Meeting after Russian Federation’s Veto of Sanctions Text, General Assembly Speakers Consider Consequences for Stability in Mali
Only Peace Can Provide Long-Term Relief for Country’s People, Stresses President
Following the Russian Federation’s 30 August veto of a draft resolution that would have renewed certain Security Council measures against those obstructing peace in Mali, speakers in the General Assembly considered its implications amidst the demanded withdrawal of United Nations presence from a country still in crisis.
Dennis Francis (Trinidad and Tobago), President of the General Assembly, said that, against the backdrop of rising insecurity and political and humanitarian crises in Mali, the 2015 Agreement for Peace and Reconciliation “remains the only framework for achieving peace and stability”. “It must be supported,” he underscored, stating that only peace can provide long-term relief for Malians suffering from massive displacement and food insecurity.
He therefore urged Council members to recommit to negotiations towards peace and reconciliation in Mali. Member States, for their part, should consider how they can constructively advance discussions towards peace and security in the Assembly and support the Council in upholding its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations. “The veto initiative has opened the door for a new form of collaboration and accountability between our two organs,” he said, adding: “Let us use it to seek unity and achieve consensus.”
In the ensuing debate, held under the Assembly’s standing mandate to convene within 10 working days of a veto being cast in the Council, many Member States expressed concern over its use, particularly in the context of the withdrawal of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA). Others, however, underlined the need to respect Bamako’s wishes.
The representative of the United Arab Emirates — co-penholder with France on this issue — expressed regret that the Security Council could not adopt the resolution despite wide-ranging support. She recalled that, during negotiations, her delegation coordinated regularly with Mali and took into consideration the viewpoints of the countries in the region. However, proposals to find common ground failed to achieve the necessary consensus to keep the Panel of Experts’ reporting mandate and the sanctions regime.
Japan’s representative stressed that such measures have been critically important for peace and stability in Mali and across the whole region. However, Moscow did not engage in good-faith negotiations, introduced its own draft resolution at the last minute and then threatened that — if such text was not adopted — the issue would never be considered again in the Council. “Such behaviour as wielding the veto towards any text other than its own is unacceptable,” he said.
Echoing others, the Head of Delegation of the European Union, in its capacity as observer, said that the use of the veto by the Russian Federation blatantly disregarded the will of a large cross-regional majority of 13 countries, including the African Council members. Further, its use ignores the principles of multilateralism, puts further obstacles on the road to peace in Mali and will only isolate that country further, he said, stressing that “cutting ties with the United Nations is not an answer to Mali’s multidimensional crisis”.
The representative of the Russian Federation, explaining his delegation’s use of the veto, advocated against endless automatic extensions of sanctions regimes and noted that such measures should be reviewed regularly to see if they reflect the situation on the ground. During negotiations, his delegation stated on many occasions that attempts to impose external resolutions on Mali “have zero chance of success”. He further stressed that the Panel of Experts has produced biased reports, adding that Western countries’ only concern “is how to preserve their geopolitical dominance”.
In the same vein, Venezuela’s delegate, speaking for the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, excluding Algeria, underscored that Bamako officially requested MINUSMA’s termination due to factors including the Mission’s negative impact on national efforts. The situation on the ground has drastically changed over the past six years, and there is no longer a legitimate justification for perpetuating the enforcement of a sanctions regime on Mali, he emphasized.
Mali’s delegate stressed that the Panel of Experts became a political mechanism whose real agenda was unknown to his Government. The Panel demanded detailed information on military and security cooperation between the Russian Federation and Mali, which is a matter related to Bamako’s sovereign choice of partners. Further, the Panel addressed political or economic questions without any link to its mandate, including the question of violations of human rights, he said.
The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, on that, said that the Council is witnessing interference in internal affairs under the deceptive pretexts of “peace and security”, “human rights” and “democracy”. With Mali’s official request for MINUSMA’s withdrawal, he stressed that “there is no single basis or justification” to maintain either the Panel or the sanctions regime.
However, Canada’s representative, also speaking for Australia and New Zealand, warned against a shrinking civic space in Mali, with rising human rights violations against civilians perpetrated by armed and terrorist groups, as well as by the Malian Armed Forces in concert with the Wagner Group. He stressed: “Russia’s latest manoeuvre is not one that is motivated by protecting civilians and improving peace and security in Mali, but the contrary: a self-interested political agenda seeking to destabilize the region and to pillage its natural resources.”
The representative of Kenya, meanwhile, underlined the need to consider the implications of the international community’s inability to respond to mounting terrorist threats in several African countries. As States discuss the use of the veto today, they must not lose sight of the broader counter-terrorism context. “As threats mount on the ground, the Council’s unity is eroding,” he said, urging that organ to refocus its energy to address terrorist threats in Mali, the Sahel and the Horn of Africa.
https://press.un.org/en/2023/ga12528.doc.htm
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий