A/74/PV.65 General Assembly

Before giving the floor for explanations of vote, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

With regard to resolution 74/307, entitled “United response against global health threats: combating COVID-19”, under agenda item 123, “Strengthening of the United Nations system”, Hungary wishes to add the following remarks in its national capacity and to align itself with the statement to be made by the observer of the European Union. We are in the middle of a global crisis that affects all of us. For Hungary, saving the lives of our citizens is of utmost importance so it is our priority to put the health-care response at the forefront of this crisis. Moreover, we also take into consideration the fact that this crisis affects almost every aspect of human life, so it is equally up to the Governments to tackle the socioeconomic consequences at the same time. Hungary considers multilateral cooperation to be important in that regard as well. At the same time, we would like to take this opportunity to recall Hungary’s concerns about certain aspects of the political declaration (resolution 74/2) of the high-level meeting on universal health coverage, which were voiced clearly by Hungary’s Foreign Minister, His Excellency Péter Szijjártó, at its adoption on 23 September 2019. Therefore, we would have preferred a neutral reference to the declaration in the tenth preambular paragraph of the present resolution. Hungary also disassociated itself from paragraphs 70 and 71 of the political declaration on universal health coverage. For that reason, Hungary disassociates itself from the tenth preambular paragraph of the present resolution.

The United States is pleased to have voted in favour of resolution 74/307, entitled “United response against global health threats: combating COVID-19”. We thank the Government of Saudi Arabia and the core group for the transparent and effective negotiation process it led and appreciate its efforts to accommodate our concerns in the text. The United States is also pleased that the resolution underscores the importance of sharing timely, accurate and transparent information in the effort to combat the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Transparency is critical for a unified response to the pandemic. Effective mitigation of a public health crisis, such as COVID-19, requires Government and international organization transparency and accountability, the full participation of civil society, protections of personal privacy and security and access to information. Transparency, access to information and the sharing of accurate information about the nature of the threat are vital in stemming the spread of the virus. Instead, in some places Governments have chosen to shut down or restrict Internet access and access to information. In other places, the right to freedom of expression has been severely restricted. Unfortunately, we are aware of cases of harassment, suppression and intimidation by Governments worldwide, intent on using this pandemic as an excuse to deny those in their countries the right to speak freely, including to dissent. These actions will make the global community less, not more, safe. In some countries, journalists have faced arrest and detention after reporting on the pandemic or criticizing their Governments’ response. This is particularly troubling, as we understand that there is a growing risk that those in detention are especially vulnerable to contagion and possibly death. Countries that respect and protect inalienable human rights are also more effective at combating COVID-19. To this end, the United States regrets that language on the need to protect and promote human rights is not stronger. The United States has said, since the pandemic began, that COVID-19 can be fought only with complete transparency and the timely sharing of public health data and information with the international community. If anything, the past several months have underscored the importance of transparency and accountability in addressing the pandemic. Unfortunately, failures by both the People’s Republic of China and the World Health Organization (WHO) at the outset of the pandemic have imperilled all of us and caused needless additional suffering and death. Finally, the United States has submitted its notice of withdrawal from the World Health Organization effective 6 July 2021 because of its lack of transparency, accountability and independence and its unwillingness to reform. We insist that the WHO advance the health of people around the world in a transparent, science-based manner that incorporates accountability into the system. We want to save lives and expect that the United Nations and its agencies will continue to share and further that noble goal. We therefore do not concur with the references to the WHO in the text.

I am taking the floor to explain Liechtenstein’s position on resolution 74/307. Liechtenstein welcomes the call by the resolution for intensified international cooperation and multilateral efforts in response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis. In this regard, Liechtenstein acknowledges that the Group of 20, encompassing the world’s largest economies, has an important role and responsibility in addressing the significant negative consequences of the pandemic, including in the areas of public health, global finance and the world economy. The United Nations, with its universal membership and unquestioned legitimacy in global standard-setting, plays a leading role in coordinating a global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The efforts of the Group of 20 (G-20), including the outcome of the Extraordinary G-20 Leaders’ Summit of 26 March and follow-up meetings, should therefore feed into and be closely aligned with the United Nations response to the pandemic with a view to reinforcing complementarities and promoting more effective, accountable and inclusive global governance. The commitment in the G-20 Leaders’ Statement in support of the World Health Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the United Nations needs to be followed up by concrete contributions by the G-20 to the efforts of the United Nations system. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide the universal framework to which all States have committed as members of the General Assembly, including the members of the G-20. Liechtenstein would welcome a strong and clear commitment by the G-20 that it will invest its economic and financial leverage in our joint efforts at the United Nations to achieve the SDGs. These efforts undoubtedly need to be redoubled in the light of the enormous human, social and economic toll of the pandemic, and the G-20 could provide a much needed contribution to get the world back on track in this most important common endeavour of our generation. While we have missed respective assurances by the G-20 on the occasion of the Extraordinary Leaders’ Summit, the resolution at hand would have provided an opportunity in this respect.

