YouSaid · the spoken record

Safronkov

lines on the record: 808
first: 2008-04-30
most recent: 2020-03-12
sittings or episodes: 103
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

“In seeking a formula for a political solution - and I know that this is Mr. De Mistura's position 4 we cannot allow any interruption in the work of State institutions, especially the security institutions, which bear the main burden in combating the terrorist threat. If we look at the other countries of the Middle East, Africa and other regions, it is clear that we cannot create State institutions even on paper 4 and Mr. Rycroft wants to destroy the ones that remain in Syria, one of the most important countries in the region. We insist on discussions being held without any preconditions. We know that that is his position. Against the backdrop of the political efforts, it is obviously unacceptable for the opponents of the Government in Damascus to try to gain military advantages.”
2017-04-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7921 (2017) · source
“Every patriotic Syrian party should be able to take part in the negotiations on an equal footing in order to discuss how to preserve Syria as a unified, secular State in which all historical communities can live in peace, as has always been the case, and take part in rebuilding the country. The opposition should have an inclusive and consolidated delegation whose members have a common position that takes account of the views of the key factions. There is no room for arrogance here. We should be thinking not about pride and arrogance but about the future of Syria. That is the substance of Mr. Rycroft's concept document. He should think about the future of his own State, not interfere in these people's affairs. Let them conduct their dialogue calmly. Mr. Rycroft should not interfere with Mr. De Mistura. Look at those mentors!”
2017-04-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7921 (2017) · source
“They j abe completely lost his way with their anti-regime notions. What do they think they are doing? So it turns out that for them, regime change is more important than the positions of the majority of the States Members of the United Nations. Mr. Rycroft was not speaking about the item on our agenda today. He has insulted Syria, Iran, Turkey and other States. I would ask you, Madam President, to ensure that the rules of procedure for this meeting are respected, because that is your job when some members are irresponsibly resorting to insulting slang in the Security Council. He should not dare to insult Russia again. We are nevertheless very grateful to Mr. De Mistura for his work. In the run-up to the next round, further efforts will be required to ensure that the intra-Syrian dialogue is genuinely broadly representative.”
2017-04-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7921 (2017) · source
“He is doing everything he can to undermine that cooperation. That is why he should look at me. He should not look away. Why is he looking away? This is precisely why he said nothing today about the political process. He did not listen to Mr. De Mistura's briefing, and that was on purpose. He makes insulting demands of the guarantors of the Astana process, but what have he and his allies done to advance the ceasefire? In London and Paris they are receiving opposition groups - illegal armed groups. They were suddenly afraid that things were moving towards peace and a political settlement. They serve the interests of armed groups, many of which have been murdering Christians and other minorities in the Middle East. They are committing acts of terror in churches on Palm Sunday. That is who they care about.”
2017-04-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7921 (2017) · source
“We expect the Geneva process to continue steadily. There should be no prolonged pauses. We already went through that negative experience in 2016. I would like to say to Mr. De Mistura that rather than give up, he should continue his painstaking work with the Syrian delegations, actively encouraging them to conduct dialogue and seek common denominators. However, the statement by Mr. Rycroft of the United Kingdom showed that he is thinking only about how to make Mr. De Mistura's task more difficult, stop the political process developing and bring confrontation and hostility to the Security Council. But the fact of the matter - and many in the United Nations are already aware ofit - is that he is afraid. He has been losing sleep over the possibility that we could be working together with the United States. He is afraid of that.”
2017-04-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7921 (2017) · source
“Mr. Safronkov (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We thank Mr. De Mistura for his briefing. Russia has been following the March round of the intra-Syrian talks in Geneva very closely and encouraging all the participants to work constructively to arrive at mutually acceptable decisions and compromises regarding a peaceful settlement. In that context, we have been in active contact with the Syrian authorities and with a broad cross-section of the opposition. We support Mr. De Mistura's efforts and believe that he will enhance them. The fact that there have been developments in the Geneva process, and that the sides have launched parallel conversations on all four of the agreed-on discussion baskets on the agenda and have begun studying the conceptual proposals of Mr. De Mistura's mediation can be considered an achievement.”
