YouSaid · the spoken record

Polyanskiy

lines on the record: 2,335
first: 2018-01-31
most recent: 2023-12-22
sittings or episodes: 300
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

“We are also undertaking efforts to restore intra-Palestinian unity, and we welcome the steps taken by our Egyptian colleagues in that direction. In that context, the Security Council's mission to the region is long overdue, which many of our colleagues have already mentioned. It should bolster trust, facilitate the resumption of negotiations between the parties and prevent the failure of the international community's efforts to ensure conditions for the implementation of the only viable settlement on the international legal basis. That framework was developed by the Security Council, and its revision should be done within the Security Council, too.”
2019-08-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8604 (2019) · source
“We would like to know how far the United States is willing to go in revising old and unnecessary decisions. For our part, we are convinced that unilateral actions that ignore international law will not produce results. They are detrimental to the prospects for a just and lasting solution to the long-standing Israeli- Palestinian problem. We support the involvement of the Quartet of international mediators as the only mechanism to support the Middle East peace process endorsed by the relevant Security Council resolutions. Russia is doing everything in its power to promote all of the activities in the Middle East peace process, including by offering a potential platform for meetings between Israel and Palestine, without preconditions.”
2019-08-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8604 (2019) · source
“Frankly, statements on the uselessness of seeking consensus on the Middle East peace process within the United Nations and the futility of the relevant Council resolutions are of great concern to us. Choosing to destroy all that has been achieved on creating an independent Palestinian State, living in peace alongside Israel, is fraught with the most terrible consequences for the entire region. It would allow only for the further radicalization of the Arab street. In the light of the statement of our American colleagues on the need to review and revise old decisions of the United Nations on the Middle East peace process, I would like to recall that it was thanks to General Assembly resolution 181 (II) that Israel was established. The declaration on the establishment of the State of Israel also mentions it.”
2019-08-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8604 (2019) · source
“Against that backdrop, it is clear that unilateral actions do not bring us closer to resolving the old and new problems in the region. The situation of some United Nations Member States trying to put Governments of other States beyond the reach of the law is particularly harmful. We, like many of our partners, see clearly that the only way out of all of that is by pooling international and regional efforts, with a central role played by the United Nations and its Security Council. That premise must be the basis for all relevant efforts and initiatives. Our memory is still fresh of the statement made in this Chamber a month ago by the Special Representative for International Negotiations of the United States on the Middle East peace process, Mr. Jason Greenblatt (see S/PV.8583).”
2019-08-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8604 (2019) · source
“Mr. Polyanskiy (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We thank Mr. Nickolay Mladenov, Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, for his report on the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories. We welcome you, Mr. President, as Secretary of State of the Chancellery and Chief of the Cabinet of the President. The Middle East is at the heart of global politics. The region is beset by many crises, old and new. Russia is closely following the development of the situation, given that we have long-standing relations with the States of the region, based on mutual respect, mutually beneficial cooperation and common interests. We note with concern the ongoing tension in the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. It is further compounded by Israel's ongoing settlement activities and the situation in and around the Gaza Strip.”
2019-08-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8604 (2019) · source
“In conclusion, I would like to extend our condolences to the Government and people of the Sudan with regard to the 62 Sudanese who died at the beginning of July following the heavy rainfall and flooding. According to the media, that natural disaster seriously damaged the country's economy and affected almost 200,000 people. More than 37,000 homes were destroyed. The international community should come together to provide assistance to Khartoum in that very difficult situation. Once again, we urge all efforts to be directed towards economic support for the Sudan, with a focus on peacebuilding tasks and the development challenges.”
2019-08-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8603 (2019) · source
“The general trend in regions that the Blue Helmets have already left has not changed. We believe that that again demonstrates that the Security Council made the right decision when it reduced the military component of UNAMID and decided on the withdrawal of the mission in 2020. In September, we look forward to the special report of the United Nations and the African Union containing specific proposals on the UNAMID drawdown. We would like to stress that we are against any attempts to change the mission's exit plan. The challenges facing Darfur today are of a peacebuilding, not a peacekeeping, nature. The time has come to focus on recovery and economic development in Darfur and that should now be the priority of the international community.”