I am taking the floor to explain our vote on resolution 74/307. My delegation abstained in the voting on the resolution based on the following observations. First, during the period in which the General Assembly was not able to hold in-person meetings, my delegation welcomed the consideration of decision 74/544 as a consensus-based instrument that fits with the novel circumstances that have arisen in the situation of the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Meanwhile, we reiterated the pre-eminent and excellent desire of the General Assembly to issue an outcome as a result of open, inclusive, transparent and orderly consultations and dialogue among Member States. It was also our common understanding that the adoption of one comprehensive resolution covering all aspects of this challenge would help us to avoid the consideration of parallel documents. Based on this common understanding, the omnibus resolution 74/306 was adopted last week, as a result of intensive and prolonged conversations between Member States and groups of States. Resolution 74/307 was introduced during the same time period in which Member States were not able to hold in-person meetings. Accordingly, there was not a single meeting to give an opportunity to Member States to present their views and observations. The resolution also overlaps with the previously adopted texts. The result of the voting on this resolution last week to some extent showed signs of the dissatisfaction of many other Member States as well. Secondly, my delegation disassociates itself from the twelfth preambular paragraph and operational paragraph 5. We are not in a position to welcome any outcome document issued by exclusive forums without the broad and effective participation of all States Members of the United Nations. Thirdly, the resolution, in its first and second preambular paragraphs, respectively, rightly recognizes the unprecedented negative health economic and social impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, while the resolution appears to address major socioeconomic aspects of the COVID-19 outbreak, unfortunately it does not include some serious economic concerns of Member States, including developing countries, and accordingly fails to reflect the voice of all Member States in that regard. It is a major flaw of the text that the final version of the resolution lacks even a single reference to the effect of unilateral sanctions on targeted countries, let alone a call for the elimination of such unlawful and inhuman practices, which continue to drastically hinder their efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. This represents a clear and total disregard of the strong calls made by major groups of Member States, including the Group of 77 and China and the Non-Aligned Movement. Furthermore, the resolution ignores the recent strong calls for the immediate removal of United States unilateral coercive measures. Such calls include but are not limited to those made by the Secretary-General; the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights; and the Special Rapporteur on the right to food. Fourthly, the final version of the resolution fails to address the need of developing countries, in particular least developed countries and small island developing States, to receive immediate and exceptional financial assistance, with low interest rates and a flexible grace period and payment deadline, from international and regional financial and monetary institutions, without any discrimination or political considerations. The final version of the resolution fails to address this important issue at a time when developing countries urgently need such assistance, not only for combating the COVID-19 pandemic, but also for addressing its unprecedented negative socioeconomic impacts.

As a sponsor, Djibouti voted in favour of resolution 74/307, entitled “United response against global health threats: combating COVID-19”, and welcomes its adoption with the strong support of Member States. From the outset, Djibouti supported the resolution and worked hand in hand with other delegations during the negotiations to ensure that it would be adopted by consensus. (spoke in English) Every day, we learn more about this virus and how it propagates itself, but also which protective measures prove effective. For our delegation, the objectives of this text are clear. The resolution just adopted underlines the critical importance of developing a common understanding and hope for solidarity, compassion and international cooperation. We must make sure that no one is left behind and build our world back better.

