YouSaid · the spoken record

Pierce

lines on the record: 1,742
first: 2006-06-20
most recent: 2020-03-12
sittings or episodes: 239
sources: un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“They are not fake; they need to be looked at and investigated by a proper independent mechanism such as the Council was prepared today to pass. Russia's credibility as a member of the Council is now in question. We will not stand idly by and watch Russia continue to undermine the global norms that have ensured the security of all of us, including Russia, for decades. As a P-S member, the United Kingdom will stand up for international peace and security; it is our moral duty. It is a matter of shame that Russia has once again blocked a draft resolution. The Russian Ambassador mentioned that it was not a question of counting the number of Russian vetoes. I beg to differ. To quote Lenin, quantity has a quality all of its own.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8228 (2018) · source
“This has come at the cost of Russia's own obligations and credibility as a permanent member of the Council, as a State party to the Chemical Weapons Convention and as a declared and supposed supporter of peace in Syria. The Security Council has been unable to act solely because Russia has abused the power of veto to protect Syria from international scrutiny for the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people. Even today open- source investigations have located a chlorine cylinder, the same kind that the Joint Investigative Mechanism has found that the Syrian regime used, atop a house in Douma full of people who had clearly died from respiratory problems. I frankly doubt that in 48 hours Russia has verified all similar reports and can conclude that they are all fake.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8228 (2018) · source
“No traces were found by whom? I repeat: Russia is not authorized to carry out an investigation on behalf of the Security Council. We need an independent investigative mechanism for that purpose, and only that sort of mechanism can have the confidence of the Security Council, the confidence of the membership of the United Nations and the confidence of the people of Syria. Sadly, reports of chemical-weapon attacks in Syria have continued since the original Russian veto, in November. It has become very clear that Russia will do what it takes to protect Syria, whatever the compelling evidence of the crimes committed, and to shut down further investigation and discussion of those crimes.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8228 (2018) · source
“Conversely, by vetoing, Russia has crossed a line in the international order, and worse, if possible, history is repeating itself one year on from Khan Shaykun. Russia helped to create the original independent investigation that attributed Khan Shaykun to the Syrian regime and concluded that sarin, which can be developed only by a State actor, had been used. But last autumn, Russia vetoed renewal of that mechanism on not one but three occasions. The reason is clear: it is because Russia would rather cross the WMD line than risk sanction of its ally Syria. Instead, we are asked to believe that the Russian version of this latest attack should be the one that the Security Council believes. Russia is not authorized by the Security Council to carry out an investigation in Syria. Russia says that there were no traces of a chemical attack.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8228 (2018) · source
“This is a sad day for the Security Council; it is a sad day for the cause of universal norms and standards; and it is a sad day for the non-proliferation regime. But, above all, it is a very sad day for the people of Douma, who now are without the protection that the international system was set up to provide for them. This is the fourth time in six days that the Council has discussed chemical weapons. Yesterday 14 members of the Security Council called for an investigation. Several members called on the permanent five (P-S) to assume their responsibilities to uphold the universal prohibition on weapons of mass destruction (WMD). As a P-S member, the United Kingdom was ready to do that and was joined by France and the United States.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8228 (2018) · source
“Credible and constitutional elections are the only way to end the political crisis and achieve stability in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and we urge the signatories of the Framework to ensure that peaceful and credible elections can take place in December 2018. That means that the electoral calendar must be respected, key milestones met and the confidence-building measures of the 2016 December agreement implemented in full. Critically, that includes freeing political prisoners and opening the political space and permitting peaceful demonstrations. This is a region that is in all our interests. The United Kingdom pledges to work together with partners to achieve progress. I have some other remarks on other aspects of the region and the Framework, but I will save them for consultations.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8227 (2018) · source
“We are also concerned about the continued proliferation of violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly in North and South Kivu, Tanganyika, lturi and the Kasais. The results of that instability have indeed been devastating. A total of 4.5 million Congolese have fled their homes and communities. There are more internally displaced people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo than anywhere else in Africa, and more than 13.1 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance and protection. We therefore support the other calls that have been made in the Council for regional players to come together in the interest of stability in the coming months. I also would like to endorse what the French Ambassador said about the importance of that regional cooperation. I would like to conclude by talking about elections.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8227 (2018) · source
“We welcome the progress that has been made in the five years since the signing of the Framework. I would like to highlight the increase in the participation of women and the commitment to greater regional and international cooperation in the course of advancing peace and security. Nevertheless, we are concerned about the fact that progress has not been made in the implementation of key elements, including the repatriation of foreign combatants. As the Ambassador of the Congo highlighted, we welcome efforts to reinvigorate the Framework, and urge all its signatories to implement it in full. We are very supportive of what the Special Representative of the Secretary-General had to say on judicial issues.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8227 (2018) · source
“But as the Special Representative and the Ambassador of the Congo have spelled out, the Democratic Republic of the Congo has always been at the centre of the Framework, and the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - the nerve centre - affects the stability of the region. As the Council has discussed in recent days, we are now at a critical juncture. What happens in the Democratic Republic of the Congo over the next few months could be a defining moment for greater regional stability. We have a choice between seeing the situation improve or seeing it overturned. The United Kingdom, for its part, remains committed to supporting the implementation of the Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework and to the holding of free, fair and credible elections in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in December.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8227 (2018) · source
“I wanted to take the floor because we are at an important point in this region. I also want to welcome the Special Representative of the Secretary-General back to the Security Council and, through him, to thank the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) for everything it is doing. It was also extremely helpful to have the update from the Ambassador of the Congo. I would like to start by saying to my good friend the Ambassador of Equatorial Guinea that the contribution that his country makes is not modest. It is much more than that. It has been five years since the Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework was signed. It has proved to be crucial to pursuing peace and stability in the Great Lakes region.”
2018-04-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8227 (2018) · source
“I apologize for taking the floor again, but I want to clarify something. The Russian Ambassador's English is far too good for him not to have understood me when I spoke on 5 April (see S/PV.8224). The investigation of the Salisbury incident that is under way is an independent police investigation, and the United Kingdom will be very pleased to update the Council as and when we have something to say. If I may, I would like to add one more thing. The other difference between Salisbury and Syria is that the United Kingdom is a party to the Chemical Weapons Convention in good standing, and the Syrian Government has not complied with its obligations as certified by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“I am sorry to say that what the two do have in common though, is Russia's refusal to assume P-5 responsibilities to prevent the use of WMDs and its reckless support for the use of WMDs by its agents and by its allies. It is not we who want to alienate Russia. It alienates herself by not joining in the vast majority of the Council who wish to find a non-polemical way through and to address the use of chemical weapons against civilians in Syria. The Russian Ambassador mentioned friends of the United States. My Government and its people are proud to be a friend of the United States. We stand with everyone on the Council who wants to find a way through the chemical weapons problem, to have a proper fact-finding mission and to have a proper investigation as the first step to bringing this dreadful conflict to a close.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“I repeat here the two demands of my French colleague, and I hope we will be able to make progress. I had not intended to address the Skripal case in Salisbury, but since my Russian colleague has done so, I will address it today. He asked what the similarities were between Salisbury and Syria. I think it is important that I point out that the cases are different in the following respects. First, there is a thorough investigation under way in Salisbury. As we have heard, there is no investigation under way in Syria. The British Government in Salisbury is seeking to protect its people, as is its duty. The Syrian Government, on the contrary, as we have heard today, attacks and gasses its people.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“It strikes me that what Russia is trying to do is to turn the debate in the Council away from the discussion of the use of chemical weapons into a dispute between East and West, presenting itself as the victim. It is far too important to play games with the politics between East and West in respect of chemical weapons. Russia's crocodile tears for the people of eastern Ghouta has an easy answer. It is to join us in the non-political attempt to get in humanitarian and protection workers from the United Nations to do their job of looking after and mitigating the risk to civilians. Russia's concern about attribution for the use of chemical weapons also has an easy answer. It is to join us in allowing the United Nations to set up an international investigative mechanism to pursue the responsible parties.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“That is why we support the United States text for a draft resolution and we believe that there is no legitimate reason not to support the call for the Council to set up an independent investigative mechanism. As I said before, we have nothing to hide, but it appears that Russia, Syria and their supporters, Iran, do have something to fear. The Russian Ambassador singled out the United Kingdom, the United States and France for criticism. I would like, ifI may, to turn to that. The responsibility for the cruelty in Syria belongs to Syria and its backers - Russia and Iran. The use of chemical weapons is an escalatory and diabolical act.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“But there is one way to settle this - to have an independent fact-finding mission followed by an independent investigation - as we all know that fact-finding missions are there to determine whether chemical weapons have been used and, ifthey have been used, what sort ofchemical weapons. But only an investigation can determine who is responsible for their use, and therefore start the path to accountability. I was very interested to hear the Russian offer that an OPCW fact-finding mission could visit and would have the protection of Russian forces. I believe that this is an offer worth pursuing, but it would, of course, be necessary for the OPCW mission to have complete freedom of action and freedom of access. That still leaves us with the question of who committed these atrocities.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“That is the attacks that we talked about in the Council just last week at Khan Sheykhoun, which led to the United States strike - which we support - on Al-Shayrat. In addition, as the French Ambassador has said, we had reports of Russian and Syrian warnings before the chemical-weapon attack took place and of a pattern of Mi-8 Hip helicopters flying overhead. Those reports have come from the ground. I listened carefully to the Russian Ambassador's argument. As I have just set out, we, as the United Kingdom believe that the Syrian regime is responsible for these latest attacks.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“We share his fears, but it is the Syrian Government and its backers, Iran and Russia, who are prolonging the fighting and risking regional and wider instability. There are real questions about what is happening in the T-4 airbase, with its foreign fighters and its mercenaries. We have been challenged today by our Russian colleague to say why we believe the attack was carried out by Syria and why we believe, further, that chemical weapons were used. The reasons are as follows. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism found six uses of chemical weapons between 2014 and 2017. Two it ascribed to Da'esh for the use of mustard gas, three it ascribed to the regime for the use of chlorine and one further use it ascribed to the Syrian regime for the use of sarin.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“As one of the five permanent members of the Council (P-S), the United Kingdom believes that we have a particular responsibility to uphold the worldwide prohibition on the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). We agree with the Netherlands Ambassador that the P-5 has specific responsibilities. I believe that four members of the P-S do believe that, but there is one that does not. The Russian Ambassador referred to a resurgence of the Cold War. This is not the Cold War. In the Cold War there was not this flagrant disregard for the prohibitions that are universal on the use of WMDs. The Special Representative of the Secretary- General also referred to the risks of escalation, and to international peace and security more broadly.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“I thank the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria and Mr. Markram for their briefings. I also thank all the United Nations teams on the ground for the important and incredibly difficult work they do. As Staffan de Mistura said, this is an important Security Council meeting. My Government shares the outrage that other colleagues have eloquently described today. It is truly horrific to think ofvictims and families sheltered underground when the chlorine found them. This is the third time in five days that the Council has convened to discuss chemical weapons. This is dreadful in the true sense of that word. The Council should dread what we risk happening - for chemical weapons to become a routine part of fighting.”
2018-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8225 (2018) · source
“I will not detain my colleagues for very long. There is another very good quote from Lewis Carroll in Through the Looking Glass, and What Alice Found There: "Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." I think that is the quote that suits my Russian colleague best. Ijust wanted to say that we are of course committed to keeping the Council updated. We will share with the Council, at the Council's request, as much information as we can, as and when we have it, and in accordance with developments. The meeting rose at 4.50 pm.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“We cannot ignore Russia's turning a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons in Syria and in Salisbury, and we cannot ignore the way that Russia seeks to undermine the international institutions that have kept us safe since the end of the Second World War. We believe that the actions of the United Kingdom stand up to any scrutiny. We have acted in accordance with the Chemical Weapons Convention throughout and, through the body charged for these purposes, the OPCW, we are happy to come to the Council at any time. We would be very willing to hold an open briefing at our mission here in New York if there are members of the United Nations who still have questions. We have nothing to hide, but I do fear that Russia might have something to fear.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“It is such use that threatens international peace and security. The threats to the Chemical Weapons Convention from attacks in Syria, Malaysia and now the United Kingdom pose a very serious challenge to the non-proliferation regime that the Council and others have carefully constructed in response to the terrible events ofthe past. There is one country among us - Russia - that plays fast and loose with our collective security and the international institutions that protect us. It it is that reason that leads people to accuse Russia and take steps against it. It is not out of lack of friendship for the Russian people or lack of respect for Russia as a country. My own Foreign Secretary Visited in the hope of establishing a more productive relationship with Foreign Minister Lavrov. But we cannot ignore what has happened in Salisbury.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“Russia discredited the work of the OPCW-United Nations Joint Investigation Mechanism on the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Members of the Council will be familiar with a pattern of aggression over the years in Georgia and Crimea. F1ightMH-17 was shot down and there was a bungled attempt at a coup in Montenegro. Each time, such acts are accompanied by distortion and disinformation - the same sort of distortion and disinformation we saw yesterday in The Hague, in the Russian press conferences and in the Security Council today. While we ourselves would not have called today's meeting, we hope to be able to brief the Council further once we have received the report from the OPCW. We believe that it is right that the Security Council remain seized of the flagrant use of chemical weapons.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“Having failed to obtain a joint investigation, the draft resolution received only 6 out of 41 votes in favour and, without waiting for the outcome of OPCW testing, Russia has reverted to a familiar path of undermining the international institution involved. There is no construction we can place on Mr. Lavrov's remarks today other than that Russia will accept the results of the OPCW Salisbury poisoning investigation only if Russian experts participate in it. I am sorry but that does not make it an independent investigation. If Russia insists on having its own experts, it seeks to move away from the Chemical Weapons Convention's stipulation and it sets a test that no independent investigation could credibly tolerate. Regrettably, it is part ofa wider pattern of irresponsible Russian behaviour.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“The samples have been sent to several designated laboratories for testing. The analysis from those laboratories will now be returned to the OPCW and they will produce a report. Contrary to Russian claims, the United Kingdom looks forward to sharing its findings once we have received that report. Yesterday, Russia put forward a draft resolution at the Executive Council, proposing a joint investigation. There are several ways to View that investigation. I think the metaphor that I find most apt is that of an arsonist turned firefighter but, in this particular instance, the arsonist wishes to investigate his own fire.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“Everything we have done has been consistent with the Chemical Weapons Convention and, ifI may say so, I will not take any lectures on morality or review our responsibilities under such international conventions from a country that, as the Council debated yesterday (see S/PV.8221), has done so much to block the proper investigation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria. The United Kingdom's track record on that issue speaks for itself. On 21 March, the OPCW deployed a team to the United Kingdom to visit the locations where the victims were exposed to a toxic chemical. The Director-General briefed the OPCW Executive Council yesterday on its actions. OPCW expert staff collected environmental samples from the scene and biomedical samples from the victims. The OPCW has verified the chain of custody.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“The use of chemical weapons on any country's territory is far too serious for those theories to hold water. The Chemical Weapons Convention, which came into force 21 years ago, is clear in article VII that States should adopt legislation criminalizing activity prohibited under the Convention. That is why the United Kingdom is conducting a full investigation into the incident, including under our own Chemical Weapons Act. Because of it, in addition to the United Kingdom's criminal investigation, we have invited the OPCW - the relevant international body - to assist in verifying our analysis on the basis of article VIII of the Chemical Weapons Convention. It mandates the Technical Secretariat to provide technical assistance and technical evaluation to States parties.