2019-08-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8603 (2019) · source
“We must also pay tribute to the Sudanese people, who have been able to overcome discord and reach an agreement against the backdrop of continuing external pressure. Regrettably, as in the past, we still note that there are various outside forces that try to exploit the difficult political situation in the country and tailor the political developments in Khartoum to their narrow self- interests. We repeat that resolving the domestic crisis in the country is a matter for the Sudanese themselves. The language of ultimatums and blatant inference in the affairs ofa sovereign State are absolutely unacceptable. It could all lead to heightened tensions. With regard to the situation in Darfur, we can see a significant improvement in the security situation. We also note that there has been some normalization in the humanitarian sphere.”
2019-08-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8603 (2019) · source
“We were confident that, within that period, the Sudanese would be able to overcome the difficult domestic political situation and resume substantive dialogue on the modalities of UNAMID's exit. Developments have shown that we were right. We welcome the signing of a constitutional declaration on 17 August in Khartoum by the representatives of the Transitional Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change. That agreement is without a doubt an important step towards ensuring solid stability within the country over the long term. We would like to particularly note the mediation efforts of Ethiopia and the African Union, including under the Ethiopian chairmanship, in the negotiations process. That was a concrete example of the idea that African problems require African solutions.”
2019-08-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8603 (2019) · source
“Mr. Polyanskiy (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We thank Under-Secretary-General J ean- Pierre Lacroix and African Union Commissioner Sma'il Chergui for their detailed briefings. Two months ago, we voted in favour of resolution 2479 (2019) on the technical rollover of the mandate for the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID). Russia understood the position of the African Union, which advocated conducting an analysis of the situation in the Sudan and developing a well-thought-out plan for the responsible drawdown of the hybrid peacekeeping operation. As members will recall, at that time, we said that we should limit the extension of the mandate to a month or two.”
2019-08-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8603 (2019) · source
“In the parallel reality created by our Western partners, where no evidence is required and allegations in the spirit of "highly likely" are accepted as proof, such behaviour is considered normal. The fact is that we live in the real world, not a virtual one. And as long as there are countries and experts who continue to question all these seamless but empty Western tales, our world still has a chance. I would like to believe that our initiative with China will increase the number of those who are not afraid to call things by their real names or to demand actions and practical steps from those who violate agreements of importance to the whole world and flout the norms of international law to serve their own interests. The meeting rose at 4. 35 pm.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“That is another problem that Washington has artificially created, which, as I already said, we have been trying unsuccessfully to prevent for a long time. I should like to stress, so that no one has any illusions, that the NATO countries are involved in this situation. In conclusion, I would like to say that, unfortunately, today's meeting has proved to be so predictable that it verges on the boring. As we expected, despite the facts and common sense, the United States and its client countries parroting along with it were shifting the blame from the guilty to the innocent, blaming Russia for all mortal sins. There is nothing new or surprising about that.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“We offered to provide the Americans with all the information they needed to save the Treaty. And now that they have already caused the Treaty to collapse, the American side is making attempts to demand that information. With regard to the new Russian weapons systems that were mentioned earlier, my American colleague must know that they all share a common feature, namely, the ability to overcome missile-defence systems. It is precisely because of the withdrawal of the United States of America from the Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems, to which I referred earlier in my statement, and the deployment of such systems near our borders that we were forced to develop this type of device.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“Last year, after it finally became clear what Washington was so concerned about, we offered to the United States side the opportunity to take a look, behind closed doors, at the 9M729 missile they were interested in, so that it could obtain exhaustive information about it and thus be assured that that weapon did not violate the Treaty. That response was once again met with a refusal. We then made another attempt. As an unprecedented transparency measure that goes far beyond the requirements of the Treaty, we publicly displayed the missile in the presence of foreign delegations, but United States representatives did not participate in the event and recommended that their NATO partners follow suit, which, of course, they did. We therefore fail to understand my American colleague's arguments.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“Mr. Polyanskiy (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We had not intended to go into technical details, but because our American colleagues and their partners brought up specific issues, I am compelled to take the floor once again. I will be brief. Since the 9M729 missile was mentioned, I would like to give an explanation. Over many years of discussions, the United States has steadfastly refused to communicate with us not only about the tests that have been carried out, which, as we understand, gave rise to questions in Washington, but also about any identifying information concerning that device.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“However, we remain realistic. It is easier to dismantle than to build. As history has shown, it can take years, if not decades, to launch a more or less sustainable and effective new format for discussing issues of strategic stability and arms control. However, there are some problems, including those arising from the irresponsible actions taken by Washington, that must be resolved today.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“Are they going to deny that they are partly responsible for what is happening, echoing Washington and pointing to a perceived threat from Russia and from China as well? Will future generations forgive them for this? Despite everything I have said, we continue to believe that, as concerns our Western partners, common sense and the instinct of self-preservation will eventually prevail. After all, the very existence of humankind is at stake. The only question is how much money and effort will have been wasted by then and how many opportunities for progress and cooperation we will have missed. For our part, we have always been ready to engage in any serious dialogue aimed at ensuring strategic stability and security. If it were up to us only, we would never have come close to a line so dangerous as the one the world is approaching now.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“Just think about how much we could have done if the money that our Western colleagues have been allocating for military purposes had been spent to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and help less developed and developing countries. Moreover, our American partners continue to bargain on the budget of peacekeeping operations and to follow their established practice of postponing until the very last moment their contributions to the United Nations budget, the total amount of which is less than $10 billion this year. All that seems notjust petty but also disrespectful to all the Members of our world Organization. We are not afraid to say it to their faces. What about other members?”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“That rationale, inspired by the best American westerns, is backed up by the numbers: according to publicly available data, the United States military budget is about $700 billion, while the budget ofNATO amounts to $1.4 trillion. These are just approximate figures. For reference, the military budget of Russia, which is allegedly a threat to us all, is about $60 billion, that is, more than 20 times lower than that of NATO. Obviously, following the risky undertakings by the United States of America, all these figures may increase; the United States President has already made that very point. We would note here that expenditures on the development of weapons prohibited by the INF Treaty had been included in the United States military budget long before the Treaty was sentenced to death. And, as always, Russia is to blame.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“We will not be the first to do that. However, given that our American colleagues are clearly itching to and want to flex their muscles, the situation that I have just described may be at hand. Are they aware that, because of the geopolitical ambitions of the United States of America, we are all just one step away from an uncontrolled, unregulated arms race? For our part, unlike our American colleagues, we are deeply concerned at this state of affairs. In any case, according to President Trump, America is prepared for an arms race, as it is supposedly capable of surpassing any of its potential rivals in terms of finance and technology.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“It contained no criticism of the United States but only urged support for diplomatic efforts to address challenges affecting the security and national interests of all States Members of the United Nations, without exception. We unequivocally warned them then that the demise of the INF Treaty would not only undermine the implementation of article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons but would also lead to a new nuclear arms race. Many partners listened closely to us, but Washington's European allies did not. Here I have a question for them: are they happy today that in December they chose to press the red button? Do they not understand that their playing along with the Americans at every step is bringing back that bygone era when missiles could target European cities from various sides?”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“No matter how much Washington insists today on the old mantra that it was Russia's actions that undermined the INF Treaty, its most recent steps are eloquent evidence to the contrary. But that is no longer the issue. To be frank, today it is not our American partners that we are primarily addressing, because their Views are clear. But we are very surprised by the stubborn position that is being adopted by our European colleagues, as their stubbornness would be much more helpful if applied in a different way. The Council may recall that, as recently as last December, Russia proposed a General Assembly draft resolution supporting the INF Treaty.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“In parallel, almost from the very first day after their withdrawal from the INF Treaty, American officials began making threats and statements that leave no doubt that Washington had intended to do exactly this and had been consistently and deliberately violating the Treaty for a long time. Otherwise, how could the Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, have announced, in early August, the possibility of deploying intermediate-range and shorter-range ground-launched missiles in just a few months? It would be impossible to produce such weapons in such a short period of time. We did not convene this meeting to accuse our American colleagues of hypocrisy. Today it is obvious to any non-biased disarmament expert that what we have presented is incontrovertible fact.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“On 18 August, just two weeks after withdrawing from the INF Treaty, Washington carried out a test launch of a medium-range missile using an MK-4l launch system Since August, there are no restrictions on the development and deployment of such systems. Thus, following the denunciation of the ABM. Treaty, yet another pillar of the arms-control architecture was toppled - an architecture that enabled the drafting and signature of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which will expire in February 2021 and is also at risk. Key figures in the current United States Administration have repeatedly, both publicly and privately, made it clear that they have no interest in maintaining the New START in its current form.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“The first victim of Washington's ambitions, in 2003, was the Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM. Treaty), which Russia had actively fought to maintain since the late 1990s. Immediately after that, the Americans announced plans to deploy ABM launchers in eastern Europe, allegedly to counter the Iranian threat. In response to our concerns, we were told that those facilities could never be used against Russia. However, when the first launcher was deployed in Romania, it became clear that it could easily be converted to launch Tomahawk missiles, which is not allowed under the INF Treaty. We immediately drew attention to that. It is now absolutely clear that we were right.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“Along with other steps taken at that time, it greatly contributed to creating a climate of trust that led to global changes that the international community now deems essential. For the first time in decades, humankind had the opportunity to move away from confrontation and to address pressing development issues whose resolution would make life better for all. For a time, the INF Treaty was conscientiously implemented by both Russia and the United States. However, with time, it became increasingly clear that the Treaty, like other disarmament and arms-control agreements, had become inconvenient for our American partners, who were convinced of their exceptionalism and became increasingly determined to impose their inequitable unilateral schemes of international relations on others.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“Mr. Polyanskiy (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We thank Ms. Nakamitsu, Under-Secretary- General and High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, for her very informative and valuable briefing. On 2 August, a very sad and important event took place - the United States withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which, in no small measure, played a key role in building both the regional and global security architecture. Talks on the Treaty were held during the Cold War in a context of complex international relations. Nevertheless, at that time the leaders of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States were able to reach an agreement. The INF Treaty was crucial for international detente.”
2019-08-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8602 (2019) · source
“I assure the Council that we stand ready to do so under any format of multilateral or bilateral cooperation or dialogue, under the auspices of the Security Council, on the basis of a positive agenda, without any double standards or hidden goals and with, of course, unconditional respect for the sovereignty of the States of the Middle East and the rights and aspirations of their peoples.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Regrettably, unilateral decisions are being taken on the basis of such false and highly contentious information, which not only undermines efforts to resolve conflicts but also weakens the entire system of international relations. Such decisions are employed as pretexts for identifying enemies. At the same time, genuine threats, which require collective efforts, are ignored. That is an approach that will not get us very far. The sooner our Western partners understand that concept, the sooner we can finally address the problems plaguing the area - outstanding and new issues alike - based on the aspirations of the peoples of the region.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“That approach is also necessary in Yemen, where all parties must act on the unifying basis of the United Nations to restore its statehood, combat terrorism and transition to building good-neighbourly relations. In conclusion, I would like to stress that it is no exaggeration to say that the alarming trends I have just described have created an impasse in the Middle East, compounded by a propaganda war in the spirit of the grimmest chapter of the Cold War. The number of fake news reports circulated by various non-governmental organizations, which receive financing from a number of Western capitals, is astoundingly high.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“We advocate the unification of regional efforts. It is important now to address without preconditions issues related to the socioeconomic recovery of the Syrian Arab Republic and to the issues faced by refugees and to cast aside the practice of their forced detention in third countries. The focus of our attention needs to be on the situation in Libya. We are of the View that the only way to help the Libyans emerge from the crisis is to consolidate the positions of international actors. Developments make clear the consequences of foreign military interventions. In Libya, such intervention has led to the total collapse of its statehood. We call upon all Libyan stakeholders to cooperate with the United Nations and not to advance unilateral agendas.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“The counter-terrorism operation conducted by the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria has led to progress in the fight against terrorism. The eradication of the terrorist hotbed in Syria aligns with the interests not only ofthe countries ofthe Middle East and North Africa but also those of Europe, as it will reduce the terrorist threat in that area and the flow of migrants therefrom. I would like to underscore that we have never agreed that terrorists could remain in Syria or be comfortable in that country. We therefore call for collective efforts and the abandonment of double standards in the fight against terrorism. I will be frank: we continue to advocate a wide-ranging counter-terrorism front. We are continuing to strive to bring about a political settlement in Syria, in cooperation with the United Nations under the Astana format.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“The basic principle of the two- State solution remains the cornerstone of a stable and peaceful future for Palestinians and Israelis both. We urge all parties to be guided not by narrow political interests but by the universally recognized legal framework for a settlement in the Middle East, including the relevant Security Council resolutions, the Madrid principles and the Arab Peace Initiative. For our part, we are committed to coordinating our actions with our Palestinian and Israeli partners, States in the Middle East and North Africa and the members of the Middle East Quartet of international mediators. Alongside the Palestinian issue there exists a new generation, ifI may put it that way, of regional crises.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Those actions are not only illegal under international law but also constitute one of the major obstacles to a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East. At the same time, persistent attempts are being made to unilaterally impose alternative settlement schemes that would undermine the long-standing and internationally recognized parameters for resolving the Palestinian problem. We believe that the intention to drag out the efforts at finding a lasting comprehensive solution to this issue is counterproductive. In the absence of encouraging political horizons, no economic surrogates can create the conditions necessary for the full realization of the national aspirations of the Palestinian people.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Nevertheless, I assure the Council that even in such difficult circumstances, we will continue to seek to persuade both our Iranian and American colleagues to move back from the edge of this precipice and begin resolving their differences through civilized dialogue, which entails the end of policies based on ultimatums, sanctions and blackmail. As was already the case many decades ago, the settlement of the Middle East issue lies at the heart of the region's problems. The status of Middle East peace process remains unsatisfactory. The situation in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is not improving. In East Jerusalem, Israel is continuing its settlement activities and the demolition of Palestinian structures.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Frankly, we see no logic in the fact that our United States colleagues, who are in breach of resolution 2231 (2015), are now calling on Iran to begin negotiations without any preconditions. We cannot accept the fact that 80 per cent of Iranian trade is subject to the illegal unilateral sanctions of the United States, which, moreover, are extra-territorial in nature, aimed at forcing all parties to bow to the will of Washington, DC. In that regard, it is fitting to recall here that by trampling on the norms of international law, the United States is essentially attempting to punish those countries that are complying in good faith with the provisions of resolution 2231 (2015).”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“In particular, I would note that in order to step up expert dialogue on this issue, an international expert round table has been scheduled for 18 and 19 September in Moscow at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. We have always firmly believed that negotiations are possible in every situation, provided that the parties concerned are willing to embark upon them a spirit of mutual respect, based on the principles of international law, diplomatic practices and civility. Like the vast majority of States in the region, we therefore cannot accept a situation whereby calls for Iran to come to the negotiating table are interspersed with direct provocations and harsh sanctions. Given such an approach, one could hardly expect the Iranian side to respond.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“We explicitly stated that we considered this to be yet another attempt to impose a unilateral solution on the international community with the goal of advancing parochial geopolitical agendas. The outcome of that event fullyjustified those assessments. Frankly, we see no added value in the efforts made in the Warsaw format. We believe that the Russian proposals can and should be complemented and elaborated. They should be perceived as a call for a constructive dialogue on ways to achieve long-term stabilization in the Persian Gulf region. We stand ready to engage closely with all stakeholders through both official channels and social, political and expert circles.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“As experience has shown, situations involving the creation of improvised temporary coalitions, based on mutual interests, can have only unfortunate consequences. Such unilateral initiatives include the ministerial conference held in Warsaw in February, which was mentioned today. We repeatedly and publicly stated our stance vis-a-vis that event during the preparation stage. We noted that decisions on the format and agenda of the conference had been taken hastily and covertly in the absence of serious consultations with the United Nations and key regional and extraregional stakeholders. We pointed out that such an approach was contrary to the declared goal of developing a collective strategy for the Middle East.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Given the need to develop a stable collective security mechanism in the region that is based on equitable dialogue, the Russian Federation has proposed and presented, inter alia within the United Nations, a blueprint for collective security in the Persian Gulf region aimed at resolving conflict situations and developing confidence-building and oversight measures. We believe that the security system in the Persian Gulf must be inclusive, universal and comprehensive. All States in the region should be involved in it on an equal footing, and the appropriate organizational structures should be established. Such a system would serve as a prelude to building a shared post-crisis architecture for the Middle East region. The exclusion of any party is unacceptable.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Against the backdrop of the ongoing exchange of accusations, we are seeing an increased military presence, including on the part of extraregional States, which increases the risk of armed conflict. Any incident could potentially spark a conflict with devastating consequences. We urge all parties to exercise restraint, work towards de-escalation and settle problems politically and diplomatically. First and foremost, that translates into refraining from the imposition of ultimatums, sanctions or threats.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Only once did he use the word "cooperation", and that was in the context of building a coalition against Iran. Not once, however, did he use the word "dialogue". In our view, the two latter terms must underpin any and all diplomatic efforts. We also noted that he spoke at length in emotionally charged terms about the Persian Gulf. We, too, are extremely concerned about the situation in the region. The only difference is that from the outset his goal has been to build a coalition against Iran, portraying that country as the main and virtually sole source of problems - a kind of evil empire. We believe that the recent tensions in the Persian Gulf have largely been artificially fomented and stoked.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Geopolitical engineering, interference in the internal affairs of others and the imposition of military solutions have led to the collapse of entire States, tragic situations and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in the region. It would be no exaggeration to say that many countries have consequently been taken hostage by the opportunistic goals of external players and been forced to wage proxy wars that have proved detrimental to their national interests. We listened attentively to the statement delivered by Mr. Pompeo. I even asked my colleagues to analyse it word for word, as so much hinges on it. As it turns out, he used many words with negative connotations, including "challenges", "deterrence", "conflict", "regime", "limitations", "counteraction" and "threat".”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“The resulting policies, aimed at destabilizing and overthrowing regimes that certain capitals deem undesirable, have not only failed to lead to the settlement of the problems in the region but have also created new, exceedingly dangerous problems for the region, leading to greater bloodshed. It is clear to us, as it is to most of our partners, that the only way to extricate ourselves from this situation is ensure that the United Nations and its Security Council play a central role in coordinating international and regional efforts in this respect. It is indeed in this Chamber that we must reaffirm that this premise needs to be the point of departure for all relevant efforts and initiatives.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“In order to attempt to arrive at solutions to such crises, it is important to look not only forward but also back, so as to understand the mistakes that were made and try to avoid making them in future. In our view, the most meaningful conclusion that we should draw from the experience of the past two decades is as follows. No unilateral action of any kind can bring us closer to the resolution of either the protracted or new problems plaguing the region. The situation becomes all the more devastating when certain States Members of the United Nations attempt to delegitimize other Member States.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“Mr. Polyanskiy (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): I, too, wish to thank the Chef de Cabinet of the Executive Office of the Secretary-General, Ms. Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti, for her briefing on the situation in the Middle East. We listened attentively to the statements delivered by our colleagues. In addition to you, Mr. President, we wish to welcome the presence of the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Michael Pompeo, and the State Secretary of the Federal Foreign Office of Germany, Mr. Andreas Michaelis. It is no secret that the Middle East is currently enduring serious crises that are of an existential nature for a number of States.”
2019-08-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8600 (2019) · source
“In addition, along with vital measures to strengthen and maintain peace and security, of equal relevance are the means to reduce the intensity of armed conflicts, limit violence and create conditions for reconciliation and political settlement. Our country, in turn, continues to call for the humanization of armed conflicts and, above all, their prevention.”
2019-08-13 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8596 (2019) · source
“I recall the many questions we pose to our British and American colleagues with regard to what is taking place with regard to the observation of international humanitarian law beyond the Euphrates. We continue to ask those questions but receive no response. Perhaps the time has come to have them. We call on all States to comply strictly with their obligations underinternational law-first and foremost, the existing norms of international humanitarian law that form the firm legal basis for protecting civilians from the dangers arising from military operations. As we have said repeatedly in the Chamber, we are convinced that implementation problems lie not in the weakness of international humanitarian law, but in the disinclination or reluctance to implement its principles and norms in practice.”
2019-08-13 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8596 (2019) · source
“Furthermore, in such conditions, many, depending on their political predilections, are tempted to reveal the violations of some parties while concealing the crimes of others. We believe that the norms of international humanitarian law should not be used for political manipulation. Regrettably, we have already heard one example of such manipulation today in the statement made by our British colleague. As our country was addressed directly, I would just like to say that our colleague either has outdated information or is poorly prepared. There is no armed conflict in the territory of the Russian Federation, which includes Crimea. Therefore, referring to international humanitarian law as it applies to our country is not appropriate. With regard to remarks made about Syria, that too is not an appropriate subject for today's meeting.”
2019-08-13 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8596 (2019) · source
“However, armed conflicts in various parts of the world remain a reality and the Security Council is forced time and again to focus its attention on the institutions of international humanitarian law. The nature of wars has changed. Internal armed conflicts now predominate and their main cause is usually the undermining ofstatehood, including through the ousting of legitimate Governments as a result of outside interference. The authority of international humanitarian law is now often affected by selective approaches and double standards. That, in turn, gives grounds for discussions about the need to uphold that branch of international law - as a rule, by means of a declaration or an additional monitoring mechanism.”
2019-08-13 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.8596 (2019) · source