YouSaid · the spoken record

Vassily Nebenzia

lines on the record: 656
first: 2020-04-16
most recent: 2021-05-26
sittings or episodes: 80
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 view the resumption of contact between the Palestinian and Israeli parties as a first step towards reinstating the dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis. We welcome this step taken by the Palestinian leadership, which is undoubtedly aimed at backing efforts to redress the difficult socioeconomic situation on the Palestinian territories and enhancing the joint response to the coronavirus pandemic, as well as promoting cooperation in the area of security. We call on both parties to uphold their obligations in accordance with earlier agreements. In order to ensure the implementation of those agreements, both parties must abstain from any aggressive or provocative rhetoric or actions.”
2020-11-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1128 (2020) · source
“The entire range of final-status issues should be resolved during direct negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis. The international community should focus its efforts on resuming the negotiation process. President Mahmoud Abbas reiterated his readiness for dialogue under the auspices of the Middle East Quartet of international mediators. We call upon our Quartet partners — the United Nations, the European Union and the United States — to strengthen cooperation to that end. We are prepared to engage in dialogue with key regional stakeholders. We are convinced that one-sided action will never lead to a breakthrough, and that it will be essential to make joint efforts and fully leverage the potential of collective diplomacy.”
2020-11-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1128 (2020) · source
“We maintain constructive and friendly relations with all States in the region, hence why we consider the improvement of Arab-Israeli relations to be beneficial in principle. However, we proceed from the understanding that a just settlement of the Palestinian question based on the international legal framework endorsed by the United Nations, including Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, the Arab Peace Initiative and the fundamental principle of a two-State solution, must be an inherent part of any Arab-Israeli settlement. That framework provides for the establishment of an independent, sovereign and territorially contiguous Palestinian State along the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital and living in peaceful co-existence with Israel.”
2020-11-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1128 (2020) · source
“At the outset, we would like to express our heartfelt condolences to the bereaved and to the leadership and people of Palestine on the passing away of the Secretary General of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Mr. Saeb Erekat. We note his personal contribution to efforts towards a just solution to the Palestinian question in accordance with the established international legal framework, including resolutions of the Security Council and General Assembly. We thank Special Coordinator Nickolay Mladenov for his briefing. Russia adheres to the time-tested principle that the comprehensive stabilization of the situation in the Middle East is impossible without a lasting solution to the Palestinian question.”
2020-11-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1128 (2020) · source
“The Security Council often discusses Bosnia and Herzegovina, but those meetings mostly provide general assessments of the actual developments in the country, many of which raise concerns for both sides. I think that it would be wise to provide an opportunity for the representatives of the three constituent peoples to present their assessments to members of the Security Council. That can be done in an Arria Formula meeting, the date of which we will announce later.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“We only request the High Representative to make sure that his role in this process does not create challenges, increase tensions and raise questions among the representatives of the entities that are most often criticized — the Serbs and Croats. As for the reports, the reports themselves are not the problem. There have been precedents in which certain entities that are not constituent States have shared some assessments with the Security Council. That is a normal practice, especially since Republika Srpska is a party to the Dayton Agreement and, as such, has a right to express its viewpoint on developments in the Federation. These assessments should be duly considered. As Council members may note, it is no coincidence that we proposed the convening of an Arria Formula meeting on the occasion of the anniversary of the Dayton Agreement.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“I would like to make one point clear — our criticism of the Office of the High Representative is not criticism of the High Representative personally, but rather of the role which in our view the Office plays in Bosnia and Herzegovina. No one denies the fact that the country is encountering problems. We spoke of this in our statement. The question is — what are the roots of those problems? Of course, we can delve into history and recall how it all started and how it ended. Of course, Dayton was a breakthrough that prevented the worst-case scenario. But now it is time for Bosnia and Herzegovina to stand on its own feet and move towards development.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“I am glad that my German colleague has pointed out that it is unacceptable to glorify war criminals. I would be grateful if he were to be consistent with respect to some of his colleagues in the European Union (EU) and of some countries wishing to join the European Union that are home to blatant and flagrant glorification of collaborators and war criminals. For some reason, neither our EU colleagues, nor, in particular, my German colleague draw attention to that. Third statement by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, Vassily Nebenzia I thank High Representative Inzko for his comments.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“We fully believe that the Office of the High Representative has outlived its usefulness and is not contributing to the country’s development. On the contrary, it hinders the country’s development in many respects. That is why we have long raised the issue of the need to progressively move towards closure of the Office of the High Representative. I think that the Peace Implementation Council Steering Board will address this issue at its meeting on 1 and 2 December. On the subject of bias and lack of balance, I would recommend that my German colleague not only to listen to statements by the High Representative, but also read the report that was drafted for today’s briefing (S/2020/1052, annex). Then it will be clear what motivated us to speak of unbalanced assessments in the report of the High Representative.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“We expect that this event will give us an opportunity to better understand the significance of the peace agreement and how important it is to fully implement it in the context of the current situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and assess the political and historic relevance of Dayton for both Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Balkan region as a whole. Second statement by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, Vassily Nebenzia To be frank, I do not quite understand what part of my statement surprised my German colleague so much. Our position with regard to the Office of the High Representative is consistent, and it is not the first time that we have expressed it. Indeed, our statement today was mild as compared to previous statements.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“We intend to further promote the implementation of the peace agreement in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which retains its potential, and to strengthen bilateral cooperation with all peoples in the country. Bosnian Herzegovina has every chance of becoming an area of successful political, economic and cultural interaction among a wide range of stake holders. In view of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Dayton Agreement, we are planning to convene an Arria Formula meeting at which the legitimate representatives of all three constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina will be given the floor.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“The time is right to consider the conditions and criteria for closing the Office. We propose exchanging opinions on this issue during the meeting of the Peace Implementation Council Steering Board, which is scheduled for 1 and 2 December. We believe that the complaints of the High Representative about the staff reduction and budget cuts in the Office of the High Representative are unfounded. The role of the international community in Bosnia and Herzegovina has changed dramatically and the concept of local ownership does not imply external interference in local affairs. Therefore, any kind of special tools for the Office of the High Representative are out of question. The staff and financing of the Office of the High Representative should continue to be downsized.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“Once again, we ask the High Representative to endeavour in the future to make his reports more balanced and objective and to refrain from an overly broad interpretation of his mandate, in particular with regard to the Euro-Atlantic agenda. We recall that the issue of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s cooperation with NATO is not within the remit of the Office of the High Representative, but is rather, in accordance with the division of powers, a prerogative of the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the opinions of the entities and constituent peoples should be duly taken into account. Mr. Inzko offered a tendentious and biased assessment of the situation in the country. We are again convinced that there is no added value in maintaining this mechanism of international protection in sovereign and independent Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“We regret that High Representative Inzko’s briefing yet again, for the twenty-fourth time in a row, painted a subjective picture of the situation in Bosnia Herzegovina that is far from reality. It is clear that the High Representative is trying to assign all the responsibility for the failure of the inter-ethnic reconciliation to the Bosnian Serbs and Croats. They are depicted as violators of the Dayton Peace Agreement. The High Representative is trying to scare the international community while ignoring the real situation in the country. We suggest that members of the Security Council acquaint themselves with the alternative viewpoint presented in the report of the Government of the Republic of Srpska.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“We call upon all the participants, including the Central Election Commission, to act responsibly and work in the interests of all peoples in the country. The international community should carry out a sober assessment of the developments in Bosnia and Herzegovina on the basis of the real situation rather than the individual policies of Member States with respect to the legitimate aspirations of all peoples, and should refrain from exerting pressure on their legitimate representatives. With regard to international law, the use of unilateral actions as a political tool is unacceptable. We are counting on constructive international efforts in order to promote national reconciliation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“The existing order can be changed only if the three peoples and the two entities reach an agreement without any external interference. The peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina determine their domestic and foreign agenda by themselves. The local authorities are exclusively responsible for the situation in the country, in accordance with the concept of local ownership, which we assume the international community still shares. Therefore, any reform of election law and the judicial system should take into account the interests of all of peoples in the country. We expect that the upcoming local elections, to be held on 15 November and 20 December, will take place peacefully in line with the existing rules.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“The desire to destroy such a system could have dangerous consequences not only for the Balkans, but also for Europe as a whole. The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is perfectly stable; it poses no threat to international or regional peace and security. However, inter-ethnic relations demonstrate a negative trend. The level of trust and the quality of the internal political dialogue have deteriorated significantly. This is primarily due to the fact that some Bosnian actors have aspired to reshape the Dayton architecture to make the State more centralized and unified. Some international stakeholders support that process. No external political statements can serve as the basis for undermining the balance of ethnic interests in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is enshrined in the peace agreement.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“This year marks the twenty-fifth anniversary of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, or the Dayton Agreement. As one of the guarantors of the Dayton Agreement, Russia fully supports the basic principles of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the equality of the three constituent peoples and the two entities with broad powers. In the year of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Dayton Agreement, we call on our partners in the Security Council to make an unambiguous statement in support of those provisions. The document, which is fundamental to Bosnia and Herzegovina, has remained relevant ever since it was signed in 1995. It envisages administrative arrangements and the balance of interests of the three peoples, which are perfectly effective when properly observed.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1103 (2020) · source
“I would also like to remind the Council that the OPCW report concluded that the substance that was allegedly used to poison Mr. Navalny is not on the prohibited chemical weapons list, under the Chemical Weapons Convention. Mr. Heusgen’s assertion that it had been done for reasons of confidentiality is, of course, redundant. The formula is absolutely necessary, so we will continue to insist that it be provided. I also confirm that the Russian Federation is today in consultations with the OPCW on how to proceed and cooperate on that issue.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Heusgen was referring, I would once again like to draw the Council’s attention to the statement made by the Russian representative in the First Committee, which is full of questions that have remained unanswered. With regard to what he said on that matter and the role of Germany in the Navalny incident, the case to which Mr. Heusgen was referring, I think that he has revealed himself. In his statement, he emphasized that the German side deliberately redacted the chemical formula of the substance that — based on the allegations of the German side — might have been used to poison Alexei Navalny, which we had requested. His is trying toe persuade us that we are blaming others, but I think that is exactly what he is doing. The bigger part of his intervention was about allegations against Russia. The issue of Syria was overshadowed by that.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Third statement by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, Vassily Nebenzia In response to the Permanent Representative of Germany, I had a chance to visit the Caesar exhibit in in 2018. I saw those photographs at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., where we were invited by Nikki Hailey, who served back then as the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations. We can discuss the so-called Caesar report issue on another occasion, since it is not directly related to the Syrian chemical dossier, which we are discussing today. We can discuss it with Mr. Heusgen in a bilateral format or devote a separate meeting to it. With regard to Syria and the case to which Mr.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Heusgen that nothing has been proven or the proof convinces only those who ended up plunging Syria into the abyss of civil war. Or does Germany live under alternative laws of physics and logic that make it take for granted tales and fables worthy of the Grimm brothers? Experts cite dozens of concrete and obvious discrepancies in OPCW investigations; Germany ignores them. Those who took part in the investigations point to blatant fabrications; Germany does not care. If we stick to this approach of ignoring the elephant in the room, we will not only fail to uncover the truth, but — as I warned — will ultimately discredit the OPCW.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“On Syria, some try to convince us that everything has been proven and that Damascus just needs to confess and repent. But here is the point — nothing has been proven. The IIT’s falsification is not a proof. The IIT is their play toy for manipulation. Sadly enough, the OPCW is starting to be used for the same purpose. We have just seen our German colleague employ a classic case of propaganda. As if trying to mesmerize the audience, he says over and over that there is no crisis of confidence, that the Al-Assad regime killed its subjects with chemical weapons, among other ways, and that this is a verified fact that Russia is covering up. Our response is that it is a nice try at hypnosis, but it is not persuasive enough. We stress to Mr.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“The British side would rather ignore them because it has already proclaimed that Russia is to blame, saying “Why delve into detail? Everyone knows that it is highly likely”. However, I think we will find a way to refresh the memory of our British colleagues of those issues and to demand answers to the questions raised. The situation with Alexei Navalny unfolds along the same lines — a conclusion is made, a verdict pronounced, and Russia just needs to confess. In the meantime, our German colleagues avoid answering our very basic questions. Ambassador Heusgen asserted that the German side had answered all the questions we posed to them in the First Committee. I have here our representative’s First Committee statement, which contains those questions. The German delegation has not answered them.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Second statement by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, Vassily Nebenzia In response to the statements made today by the representatives of Germany and, in particular, the United Kingdom, regarding allegations we hear time and again in the form of “Russia did such and such a thing and must be held to account”, we agree with only one thing — the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable and, if it really took place, the guilty must be punished. Beyond that, we agree with nothing else that has been said. The situation with regard to Mr. Navalny and the Skripals has again been raised. Let me remind the Council what many have started to forget or prefer not to remember at all — the bulk of our questions relating to the Skripal incident remained unanswered.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“The times when we could technically discuss a Director General’s reports on the progress of resolution 2118 (2013) are long gone. At stake now is the authority, integrity and fate of the OPCW. Only those who enjoy impunity and stage chemical-weapons provocations stand to benefit from systemic OPCW problems remaining unsolved. Like all responsible members of the international community, Russia remains committed to the goals of the CWC and recognizes its responsibility with regard to the future of the OPCW and the global chemical-weapons non-proliferation regime. That is why we will continue to stand up for objective investigations and oppose disinformation and blatant lies.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Now a month has passed, but incumbent Director General Arias has not yet briefed the Security Council. If the OPCW leadership is entirely proper, professional, and unbiased in its actions with regard to the Syrian chemical file, as Western delegations claim, then it surely has nothing to fear. It should be more interested than anyone to respond to all the criticism. If the criticism is inadequate, the OPCW should counter it. The more it tries to evade this conversation, the more everyone is inclined to think that the OPCW leadership has something to conceal. We hope that Director General Arias will summon up his courage to respond to these questions in December. Let me state right now that there are many questions and we see no reason why we should not pose them in an open meeting.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“That is why Russia continues to insist that such files be discussed in the open. We are glad we have already managed to ensure that three times, even though they would always covertly try to prevent it. As we have said on many occasions, neither Syria nor — we hope — members of the Security Council have anything to hide from the global community. It is regrettable and very telling that OPCW Director General Arias is not taking part in this meeting, even after our Western colleagues explicitly stressed, at the previous meeting on the same item (see S/PV.8764), the importance of his participation. We remember perfectly well that this was why they were so hysterical and unwilling to accept our proposal of having former Director General Bustani as a briefer.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Let me remind the Council that our claims regarding the report of the Fact-Finding Mission in the Syrian Arab Republic (FFM) on the April 2017 incident in Khan Shaykhun were ignored despite abundant evidence that the incident had been staged. We are still waiting for an explanation from the Technical Secretariat regarding various instances of manipulation in the FFM report on the events in Douma in April 2018, as well as a response from the Director General on how he is going to address the exposed irregularities. Many direct and concrete questions asked by Mr. Ian Henderson, Mr. Aaron Maté and Mr. Theodore Postol during an Arria Formula meeting on 28 September were left unanswered. Again, there has been complete silence regarding the facts raised in the statement made by Mr. José Bustani, whom our colleagues failed to silence in October.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Let me pose a direct question to our Western colleagues. Do they realize the results of their acts? We are witnessing symptoms, if not the metastasis, of a severe disease — a large-scale crisis of confidence at the OPCW. The consequences of such a disastrous situation extend far beyond the organization. This is not a critique of the results of particular investigations; it is a systemic problem, which, unless solved, will not allow the OPCW to function normally and reliably. We have accumulated a critical mass of challenges to the OPCW Technical Secretariat and leadership. Proof of manipulation and falsification in its reports has become too overwhelming to ignore.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“At one time, that document was genuinely consensus-based and aimed at strengthening the integrity of the organization. Now it has lost all of its initial meaning and become another biased instrument used by the West to impose sanctions. What is especially telling is the inclusion in the draft resolution of the paragraph about the incident with Russian blogger Alexei Navalny. During the general debate in the First Committee, we asked the German party a number of concrete questions on that matter. However, there was no response. The “highly likely” paradigm does not favour citing facts and providing answers. Instead of frank and direct talk, our Western colleagues pretend that Russia’s guilt has already been proven. We are seeing this tactic being used in the context of the Skripal incident.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Of course, we have no illusions that the Fact-Finding Mission would adopt a principled and unbiased approach. The mission could not establish the use of chemical weapons by opposition groups. There was no need for the Technical Secretariat to pretend that it was conducting an investigation. It could have issued its conclusion at the outset and admitted that it would not even consider a scenario in which the Syrian opposition might have used chemical weapons. We are seeing our Western colleagues increasingly resort to the practice of fabricating accusations of the use chemical weapons to punish inconvenient countries everywhere. Just yesterday, the First Committee adopted an extremely politicized and confrontational draft resolution on the Chemical Weapons Convention (see A/C.1/75/PV.12).”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“This looks like another clumsy attempt to catch Syria red-handed. The Fact-Finding Mission reports on the incidents in Aleppo in November 2018 and Saraqib in August 2016 are another example of the double standards being used by the OPCW Technical Secretariat. Those documents were prepared only upon our repeated insistence. At the same time, for over a year we and the Syrian side had been bombarded with requests for more information. Something was always lacking; the Technical Secretariat encountered new insurmountable obstacles; samples were lost and, at some point, we became exhausted with trying to prove that we had transmitted all the materials. Why did the investigation of those incidents take so long and become so complicated? Perhaps it was because the Syrian army, not the opposition, was accused of using chemical weapons.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“Let me also recall that, according to the same experts, many States encountered similar problems when filing their declarations at the initial stage of joining the Chemical Weapons Convention. However, in those cases they were interpreted as minor drawbacks that did not undermine the integrity of the declarations. We are therefore seeing that the Technical Secretariat’s treatment of Damascus is biased. Why is the Secretariat participating in such political games? Moreover, it is unclear on what basis Western delegations are try to initiate a detailed discussion of Syria’s initial declaration at the Security Council. The Hague has the prerogative to address these issues. Information that States submit in the framework of initial declarations is strictly confidential. It should not be discussed publicly, especially not in New York.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“We cannot allow distorted and politicized phrases of warning to seep into reports published on behalf of the Secretary-General. This is a matter of his personal authority and of the authority of the United Nations as a whole. We are concerned by the inclusion of accusatory paragraphs on outstanding issues with regard to the initial declaration, especially now that we have learned from former OPCW inspector Henderson during the Arria Formula video-teleconference on 28 September 2020 that the Technical Secretariat leadership is instructing the Declaration Assessment Team to keep those issues open. Syrians will never be able to close those issues with such an approach.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“The last time (see S/PV.8764), we drew attention to the fact that, in the cover letter transmitting the monthly report on the implementation of resolution 2118 (2013), the Secretary-General all of a sudden used the language of that biased and unrealistic decision of the OPCW Executive Council that it is imperative “to hold accountable all those who have used chemical weapons” and that it allegedly requires the unity of the Council to uphold this “urgent obligation”. Regrettably, we are seeing the same situation repeat itself. Condoning such biased approaches does not do the Secretariat any favours. It is even more inappropriate to directly and publicly side with those who besmirch Syria, while knowing how unfounded, or at least dubious, such allegations are.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“If it were, they would have to admit that conclusions on a number of high-profile cases of alleged chemical-weapon use, baselessly ascribed to Syria, and recently also to Russia, lie outside the bounds of common sense. It is telling that Western colleagues had started to call upon the Security Council to punish Syria as early as in July, long before this report of the Director General was issued. In other words, they understood perfectly well that Syria stood no chance of complying with the July decision of the OPCW Executive Council. We hope that the other Security Council members take a critical approach to the current developments and will refuse to participate in this farce that threatens to undermine the authority of the Council.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“However, even that pseudo report, when touching upon the military situation in Ltamenah and Hama in March and April 2017, comes to the conclusion that the Syrian Arab Armed Forces had no need — even hypothetically — to use chemical weapons. We agree with the authors of the report on that point. At that time, the Syrian army’s offensive had been successful in Hama governorate and had regained control of most of its territory. There was no reason, even in theory, for the Syrian army to use chemical weapons and thereby draw the fire onto itself. In any case, logic has not been a part of the arsenal of our Western colleagues for a long time now.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“The condition could not be met even in theory, as it required previously undeclared chemical weapons and facilities that were allegedly related to them to be declared within 90 days. These were the very facilities that were destroyed, which was verified, and not a single OPCW inspection since 2013 has been able to demonstrate the opposite. We have repeatedly expressed our detailed criticism of that decision, as well as the report of the OPCW Investigation and Identification Team on the incidents in Ltamenah in March, 2017, which the decision was based on. The decision itself was pushed through the Executive Council by a very small margin. The Investigation and Identification Team report is politically biased, factually unreliable and technically unconvincing. It cannot claim to be any sort of expert investigation.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“We thank Mrs. Izumi Nakamitsu for presenting the reports of the Director General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) (see S/2020/1056, annex) and the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission (see S/2020/1082, annex) in the Syrian Arab Republic. The report of the Director General on the July decision of the Executive Council was not a revelation for anyone. It predictably accuses the Syrian Arab Republic of non-compliance with that decision. That outcome was also predictable. It was obvious, from the very beginning, that this decision was unrealistic and its only one goal was to make Damascus look even worse in the eyes of the international community. No one cares to understand that Syria was being asked to do the impossible.”
2020-11-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1088 (2020) · source
“The result of the vote is as follows: In favour: China, Indonesia, Russian Federation, South Africa, Viet Nam. Against: None. Abstaining: Belgium, Dominican Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Niger, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tunisia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. The draft resolution received 5 votes in favour, none against and 10 abstentions. The draft resolution has not been adopted, having failed to obtain the required number of votes.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1066 (2020) · source
“I have the honour to inform you that the Security Council has concluded the voting procedure on the draft resolution contained in document S/2020/1054, which was submitted by the Russian Federation in connection with the item entitled “Women and peace and security”. The voting was carried out in accordance with the procedure set out in the letter by the President of the Security Council addressed to the Permanent Representatives of the members of the Security Council dated 27 March 2020 (S/2020/253), which was agreed upon in the light of the extraordinary circumstances caused by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The Director of the Security Council Affairs Division has received letters from all 15 members of the Security Council indicating their national position on the draft resolution.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1066 (2020) · source
“The result of the vote is as follows: In favour: Belgium, China, Dominican Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Indonesia, Niger, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tunisia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Viet Nam. Against: None. Abstaining: Russian Federation, South Africa. The draft resolution received 13 votes in favour, none against and 2 abstentions. The resolution has been adopted as resolution 2548 (2020) of 30 October 2020. The resolution, which is set out in the annex to the present letter,* will be issued as a document of the Security Council without delay.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1063 (2020) · source
“I have the honour to inform you that the Security Council has concluded the voting procedure on the draft resolution contained in document S/2020/1039, which was submitted by the United States of America in connection with the item entitled “The situation concerning Western Sahara”. The voting was carried out in accordance with the procedure set out in the letter by the President of the Security Coun cil addressed to the Permanent Representatives of the members of the Security Council dated 27 March 2020 (S/2020/253), which was agreed upon in the light of the extraordinary circumstances caused by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The Director of the Security Council Affairs Division has received letters from all 15 members of the Security Council indicating their national position on the draft resolution.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1063 (2020) · source
“on Thursday, 29 October 2020. The non-extendable 24-hour voting period will expire at 2 p.m. on Friday, 30 October 2020. Please submit your vote (in favour, against or abstention) on the draft resolution, as well as any possible explanation of vote, by sending a letter signed by the Permanent Representative or Chargé d’affaires a.i. within the non-extendable 24-hour voting period set out above to the Director of the Security Council Affairs Division in the United Nations Secretariat (egian@un.org). It is my intention to circulate a letter listing the outcome of the vote within three hours of the conclusion of the 24-hour voting period. I also intend to convene a video-teleconference of the Security Council to announce the outcome of the vote shortly after the conclusion of the voting period, on the afternoon of Friday, 30 October 2020.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1076 (2020) · source
“In accordance with the procedure agreed upon by the members of the Security Council in the light of the extraordinary circumstances caused by the coronavirus disease pandemic, as set out in the letter dated 27 March 2020 from the President of the Security Council addressed to all members of the Council (S/2020/253), I would like to draw your attention to the following. The members of the Council have discussed a draft resolution, submitted by the Russian Federation, in connection with the agenda item “Women and peace and security”. That draft resolution, contained in document S/2020/1054 and enclosed herewith, has been put into blue. In my capacity as President of the Security Council, I hereby put the above- mentioned draft resolution to a vote. The non-extendable 24-hour voting period for this draft resolution will begin at 2 p.m.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1076 (2020) · source
“I also intend to convene a video-teleconference of the Security Council to announce the outcome of the vote shortly after the conclusion of the voting period, on the afternoon of Friday, 30 October 2020.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1075 (2020) · source
“The non-extendable 24-hour voting period for this draft resolution will begin at 12 p.m. on Thursday, 29 October 2020. The non-extendable 24-hour voting period will expire at 12 p.m. on Friday, 30 October 2020. Please submit your vote (in favour, against, or abstain) on the draft resolution, as well as your possible explanation of vote, by sending a letter signed by the Permanent Representative or Chargé d’affaires a.i. within the non-extendable 24-hour voting period set out above to the Director of the Security Council Affairs Division of the Secretariat (egian@un.org). It is my intention to circulate a letter recording the outcome of the vote within three hours of the conclusion of the 24-hour voting period.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1075 (2020) · source
“In accordance with the procedure agreed upon by the members of the Security Council in the light of the extraordinary circumstances caused by the coronavirus disease pandemic, as set out in the letter dated 27 March 2020 from the President of the Security Council addressed to all members of the Council (S/2020/253), I would like to draw your attention to the following. The members of the Council have discussed a draft resolution, submitted by the United States of America, in connection with the agenda item entitled “The situation concerning Western Sahara”. That draft resolution, contained in document S/2020/1039 and enclosed herein, has been put into blue. In my capacity as President of the Security Council, I hereby put the abovementioned draft resolution to a vote.”
2020-10-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1075 (2020) · source
“Our goal is to contribute constructively to the work of the Group on the basis of non-politicized, transparent and democratic decision-making, which is required to establish a mutually respectful inter-State dialogue on this vital topic. The Security Council must work collectively. We hope that in the year of the twentieth anniversary of resolution 1325 (2000) it will be able to demonstrate its unity.”
2020-10-29 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/1084 (2020) · source