2017-04-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7921 (2017) · source
“Mr. Safronkov (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): I take the floor again only to say that I would like to ask the representatives of the United States and other countries not to insult my country. They have absolutely no moral right to do so. We do not behave in that way ourselves. I would simply like to say that Ambassador Haley, who has only just taken up her post here, has a real chance, both as Permanent Representative of the United States and as the current President of the Security Council, to restore the collective work of the Security Council to a healthy state. But that will not happen if she claims a national point of view to be an absolute truth. We would first like to ensure that our work in the Council is mutually respectful. The meeting rose at 1.30pm.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“Washington had already chosen to take military action, which took place with members barely having left the United Nations building. We call upon the United States immediately to cease its aggression and to join the efforts being made towards a political settlement in Syria, as well as to work together to combat the terrorist threat. We are still prepared to engage in such cooperation. We have heard many insulting words today with regard to our right to the veto - our right. We have won it and have exercised it in a responsible manner, but we use it only in such circumstances when others in the Security Council try to impose their irresponsible geopolitical projects. The Council must develop agreed international decisions. Reckless geopolitical schemes will never be supported.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“We merely want to say that if we are fighting terrorism, we should do it on the basis of single standards and not by dividing parties into good and bad, allies and foes. Let me say once again that no one should try to set us at odds with Iraq. No one will be able to ruin our relations that country. They should look at our relations with Iraq, as opposed to their own. The 10 non-permanent members of the Security Council did try to find compromise last evening during the consultations we called for. They thanked the American delegation for the fact that voting had been postponed. However, there really was nothing to thank them for. Our colleagues did not even imagine that the decision was made with totally different ideas in mind. It certainly was not with the idea of continuing constructive and conciliatory dialogue.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“There are no properly working Hhumanitarian corridors. Let us recall the little girl from Mosul named Hawra. No one said anything at all about this little girl, who became a symbol of this tragedy: everyone in her house was killed when a coalition bomb fell on her house. Thank God, the little girl lived. She had to fight for her life, but is now out of danger. However, she is almost blind. We will not set up a cynical show and hold up photographs here in the Chamber. But people must know about the Mosul tragedy. Do not tell me that we are trying to draw attention away from Syria when we talk about Mosul. That is a lie. Those who know our position on this will know that this is a shameless lie. We do not want to draw anyone's attention from anything, in particular from what terrorists are doing.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“Proof of blatant double standards includes ignoring the chemical attacks carried out by terrorists in the Middle East as a whole. In that regard, members could recall the recent events in Mosul, Iraq. Where was the international community's reaction? Where was their warning - first and foremost, of those who carried out this headline-grabbing public action in regard to Khan Shaykhoun? Are these victims of a different category? Are they perhaps second-rate victims? Why do we not see in their countries' headlines the tragedy in the besieged town of Mosul? We are talking about hundreds of thousands of people. Thus is the attack in Syria an attempt to distract attention from the many victims among the peaceful populations in Iraq and Syria caused by unilateral actions, including attacks on homes and other civilian targets.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“It prefers to be guided in its work by statements from opposition groups, Internet blogs, social networks and a whole range of non-governmental organizations of highly dubious reputation. They do not even look at information and evidence from areas where the incidents took place. And they want us to agree with that information? It is not even worth looking at. In our draft resolution we also set out the need to establish a geographical balance with regard to staffing the investigation group. That is an important point, which has a direct bearing on the issue of impartiality and trust. Thus far, the Fact-finding Mission was usurped by representatives from a single country that is in the forefront of anti-Damascus parties.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“Supported from aborad, military groups that are closely linked to Al-Nusra Front terrrorist units rule over those territories, and they have things to hide, including in the context of chemical weapons. But some are trying to back them again, as they backed notorious bandits in eastern Aleppo. However, everything became clear once Aleppo was freed. It is no coincidence that the many complaints of the Syrian Government related to the massive entry of chemical weapons into the country, their warehousing by extremists in special warehouses and their use against the army and civilians have simply been ignored - or it has been considered for month after month with comtempt and without any outcome. The OPCW Fact-finding Mission does not work in a conscientious manner.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“Our initiative was specifically based on the appeal for specialists, chosen on a geographical basis by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Fact-finding Mission and the United Nations- OPCW Joint Investigative Mechanism on chemical weapons in Syria to visit the site where this incident took place in Khan Shaykhoun, as well as neighbouring areas, as soon as possible, in order to carry out a professional investigation. All Syrian parties were asked to grant these expets immediate access to where the events took place. It is not irrelevant to recall that the Syrian Government does not control that area of Idlib province.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“With regard to Khan Shaykhun, the Permanent Representative of the United States stated that there is credible evidence from the United States intelligence services who claimed that Syrian Government forces used chemical weapons. We said, "Show us, and experts will determine whether or not that was the case". I would recall that General Powell talked in this very Chamber about chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction, which were not found (see S/PV.4701). Let us work together as professionals, and not issue ultimatums. We are living in a very complex and multipolar world, and we cannot live like this. Russia has proposed a constructive alternative to its partners in the Security Council. They just didn't have a trump card or a winning alternative. They have not put forward any professional alternative or good arguments to us.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“In his statement, Ambassador Rycroft tried to divert the attention from the core issue. Once again it did not work. That is why I would like to recall exact events. Those who put forward this initiative are in no way interested in an impartial investigation by a competent international body to determine exactly what took place in Khan Shaykhun. In addition, I would also state that they fear such an investigation. They are afraid of a genuinely independent investigation. What would happen if the outcome of that investigation were to contradict their anti-Government paradigm? They feared investigations into the events in Khan al-Asal, then in eastern Ghouta and now in Khan Shaykhun.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“Why do they forget the presumption if innocence in such cases? All of that is taking place because Washington, London and Paris - I have spoken about this topic in closed consultations and would like to reiterate it - are paranoid about overthrowing the legitimate Government in sovereign Syria. That was clearly shown by non-diplomatic actions and the statements made by the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom, Mr. Rycroft. Stop putting forward such unprofessional arguments and levelling accusations against my country; they fly in the face of diplomacy. They are all lies. Once again, I warn them not teven try to sow the seeds of discord between us and the Arab world. Nothing will work or be achieved. That is why they are becoming annoyed. All Arab countries recall the colonial hypocrisy.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“With regard to the Astana and Geneva tracks, clear progress has been made in recent days. What goals guided the United States when it undermined that progress, especially given that the progress achieved was no thanks to the United States at all. Returning to the use of chemical weapons as a pretext yet again, the United States, the United Kingdom and France put forward a draft resolution (S/20l7/172) that was quite erroneous in its very logic. The logic behind predetermining that Damascus was guilty was deeply flawed. What about the gold standard of the presumption of innocence? Why do they apply it in their own capitals but forget about it when it pertains to the Middle East and or to other regions? Why do the capitals of those countries forget that principle when it pertains to the Middle East and or to other regions?”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“The Russian Federation, from the tribune of the United Nations, has stated the need to establish an international coalition to combat terrorism, which would be based on international law. On many occasions, we have sent signals to Washington about our readiness to undertake such cooperation. As we see it, Washington has chosen a different path. We must recall that unilateral actions lead to reprehensible and tragic consequences for region and its inhabitants. Think about the consequences and remember the outcome of United States actions in the Middle East. Think about the steps it has taken and their impact on the process to bring about a political settlement in Syria. Unfortunately, today's appeal to move forward the political process after the military attack shows its hypocrisy.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“Immediately following the attack, major attacks were perpetrated by the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant and the Al-Nusra Front against Syrian military sites. Once again, we repeat that the Syrian armed forces will continue to be the main anti-terrorist entity of the Syrian Arab Republic. Who will combat terrorism? Will it be the illegal armed groups that have entered Syria by the hundreds of thousands? Iraqi and Libyan military bases have been destroyed, and look at what then happened. Such actions are contrary to international decisions, including the Geneva communique (S/2012/522, annex), which we all played a part in designing. The communique includes references to settlement, while ensuring that national institutions remain intact. Are those actions the way to ensure sustainability?”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“In recent times, the United States Administration has often talked about the need to combat international terrorism, and that provided the justification for American troops and their allies being present on Syrian soil, although they were there without the invitation of the legitimate Government of Syria and without the approval of the Security Council. Manipulating Articles of the Charter of the United Nations is beyond any criticism. The aggression by the United States has merely served to strengthen terrorism. The attack was directed at Syrian armed forces infrastructure and its air force. In other words, it was directed at those, who over all these years, have been involved in the fight against terrorism. It is not difficult to imagine how much terrorists' spirits were raised after the attack by Washington.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“Mr. Safronkov (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): First of all, we convey our deep condolences to the Permanent Representative of Sweden to the United Nations following the tragedy that took place in Stockholm. On the night of 7 April, the United States carried out an attack on the territory of sovereign Syria. We describe that attack as a flagrant violation of international law and an act of aggression. We strongly condemn the illegitimate actions by the United States, whose consequences for regional and international stability could be extremely serious. The attack was a flagrant violation of the 2015 memorandum on preventing air incidents and ensuring security during operations in Syrian airspace. The Russian Ministry of Defence has stopped its cooperation with the Pentagon under that memorandum.”
2017-04-07 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7919 (2017) · source
“I reiterate once again that we will never be able to resolve the Syrian conflict or any other global problems, including that of aggressive terrorism, without genuine united effort. We are ready to work together on that.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“Better that they should tell us what Britain is doing to solve the situation in Syria. They keep asking questions of Russia and China. Do they feel any such responsibility with regard to the issue? No, they do not. This is all about an obsession with regime change. That is what is preventing the Security Council from working constructively. It is they who are undermining the Council through their attempts to use Council decisions to give their illegitimate plans a veneer of legitimacy. But it is not working, and it will never work. It is time to change that broken record. Nor should they attempt yet again to set us against the peoples of Syria, Iraq and other nations of the Middle East. I thought that British diplomacy had long ago abandoned such crude tactics. They should think very hard about that.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“The conclusions of the Fact-finding Mission cannot possibly be called impartial. There is one other thing I would like to talk about, which is, once again, the utterly irresponsible, disrespectful, unprofessional statement by the British Ambassador. It can be explained by the fact that they are doing nothing - nothing - to normalize the situation in Syria. Actually, they are doing one thing - dumping provocative draft resolutions in the Security Council - and, by the way, openly putting unilateral pressure on the Joint Investigative Mechanism in an attempt to extract the conclusions that he needs. Just in general, Mr. Rycroft's pronouncements about China and Russia cross a diplomatic line that is simply unacceptable and must not be repeated. We are not going to sit here and listen to it any more.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“Any investigative body, including the Fact-finding Mission, must actually visit the site where the alleged use of chemical weapons occurred in Syria, while using a broad range of methodologies, such as taking samples and consulting with medical and legal forensic experts. The need for such a serious and professional approach was specifically mentioned in the fourth and fifth reports of the OPCW-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism (see S/2016/ 888 and S/2017/13l), in paragraphs 49 and 11, respectively. I once again stress that the team of investigators must be truly international, in line with the principles of broad geographical representation as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. In its current form, the composition of the Fact-finding Mission in no way respects that foundational principle.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“In typical fashion, they were completely indifferent to the recent actions of terrorists in Mosul, and that fact was confirmed by reputable and impartial international organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross. I now draw the Council's attention to the Secretary- General's statement. He called for a thorough inquiry into what really happened in Khan Shaykhun. We fully support that position. The investigation must be comprehensive and objective. We must put an end to the very poor practice ofinvestigation from afar, often based on information that is posted on the Internet or taken from neighbouring countries - used even by the Fact- finding Mission. That information is questionable and very difficult to prove.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“The symptoms of those affected in Khan Shaykhun, as shown in video footage on social networks, were the same as those who were affected last year in Aleppo, when all of the information regarding the use of those chemical substances, found in samples of soil from that city, was collected and forwarded to the OPCW, where they continue to be reviewed hesitantly. What is clear to us is that chemical terrorism is increasing and needs to be countered as decisively as possible. Unfortunately, over the past three years, all of our attempts to get the Security Council to respond to the crimes ofterrorists who are using chemical weapons with increasing frequency have been unsuccessful due to the opposition of our Western colleagues.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“Let us be clear - putting forward such a text for adoption by the Security Council is simply inappropriate. As for the incident that allegedly took place on territory that since 2014 has been under the control of terrorists from the Al-Nusra Front, it is true that on 4 April, from 11.30 to 12.30, local time, Syrian planes conducted an air strike in the eastern edge of Khan Shaykhun, on a large warehouse containing ammunition and military equipment. At that site, there was a facility for producing ammunition with toxic agents. That ammunition was for use in Iraq and Aleppo. Their use in that region was confirmed last year by Russian military experts.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“In the videos and photos released on social media, we see the representatives of the White Helmets providing assistance to the victims while acting very unprofessionally and without any decent protective means. Also, the behaviour of the representatives of the White Helmets in extreme circumstances is very relaxed, which leads one to question the plausibility of those materials. Such actions are meant to provoke. As a matter of fact, the aforementioned discrepancies arealso reflected in the draft resolution. The second preambular paragraph, for example, expresses the horror of what occurred 4 as though it were an established fact. The operative paragraph 3 states that we need to establish whether or not the event took place. Has anyone even checked what was written? In other words, this draft resolution is hasty and superficial.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“Thus far, all falsified reports regarding the incident have come from the previously mentioned White Helmets or the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, based in London. Those two sources have long been discredited. To take their reports at face value as a basis for making important decisions is neither professional nor prudent. At the same time, we note the contradictory character of the reports about the incident. The White Helmets are jumbling information in their reports; their versions keep changing. They refer to bombings, either from helicopters or aircraft; they mention the use of chlorine or sarin; and they constantly change the number of victims.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“It should also state that those reports dictate the need to carry out a comprehensive investigation in order to find out what happened and who is responsible. The preambular section should also condemn the use of chemical weapons by anyone. The operative part should be limited to one paragraph indicating that the OPCW Fact-finding Mission should conduct a thorough investigation of the reports on the ground, but with one important condition - the staff of the investigative Mission should be introduced to the Council and should reflect a geographical balance. There should also be a demand that illegal armed groups that control the area where the incident took place must provide full, unimpeded and safe access to that area and furnish all the necessary information. The main task now is to conduct an objective inquiry into what occurred.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“To respond to the question posed by the United Kingdom as to whether Russia has a plan, the answer is yes. We have more than one plan. The first plan is to combat terrorism. The second plan relates to the draft resolution before us. At this stage, we do not see a particular need to adopt a draft resolution. Previously adopted decisions are more than sufficient to conduct a thorough investigation of the incident. But, if some of the Security Council members think that a new draft resolution is desirable or necessary, then it needs to have a completely different shape and form. The preambular part should state that the Security Council deeply regrets the massacre of people as a result of the use chemical agents in Khan Shaykhun.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“We are very concerned about the fact that certain States are already manipulating the preliminary results of the work of the Joint Investigative Mechanism. An example of this kind of irresponsible approach was the draft resolution on sanctions (S/2017/l72) under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations that was put to the vote on 28 February, even while the political processes in Astana and Geneva were working very well. The aforementioned States created an absolutely artificial provocation in the Security Council without even explaining the purpose of putting the draft resolution to a vote. If the Russian and Chinese initiative had been taken seriously two years ago, including the draft resolution that we submitted, then the situation today would be radically different. But that initiative was disregarded.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“That is why we agreed to extend the mandate of the Mechanism for another year. We need to conduct a thorough, depoliticized investigation of cases of the use of chemical weapons, based on reliable and verified facts. The future work ofthe Joint Investigative Mechanism needs to be expanded geographically. Its mandate needs to be buttressed by real anti-terrorist content, which is provided for by a Security Council resolution. No one should seek to sew the seeds of discord between the Russian Federation and the government of Iraq and other countries of the region. We have a solid position in the Middle East. People believe us, and what we are doing is to support Baghdad and not act against it, as some affirm. There should be some bounds of propriety.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“Apparently, they were getting ready for a long- term siege. Can you believe the degree of cynicism: those are the organizations that provide video materials for this, and these video materials should serve as a basis for us to draw conclusions? The OPCW experts have confirmed that these kinds of terrorist groups, such as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Sham and Al-Nusra, produce fully fledged weaponized chemical substances, mustard gas and sarin, which are regularly used in Syria and Iraq. By the way, the Western intelligence community also agrees with those kinds of conclusions. We have often argued our position in the Security Council regarding the preliminary outcome of investigations in the framework of the Joint Investigative Mechanism. Much still needs to be examined.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“If anyone has any doubt that the images of the so- called use of sarin incidents, in particular in Sarmin, were staged in advance, one need only look at the videos that were filmed on that subject by certain pseudo-humanitarian non-governmental organizations, such as the White Helmets, which were praised by some in this Chamber, and by Jabhat Al-Nusra. In those videos, one sees the same "actor-correspondents". It is a fact that the White Helmets are closely linked to that terrorist organization, or perhaps those who fabricated those materials were the same persons who were exaggerating about the humanitarian catastrophe in eastern Aleppo while they were busy filling their warehouses with medication and food when the population was starving. I asked here at the United Nations, "Is that true"? They said, "Yes ,that is true. Why"?”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“The OPCW established a Fact-finding Mission for that chemical attack, with the support of the Government of Damascus, which was meant to swiftly investigate such incidents. But in fact this mission never visited the supposed sites where chlorine was used to verify this. And so a poor foundation was laid in the work of the Fact-finding Mission, and then of the OPCW- United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) in Syria to investigate cases of the use of chemical weapons in Syria. In fact, reports were fabricated by the Syrian opposition and non-governmental organizations that support it about the alleged use of chlorine by Government forces. Those reports were taken at face value, and no one sought to conduct an objective investigation.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“By the way, quite coincidentally, this action was timed to coincide with the first mission to Syria of a United Nations group of experts, led by Ake Sellstrom. It tried to ascribe responsibility for the attack on Government troops, but they did not succeed in doing so because, at the time, Damascus showed sufficient good faith, and, through the efforts of the Russian Federation and the United States, with the support of the international community, it was possible to achieve a successful chemical demilitarization of Syria. When it became clear that the Government of Al-Assad in very brief time frames and in very complex conditions of the armed conflict was able to eliminate its chemical arsenals, we saw reports about the alleged use in Syria of chlorine as chemical weapons.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“Crossing those red lines was supposed to have led to military intervention in the intra-Syrian conflict. That decision served as a starting point for future provocations by terrorist and extremist groups with the use of chemical weapons. They sought to discredit the official Damascus regime and to create a pretext for the use of military force against a sovereign State. Back then, our Western partners preferred to remain silent, including regarding the request that came from Damascus in March 2013 about investigating the use of sarin by insurgents in a suburb of Aleppo, Khan Al-Assal. We hope that this kind of attitude will not be repeated this time. It was such inaction that encouraged the insurgents, who felt they enjoyed impunity, to commit more large-scale acts on 21 August 2013 in eastern Ghouta, when sarin was used again.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“According to our information, the Syrian Government has requested the Technical Secretariat of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to send a fact-finding mission to Syria to investigate the incident, as well as an OPCW rapid response and assistance mission. There is no need to repeat that the Russian Federation has always had a clear and unequivocal position: the use of chemical weapons by anyone is absolutely unacceptable under any circumstances. Those guilty of committing such kinds of crimes must be held accountable. Let us look at the origin of this problem. The watershed in the history of the use of toxic chemicals in Syria, and then of full-fledged chemical warfare agents, was the establishment of the so-called "red lines" initiated by the previous United States Administration in 2012.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“Mr. Safronkov (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We are grateful to the delegation of the United States for this opportunity for an open debate and to discuss honestly the very complex topic of the use of poisonous substances in the context of the Syrian conflict. Unfortunately, interest in such events clearly has an ideological thrust. Let us acknowledge that it is closely interwoven with the anti-Damascus campaign, which has not yet reached the place it deserves on the rubbish heap of history. As soon as an element of realism appears, when the political process in Astana and Geneva starts to really take shape and gain speed, then, strangely, all kinds of incidents start to occur. The last example is the tragedy in Khan Shaykun.”
2017-04-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7915 (2017) · source
“We are convinced that Ambassador Llorentty Soliz will organize the work of the Committee in strict respect for the sovereignty of the States that cooperate with it. We are interested in strengthening the non-proliferation regime with regard to weapons of mass destruction, including in the framework of implementing resolution 1540 (2004). We are ready to constructively cooperate with the new Chair ofthe Committee and our partners. We fully support the programme of joint work in the area of non-proliferation, which has just been outlined by the Permanent Representative of China.”
2017-03-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7900 (2017) · source
“Reports of non-State actors gaining access to chemical weapons require a quick response by the Security Council and a thorough investigation. This can and should be handled by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons- United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism. We believe that the quarterly briefings by the Chair of the Committee to the Council should contain information on the status of implementation of resolution 1540 (2004) by Member States, as well as information on the work of thematic working groups, the renewal of matrices, cooperation with national focal points and updates of lists of donors and beneficiaries. The specific issues of States should also be taken into account in implementing the provisions of resolution 1540 (2004) and in preparing reports.”
2017-03-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7900 (2017) · source
“Establishing additional bureaucratic structures pertaining to the issues of the 1540 Committee, setting limits on the duration of the contracts of experts or artificially promoting radical or insufficiently developed proposals could lead to the generation of additional obstacles rather than enhancing the work of the Committee. Therefore, we should be guided by the principle of "do no harm". In light of the ongoing terrorist activities in Syria and Iraq of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant and other terrorist groups, which have mastered the technology of chemical weapons production and have been actively using it, collective efforts to prevent this horrific phenomenon are becoming increasingly important, and we must act quickly.”
2017-03-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7900 (2017) · source
“Another important outcome is the need to maintain positive momentum in the implementation of resolution 1540 (2004) and the need for an overall approach aimed at a long-term, thorough and, most importantly, joint work, while taking into account the long-term nature of the process. The institutional framework of the resolution fully corresponds to the tasks that have been defined, especially after resolution 2325 (2016). We are convinced that, in assessing the work of this subsidiary body of the Council and the Panel of Experts, we need to be very careful and restrained.”
2017-03-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7900 (2017) · source
“We are interested in developing common positions with our partners so as to quickly advance the non-proliferation agenda, especially since the issues pertaining to that area have become more acute. Resolution 1540 (2004) occupies a special place in the international non-proliferation architecture. It focuses on establishing a sound legal and enforcement barrier so as to prevent WMDs from finding their way into the hands of non-State actors, including terrorists. The main outcome of the comprehensive review completed in 2016 reaffirmed the continued relevance of all the guidelines formulated by the Security Council in resolution 1540 (2004). It also confirmed the preventive nature of the resolution and its inherent philosophy of cooperation.”
2017-03-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7900 (2017) · source
“Mr. Safronkov (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): I am grateful to the Permanent Representative of Bolivia, Mr. Sacha Llorentty Soliz, for his briefing on the work of THE Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004). We thank the Ambassador and his entire team for their successful leadership of that subsidiary body of the Council and their flexibility and skill in incorporating various points of View in the preparation of the Committee's documents and draft decisions. Combating the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) is one of the Russian Federation's primary military and political priorities. As is the case with any critical issue, joint coordinated efforts are required in this instance.”
2017-03-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7900 (2017) · source
“Obviously, the winners of the Yemeni conflict are the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant and Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. With respect to Somalia, only Al-Shabaab is a winner there. Also winning are other the terrorist and extremist groups that control entire regions in the south and east of Yemen. We know from the experience that we should not put off starting to fight terrorists. Postponing this will only complicate the situation. We cannot but be concerned by the humanitarian situation in African countries Visited by Mr. O'Brien. Many challenges remain in Somalia, where the terrorist group Al-Shabaab has been sowing terror. South Sudan faces equally urgent problems. We also need to unite our efforts at the regional and international levels. It is only through collective efforts that we will find appropriate solutions.”
2017-03-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7897 (2017) · source
“This would lead only to increasing misunderstanding and mistrust between the Yemeni parties and undermine prospects for a return to peace. We are convinced that resolving the conflict in Yemen can be done only through political means, through negotiations based on a balanced road map leading to a solution. Although past efforts of the international community to bring Yemenis to agreement have not been successful, this does not mean that we should simply abandon this undertaking. We are continuing to work through our embassy in the country with all parties to the conflict, urging them to refrain from unilateral decisions that only block the launching of a negotiating process. As Mr. O'Brien rightly said, solutions to all problems in this connection should be sought only through political means.”
2017-03-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7897 (2017) · source