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“The Foreign Secretary was making clear that Porton Down was sure that the nerve agent was a Novichok - a point that it has subsequently reinforced. In the same interview, based on that information, additional intelligence and, as I said, the lack of an alternative explanation from the Russians, he goes on to make clear why we have reached the conclusion we have. What the Foreign Secretary said then and what Porton Down has said recently is fully consistent with what we have said throughout. In contrast, we have had innumerable theories from the Russians. I think we have counted some 24 in all. On 21 March, for example, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated that it believed terrorists were to blame. On 14 March, Mr. Lavrov said that the British response was aimed at distracting from Brexit.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“We also made our own assessment that Russia views defectors as suitable targets for assassination and, indeed, there are public statements from Russian leaders to that effect. I would like to say a word about the use of the phrase "highly likely". We use it because under the British system, only a court can finally determine culpability. Therefore, the use of the phrase "highly likely" is a reflection of ourjudicial process and should not be construed as casting any doubt whatsoever on the likelihood of Russia being responsible. I would also like to take this opportunity to address the Russian Ambassador's comment about Porton Down contradicting Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson. There was no contradiction.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“Porton Down is an accredited laboratory under and conforms to the Chemical Weapons Convention. It is allowed to conduct protective research. The second reason that helped us come to our conclusion was the knowledge that Russia has produced that nerve agent within the past 10 years and remains capable of doing so. As the Prime Minister made clear in the British Parliament, we know that the Russian State has investigated ways of assassination through the use of nerve agents. The third reason is Russia's record of conducting State-sponsored assassinations. I do not want to detain the Council by going through a long list but I can provide examples if anyone would like to hear them.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“We stated that Russia should declare its Novichok programme to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). We gave 24 hours because it is a weapon of mass destruction. It was no ordinary poisoning and no ordinary attack. In our view, the circumstances justified that tight deadline. Notwithstanding, the Russians stated that the request was null and void. They did not request more time. They did not come to us and say that they wanted to look into it with us. They rejected the very premise of the request. As the Russian Ambassador stated, we have said that it is highly likely that Russia carried out the assassination attempt. The British Government came to that conclusion because of positive identification by experts at Porton Down that the specific chemical used is a type of Novichok nerve agent.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“We have received a request from the Russian Consulate that we have conveyed to Yulia Skripal, and we are awaiting her response. That is an obligation under international law that the British Government takes very seriously, but there is also the question of Ms. Skripal's own wishes, which have to be taken into account. The Russian Ambassador had several points to make about the United Kingdom's demands of Russia. As he outlined, on 12 March we asked the Russian Government a very clear question. Russia refused to respond and said that it considered the request null and void. It was indeed true that we asked for a response within 24 hours to the question of how a Russian-developed military-grade nerve agent came to be used on the streets of Salisbury and if it meant that Russia had lost control of its chemical-weapons stocks.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“In the United Kingdom, the police are independent of the Government, but if there are more details that we can share with the Council as the investigation proceeds, we will be very happy to do so. We all know why that investigation is under way. It is because a military-grade nerve agent was used in an attempt to kill civilians on British soil. It was carried out recklessly and without regard for public safety. It was a weapon of mass destruction. A British police officer was in critical condition alongside the Skripals, and ordinary members of the public, going about their daily business, were put at risk. I am glad not only to be able to inform the Council that Yulia Skripal is able to communicate and is getting better, but also to clarify what the Russian Ambassador said about consular access.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“We did not seek this meeting, but we take requests from the Council for meetings very seriously. I am pleased to be able to update the Council on some developments, but I am also pleased to be able to provide the intellectual clarity that our Russian colleague has called for. In my statement, I will stick to the facts. Following Sergei and Yulia Skripal's poisoning in Salisbury on 4 March, the United Kingdom has launched one of the most comprehensive and complex investigations ever conducted of the use of a chemical weapon. It involves more than 250 police detectives, who are supported by a range of specialist experts and partners. They are trawling through more than 5,000 hours of closed-circuit television footage. They are examining more than 1,300 seized exhibits and interviewing more than 500 witnesses.”
2018-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8224 (2018) · source
“The rules- based international order and its institutions are too valuable to be put at risk in that way. It is our collective duty to protect them and seek accountability for those who choose to defy them. We fail the people of Syria, the people of Salisbury and the world if we do not act. Both my Dutch and American colleagues drew attention to the 100 years that have elapsed since some of the worst battles of the First World War. Allow me to conclude with a quote from a poem from that War, "I died in hell - (They called it Passchendaele)". It has a new name now.”
