Statement by Deputy Permanent Representative Anna Evstigneeva at a UNSC Briefing on UN Peacekeeping
Mr. President,
We are grateful to the Under-Secretary-General Mr. Jean-Pierre Lacroix, to Lieutenant General Ulisses Gomes, Commander of the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), and Lieutenant General Aroldo Lazaro Saenz, Head of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), for their informative briefings.
In the person of the commanders present, we’d like to thank all military peacekeepers for their conscientious fulfillment of the tasks entrusted to them in maintaining peace and security in complex conflict situations.
Military components are particularly important in UN peacekeeping efforts. After all, it is precisely military components that stand at the origins of the peacekeeping activities of our global organization. The first mandate with their participation is really what represents the basic principles of peacekeeping: consent of the parties, impartiality and non-use of force except in self-defense and defense of the mandate. Furthermore, monitoring the ceasefire regime is something that UN military observers were doing long before the emergence of the very concept of UN peacekeeping.
The peacekeepers meticulously keep record of all violations of both sides, and this information forms the basis of the UN Secretary General's reports to the Security Council, which in turn can consider taking appropriate measures regarding the perpetrators. For example, one of the main tasks assigned to UNIFIL – as set out in the keynote Security Council resolution 1701 – is to monitor the cessation of hostilities along the Blue Line.
If it were not for that, the UN Security Council would have never learned, for example, that since the ceasefire was established, there has been recorded 50 times more shelling coming from Israel rather than from the north of the Blue Line – and this is of utmost importance when we want to establish which side is seeking escalation. If the Blue Helmets were not present in Lebanon, the Council would simply have no objective data regarding compliance with the cessation of hostilities regime.
It is clear that this function cannot be performed by any narrow-format structures. For example, after the establishment of the truce on November 26, 2024, a special monitoring mechanism was set up in Naqoura under the US leadership and with the participation of France, but this mechanism doesn’t provide us with this sort of information. In theory, this structure was supposed to receive complaints regarding possible violations by Israel and Lebanon, collect and verify the data and assist the sides in complying with the peace agreements. However, what the participants in the mechanism were going to do with that data is something that was not clarified to us from the very beginning. Therefore, according to the information we have, the Israeli side in most cases is simply ignoring the monitoring mechanism and bearing no responsibility whatsoever for its actions, which, in essence, nullifies any point of the Naqoura mechanism.
What we have as a result, is the Israeli decision to retain control over five strategic heights and over the border areas, as well as to organize two “buffer zones” in violation of the ceasefire agreements. And this is a clear example of that. The notorious ad hoc monitoring mechanism is producing nothing but a resounding silence, which makes a strong contrast to the public outcry by UNIFIL.
As regards the use of new technologies to monitor the ceasefire, we consider this matter to be purely practical in nature. Of course, peacekeepers must keep up with the times and harness the latest technological advances in their daily work. However, what should be taken into account is the sensitive nature of the issue and the need to obtain the consent of both parties. It is important that the use of information and digital technologies by peacekeepers not jeopardize the sovereignty of States nor violate the privacy of citizens. In this regard, we note the interaction between the Secretariat, the mission leadership and the parties represented by the IDF and the Lebanese Armed Forces, including through the Naqoura mechanism, which has repeatedly proved its effectiveness in preventing crisis situations.
What plays an important role in monitoring the ceasefire when it comes to UNIFIL is ground and air patrolling, which was basically suspended during Israel's fall campaign in 2024. We note with satisfaction that the peacekeeping mission's adaptation plan provides for an increase in the number of patrols to monitor the situation along the Blue Line, while establishing closer coordination with the Lebanese Armed Forces. At the same time, we should emphasize that access to the private sector, including with the view to investigating what happened, can only be carried out under the supervision of the Lebanese Army.
We would also like to raise the question of adapting ceasefire monitoring mechanisms to new threats, including to the spread of disinformation and fake news. In the Lebanese context, this issue seems to be somewhat trumped-up. We can speechify long and hard on the future of peacekeeping (which is an extremely popular topic at the moment), and at the same time fail to note point blank the fact of Israel's continued occupation of Lebanese territories, which actually poses a direct threat not only to the ceasefire monitoring regime but also to the work of peacekeepers in general. For example, the Secretary-General's latest report notes that violations of the freedom of movement of peacekeepers, which the Lebanese side was blamed for, are often linked to the general resentment of the population to the Israeli occupation, and the Blue Helmets in such a situation were just collateral in a way.
We believe that there is no alternative to both parties – Israel and Lebanon – returning to the implementation of all their obligations under UNSC resolution 1701. We note that this resolution not only stipulates Israel's obligations (namely, to cease all military operations, withdraw its armed forces from southern Lebanon, stop the occupation of Lebanese lands and violations of the sovereignty of the Republic of Lebanon), but also provides for the withdrawal of Hezbollah formations north of the Litani River.
Mr. President,
With regard to the situation in the DRC, resolution 2773 (which was adopted unanimously), reaffirmed the Security Council’s readiness to consider the possibility of involving MINUSCO in monitoring the eventual ceasefire, once a relevant agreement has been reached through regional diplomatic efforts under the auspices of the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
Russia is ready to discuss this with our colleagues on Council provided there is a relevant request from these subregional organizations. At the same time, we believe that if countries of the region formally request the involvement of MONUSCO in monitoring the ceasefire regime, then specific modalities for the participation of peacekeepers need to be framed through direct and open dialogue with our African colleagues. We also trust that there will be specific recommendations coming from the leadership of the Mission and the Secretariat. We believe this would enable the Council to take an informed decision during discussions on the parameters of MONUSCO's mandate.
What will stand out in such discussions is the question of how things are going to unfold in South Kivu, from where the Blue Helmets withdrew last summer. Given how sensitive this subject is, we believe that the Council need to be very careful and deliberate when discussing it. We are convinced that any decision by the Council should not call into question either the authority of the Security Council or the course for the Mission's gradual and phased withdrawal from the DRC.
Mr. President,
The Russian Federation, as a troop-contributing country, is striving to enhance its contribution to UN peacekeeping. Currently, through the Ministry of Defense, military observers and officers are serving on missions in the Central African Republic, Western Sahara, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Middle East, South Sudan and Cyprus.
The effective execution of the tasks before military observers requires proper staffing. Russia is making its contribution by training military peacekeepers, including foreigners, through programs certified by the UN Secretariat to train officers and military observers of the UN. Our country has unique experience in professional training of Blue Helmets, which we are ready to share.
Thank you.
