For the second time this week, the Security Council today did not hold a meeting, requested by the Russian Federation, to mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the 1999 aerial bombing campaign carried out by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) against the former Yugoslavia, having failed to adopt the provisional agenda to do so after a procedural vote was requested by France. (For background, see Press Release SC/15642.)
At the outset of the meeting, the representative of France underscored that the Council is charged with addressing international security crises that are referred to it — “not a forum for discussions on historical questions, particularly those of the last century”. However, the organ is open, at any time, to discussing the question of Kosovo, the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) or the implementation of resolution 1244 (1999) — as was the case when it opened its doors to Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić in February.
Adding that another meeting concerning Kosovo will be held in April, he stressed that the Council is here “to deal with current crises”. And, while meetings requested by any Council member on such crises — some of which involve permanent Council members — can be organized, he observed that the organ “is not here to replace historians, lawyers or jurisdictions”. On that basis, he requested a procedural vote on the provisional agenda and encouraged those present not to support organizing today’s meeting.
The representative of the Russian Federation then took the floor to say that France’s delegation is manipulating procedure, adding that France, the United Kingdom and the United States misled the Council by claiming that the Russian Federation did not consult others about the meeting despite earlier discussions on this issue. Recalling a recent decision by the Council of Europe regarding Kosovo’s membership, which contradicted resolution 1244 (1999), he asked whether such decision — “a direct continuation of the monstrous destructive line of the West in the Balkans” — became part of “history” as soon as it was adopted.
Likewise, he asked France’s representative whether the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is as old as the United Nations, should also be considered “a thing of the past”. Against this backdrop, he urged Council members to support a discussion on the Kosovo issue, highlighting NATO’s responsibility for civilian casualties during the bombing of the former Yugoslavia.
The representative of the United States, meanwhile, rejected claims of procedural juggling, pointing out that the Russian Federation has itself called procedural votes on the provisional agendas for certain Council meetings. On 31 January 2022, for example, that country called such a vote to prevent the Council from discussing the build-up of hundreds of thousands of its troops along its border with Ukraine. He added that if the Russian Federation “insists on calling votes for every meeting, we expect — for the sake of consistency — it will also call votes on its own meetings”.
Retaking the floor, France’s representative pointed out that the subject of Kosovo is on the Council’s agenda, and that the April meeting scheduled on that item — to which the parties themselves will be invited — will provide the opportunity to discuss this issue “in an updated way”. Adding that this discussion could be prolonged “forever”, he invited the Council President to put the provisional agenda to a vote. Responding, the representative of the Russian Federation said that the West is prepared to look into history when there is a need but is not prepared to do so when it does not see one.
The Council then voted and, by a tally of 6 in favour (Algeria, China, Guyana, Mozambique, Russian Federation, Sierra Leone) to none against, with 9 abstentions, the provisional agenda was not adopted as it did not obtain the required number of votes.
Speaking after the vote, the representative of Sierra Leone said that his delegation voted in favour of adopting the provisional agenda because the Council’s rules of procedure state that its President may call a meeting at the request of any Council member. Further, Article 35 of the Charter of the United Nations allows for discussion on any issue that has implications for the maintenance of international peace and security. He expressed hope that Council members can “come together and find common ground on the issue of holding procedural votes before every meeting”.
The representative of the Russian Federation, expressing disappointment over the voting results, said they “confirm that Western countries are overrepresented in the Council”. He continued: “We regret the fact that the Council, because of the Western troika, refused to discuss its own agenda item on the maintenance of international peace and security.” Highlighting the destructive consequences of NATO’s campaign in the former Yugoslavia, he stressed that Western States try to hide the truth about their actions and warned: “So far you have been able to avoid this discussion, but it will not be easy to avoid responsibility for your actions”.
China’s representative also voiced regret over the result of the vote, noting the importance of Council meetings that review the lessons of important episodes in history — such as the 1999 aerial bombing campaign carried out by NATO against the former Yugoslavia. Recent disruptions to the organ’s workflow are in nobody’s interest, he stressed, noting the Council’s heavy agenda and urging cooperation, at least on procedural matters — “the only way to keep the Council functioning”.
The representative of Japan, Council President for March, thanked Council members and the Secretariat for their support and noted that, while “it has been a busy month”, the Council was able to rally to consensus on several important issues.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
https://press.un.org/en/2024/sc15649.doc.htm
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий