundeswehr, which is a set of documents indicating that Germany intends to become the leading military power in Europe and to “take on responsibility for Europe” (that is what the document states).
The proclaimed goal is an unprecedented expansion of the armed forces and military capabilities of the country. Moreover, Germany, jointly with France, is set to establish a so-called “high-ranking nuclear steering group,” announcing its engagement in “doctrinal dialogue and the coordination of strategic cooperation, including consultations regarding the appropriate mix of conventional, missile defense and French nuclear capabilities.” Germany is beginning to shift its military posture eastward, deploying its contingent to Lithuania. The goals and actions announced by Germany run counter to the 1990 Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany, which laid the groundwork for the country’s reunification and established very specific limitations with regard to Germany’s armed forces, as well as a ban on the possession of nuclear weapons by this country. This treaty also stipulates that it is nothing but peace that must emanate from German territory.
Thus, a question follows: Can Germany’s remilitarization and its policy of confrontation bring about as much prosperity in Europe as was achieved during the era of cooperation with the USSR and Russia from the 1970s to the early 2000s? In our view, the response is clear, and it is reflected not merely in economic development indicators.
Mr. President,
Remilitarization is also being pursued by other countries that fall within the purview of Article 107 of the UN Charter. Japan, for example, is augmenting its armed forces and weapons deliveries, and is openly discussing amendments to its Constitution, which imposes certain limitations in this regard following World War II.
The policy towards remilitarization is undermining the UN-centered international system: the countries that were defeated in World War II are seeking plausible pretexts to rewrite its outcome, and their rhetoric should not mislead anybody. This is a very dangerous trend that warrants the attention of the entire international community.
Mr. President,
Throughout the world, the situation is teetering on the brink of war and peace. Our alarmed gaze is riveted on the developments in the Middle East and the hawkish rhetoric vis-à-vis Cuba. We are convinced that this is a path to nowhere. We need to help one another avert a global crisis and restore the UN’s role as an honest broker. However, to start this process, as was the case in the past, we need to reaffirm consensus on the core parameters of international cooperation.
We are convinced that the attainment of this goal is advanced by what was proposed by Russian President Vladimir Putin in June 2024. I refer to the initiative to establish a new architecture of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia, which will be entirely open to all States and subregional organizations on the continent. This initiative vests each State with the right to choose the means of ensuring its own security, provided that this does not infringe upon other States’ interests in the area of security.
Last October, during Russia’s presidency of the Security Council, a presidential statement was adopted marking the 80th anniversary of the establishment of the United Nations. It is important that in this document, the membership of the Security Council reached consensus and unity on the need to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter in their entirety, as well as to ensure a comprehensive response to threats to international peace and security, which must incorporate addressing the root causes of international conflicts.
To surmount the crisis of trust in the United Nations, there is a need to negotiate in good faith and to ensure that intergovernmental decisions are conscientiously implemented. What is also needed is adapting the UN system to shifting realities, with Member States playing the central role in this process. This is precisely why the UN80 initiative must be carried out under close national oversight and in full compliance with the resolutions and decisions by UN bodies. It is vitally important to ensure that the prerogatives of the Security Council are not cast into doubt. After all, it is precisely the Security Council that, under the UN Charter, bears primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.
We do hope that with the election of a new Secretary-General this year, the United Nations will be reinvigorated. For far too long, it has been sidelined on matters related to eradicating the root causes of conflicts, rebuilding trust among Member States, and objectively resolving the most urgent crises. For the UN to effectively deliver on its potential, its Secretariat must strictly adhere to Article 100 of the Charter stipulating the principles of neutrality and the exclusively international nature of their actions without any qualifications.
We invite all interested partners to engage in frank discussion, with assiduous efforts undertaken for the prosperity of all humanity.
Thank you.