2018-04-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8221 (2018) · source
“The poisoning in Salisbury of two people with a military-grade nerve agent endangered anyone who chanced to be in the vicinity. More than 130 people, including a police officer, were potentially exposed to the agent. There has been no explanation offered as to how a Russian nerve agent came to be used in that manner. On 22 March, a Foreign Ministry official in Moscow rejected the idea that Russia would accept the OPCW independent conclusions in examining material from the Salisbury attack, and today Russia has called a meeting of the Executive Council of OPCW in The Hague to pre-empt the findings of the OPCW investigation. There should be no more victims of chemical weapons attacks, whether they take place in the war zone of Syria or in an English country town.”
2018-04-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8221 (2018) · source
“Those are not trivial points of minor detail; they are substantive, and the seriousness of the outstanding concerns has increased over time. My United States and Dutch colleagues have eloquently drawn attention to the fact that there can be no impunity, and we echo their call to that end. Last November, Russia blocked the renewal of the mandate of the Joint Investigative Mechanism and that leaves us, as the Dutch Ambassador said, without a proper mechanism to determine accountability. I echo what he said about the way to explore all avenues in order to try and find a way of establishing accountability and responsibility for such weapons. It is not just through actions in Syria, unfortunately, that Russia's disdain for the international system manifests itself.”
2018-04-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8221 (2018) · source
“The Director-General noted that Syria had destroyed its declared programme very quickly, but that questions had arisen following inspections conducted by the OPCW, and overtime those questions have increased as inspectors have deployed to Syria more than a dozen times. Chemicals were found that should have been declared, and yet Syria claimed not to know why. After long, drawn-out discussions, they finally declared the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Centre, but there were still 21 serious issues that remained unaddressed. That means that after more than four years of work, the OPCW is still unable to verify that Syria's declaration is accurate, and as we have heard many times, gaps, inconsistencies and discrepancies remain in Syria's account of its declaration under the Chemical Weapons Convention.”
2018-04-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8221 (2018) · source
“As previous speakers have said, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Fact-finding Mission in the Syrian Arab Republic concluded that sarin was used in Khan Shaykhun, and the OPCW-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism concluded that the Syrian regime was responsible for the attack. Khan Shaykhun was not the first time the regime used chemical weapons. In 2013, after hundreds that were killed with sarin in eastern Ghouta, Russia and the Al-Assad regime promised the world that Syria would abandon all of its chemical weapons. Resolution 2118 (2013) decided that Syria would destroy its chemical weapons programme and join the Chemical Weapons Convention. Last month, the Director-General briefed the Council on Syria's progress in doing just that.”
2018-04-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8221 (2018) · source
“I thank the Deputy to the High Representative for his briefing. I would like to start by also saluting Dr. Morad. I thank him for his work, and I thank Ambassador Haley for drawing our attention to his presence in this Chamber today. I also thank all those members of the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross and others who try so hard to help the people of Syria. We have heard very graphic accounts of what exactly sarin is and how it attacks the central nervous system and leads to convulsions, paralysis and asphyxiation. I am sure that none of us will forget the footage we saw of the agony of the men, women and children who were poisoned by this nerve gas.”
2018-04-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8221 (2018) · source
“However, we do urge the Secretary-General to be realistic and clear with regard to the division of responsibilities across the United Nations system. It is ultimately the Government of Haiti's leadership that will make the transition a success but, as other speakers have noted, where we are now presents us with an enormous opportunity for achieving a successful outcome not just for the Government of Haiti but for the entire United Nations family and for peacekeeping in general.”
2018-04-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8220 (2018) · source
“In conclusion, it is critical that the Mission and the Government work together in a spirit of solidarity and mutual respect and trust. Where the United Kingdom can help, the Council can count on it to do so. At this point, I would like to mention the sad history of sexual exploitation and abuse that Haiti has witnessed and to say that we will work with the Secretary-General to ensure the implementation of the zero-tolerance policy throughout the whole of the United Nations. The time remaining to meet the transition target of October 2019 is now limited. We hope to see the adoption of a clear transition plan that will set out how we will move from peacekeeping to development. What Mr. Lacroix said in that regard was very encouraging.”
2018-04-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8220 (2018) · source
“The plan for transferring responsibilities from the Mission to the country team is a complex one, and it makes the transition even more complex than it inherently is. We hope that the Mission, in consultation with the Government, will be able to develop the necessary indicators. Using clear and realistic milestones will enable us to track progress. While we note that many colleagues and the Under- Secretary-General spoke about the fragility of the transition, we believe that if we have such milestones and benchmarks, they will reduce the risk associated with the exit strategy. In particular, the exit strategy should also be clearly aligned with the United Nations Development Assistance Framework 2017-2021.”
2018-04-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8220 (2018) · source
“In particular, there should be a strong focus on collaboration between the country team and the Mission; support from the Peacebuilding Fund, as other colleagues have mentioned; flexible and coordinated partnerships between mobile teams and the country team; and close cooperation with other international and bilateral partners. I alsojoin others in hoping to see an overall focus on the progress that can be made with the Sustainable Development Goals. The Secretary- General's report for May is eagerly awaited. We hope it will outline the progress needed to deliver an integrated and sustainable transition in the next 18 months. Thirdly, the two-year exit strategy should demonstrate clear progress against the benchmarks that the Secretary-General has set.”
2018-04-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8220 (2018) · source
“To that end, the United Kingdom urges the Government and the United Nations to take the following three steps. First, the Government should take ownership of the delivery of critical reforms that will have a lasting impact on security and development. I want to particularly highlight the importance of protecting the independence of the police, enacting new legislation to empower the judiciary, ensuring that human rights are protected by strong State institutions and empowering women to be political leaders. Secondly, we look to the United Nations to be a well-integrated organization on the ground that can ensure an effective transition by implementing the joint work plan.”
2018-04-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8220 (2018) · source
“We are very interested in the way in which the Government is establishing a solid and sustainable foundation for Haiti's long-term political stability, security and development. As the Under-Secretary- General just said, this is a real vote of confidence in the country. It is good to hear that the Mission for Justice Support is actively implementing its mandate, and we now look to it to deliver a smooth transition to a non-peacekeeping United Nations presence. In particular, we support the Mission's intention to hand over responsibility for ensuring the rule of law, human rights and security sector reform to the United Nations country team and the Government of Haiti by October 2019. We want to ensure that the transition is a success.”
2018-04-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8220 (2018) · source
“I would like to join my colleagues in congratulating you, Sir, on your presidency, and thanking the Netherlands for theirs. I also thank the Under-Secretary-General for his briefing. It was very good to have news of his visit in March and to see the degree to which the Security Council's mandate is being actively implemented. The United Kingdom welcomes the continued progress in Haiti. We are particularly interested in the development of the Haitian National Police, the penal chain committee initiative and the efforts to strengthen the rule of law, and, like other speakers, we applaud the new United Nations approach to cholera. It is very good to see the dedication and support that the United Nations Mission for Justice Support in Haiti (MINUJUSTH) has given the Government of Haiti in carrying out its tasks.”
2018-04-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8220 (2018) · source
“We call on Russia to use its influence to ensure that at a minimum the United Nations can fulfil its mandate to ensure humanitarian assistance and protection for Syrians on the basis of need, regardless of any other considerations. I was at Geneva in 2012. I think we all feel that that was a huge missed opportunity, in the light of events. The situation has escalated every year since that time, and, as the Under-Secretary-General said, the level of access is worse. The Council has a small opportunity to put measures in place to reduce the risk of reprisals. As you said, Mr. President, if the Security Council cannot do it, who can?”
2018-03-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8217 (2018) · source
“More than a million internally displaced Syrians live there, including those who have fled eastern Ghouta. In Afrin, we recognize Turkey's legitimate interest in the security of its borders, but at the same time we remain concerned about the impact of operations on the humanitarian situation, and my Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have raised the need for protection of civilians and access with President Erdogan and his Ministers. It was good to hear from the Under-Secretary-General that there may at last be signs of progress in Afrin. After seven years ofconflict, over 13 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance in Syria. The Al-Assad regime has created the situation and is now preventing humanitarian actors from relieving some of the horror it has inflicted.”
2018-03-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8217 (2018) · source