My country abstained in the voting on resolution 74/307. We are not convinced that the procedures that took place last Friday and led to the non-consensual adoption of the resolution were sound. The results of the vote on the non-consensual resolution reflected a lack of support for the resolution. A large number of member States are not convinced even now of the reasoning and the justifications that led the General Assembly to reconsider resolution 74/307, in particular after the General Assembly adopted resolution 74/306, entitled “Comprehensive and coordinated response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic”. Resolution 74/306 was called an omnibus resolution and emerged form long months of negotiations that were difficult, but at the same time transparent and constructive. Subsequently, the President of the General Assembly appointed the Permanent Representatives of Afghanistan and Croatia as co-facilitators to coordinate and unify the various initiatives on COVID-19. The aim was to strengthen the international the response to this challenge and to take the necessary measures to address its impact in the social, economic and public health spheres. My colleagues will recall that the President of the General Assembly, in his letter informing us of the appointment of the co-facilitators, referred to the fact that a large number of resolutions on this problem required an agreement on coordinating efforts and initiatives in this area. Practical experience in the work of the General Assembly has proven that cooperation, dialogue and transparent negotiation are the essential guarantees for achieving consensus-based resolutions or resolutions that enjoy the broadest possible support of Member States, above all when they seek to offer a collective universal response to health, economic and social challenges. Unfortunately, however, resolution 74/307, entitled “United response against global health threats: combating COVID-19”, was not the subject of formal or informal negotiations on either its preambular or its operative paragraphs. Despite our serious efforts to persuade the authors to introduce amendments both on substance and form, those attempts were rejected by the primary author of the resolution, which led us to break the silence on the resolution at the time. Subsequently, my country’s delegation sent a message to the President of the General Assembly in which we explained the reasons for our objection to the resolution, including the fact that the text of the resolution did not meet the minimum consensus necessary to ensure a collective global response to COVID-19. The Syrian Arab Republic disassociates itself from resolution 74/307 and believes that it represents a form of duplication in the work and mandate of the General Assembly, above all following the adoption of the omnibus resolution 74/306. Resolution 74/307, on which we are delivering this explanation of vote, will undoubtedly burden the agenda of the General Assembly with decisions that do not enjoy consensus. In that regard, allow me to focus on three primary points. First of all, we regret the fact that the authors of resolution 74/307 refused to introduce wording referring to the impact of unilateral coercive measures on the ability of countries and peoples to respond in the context of the socioeconomic public health impact of COVID-19. Secondly, we disassociate ourselves from any tribute paid in the resolution to the work and efforts of the Group of 20 (G-20). Once again, we reiterate that a number of States members of the G-20 impose unilateral coercive measures on my country, Syria, as well as on a number of other countries around the world, which has had a profound impact on the ability of those countries and peoples to address the economic social, public-health and medical impacts of COVID-19. Thirdly, this delegation disassociates itself from any tribute paid in the resolution to the efforts and work of the international financial institutions, chief among them the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund, since those institutions adopt partial, biased policies that are not constructive, are politicized and make their work, financing and facilitation in some States, including my country, Syria, conditional upon political pressure exerted by the Governments of certain major economic and political Powers. Those are the same Governments that adopt policies that target many countries with unilateral coercive measures. In conclusion, we would have hoped that the presidency would be able to find a realistic, legally convincing and transparent justification concerning resolution 74/307, instead of saying that breaking silence did not mean that the draft resolution had been rejected. If that is not the case, what is the aim of decision 74/544, which was extended several times. We were to have hope that the presidency would be in coordination and in line with its own fundamental position and able to combine the many draft resolutions, as we did in the omnibus resolution. As we are all aware, there are a number of resolutions on which silence was broken, but the sponsors and authors of those resolutions decided to reconsider them after returning to the plenary. This confirms our interpretation of the real content of the resolution and confirms our fears expressed when we warned against taking a selective and politicized approach, especially when we seek to achieve global collective solidarity in the face of this scourge.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote. We will now hear a statement after the adoption of the resolution.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member States. The candidate countries the Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania, and the country of the Stabilization and Association Process and potential candidate Bosnia and Herzegovina align themselves with this statement. Let me start by acknowledging your leadership, Mr. President. In these still-challenging times, we were grateful for the opportunities for exchange provided last Friday and today. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remains an unprecedented challenge, and all our efforts are still focused on mitigating the effects of this pandemic. In doing so, the world, guided by the United Nations leadership, has already undertaken enormous efforts. We also negotiated an overarching omnibus resolution on COVID-19 over the past month, which was adopted last Friday (resolution 74/306), which was meant to cover all topics holistically and avoid different initiatives on particular aspects. We were therefore surprised to see that resolution on the agenda again, as it brings us back to the very first day of this pandemic. In April, quick responses by the United Nations and its membership were of the utmost importance to demonstrate that we unite in difficult times. That resolution was an important contribution at that time. And we were ready to compromise on process and content in the interest of unity. But, even then, the process was problematic for us. While acknowledging the opportunities that were provided by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to submit comments on that draft resolution, and while appreciating that some of them were taken into consideration, we would have preferred more in-depth consultations and established timelines, which would have allowed for an inclusive and transparent consultation process. The resolution includes a number of important elements. Nevertheless, for us, a COVID-19 resolution, even at that time, should have included: an acknowledgement of the central role of the World Health Organization; an expression of support for the appeal of the Secretary- General of 23 March for an immediate global ceasefire; an expression of support for the consolidated COVID-19 Global Humanitarian Response Plan; a clear commitment to human rights and gender equality perspectives in the COVID-19 response, in the short and long terms alike; an acknowledgement of the need to respect the rights to privacy and protection of personal data when exchanging epidemiological and clinical data; a reaffirmation of the determination of the United Nations to seize every opportunity in the emergency and recovery efforts to accelerate sustainability action, including on climate change; and a recognition that the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates the need for protecting the world’s environment and biodiversity to prevent new epidemics. As mentioned, our agreement to let the resolution be adopted in April was strongly influenced by the need for a quick and united response to the crisis and the lack of modalities at that time for negotiations. Today the context is completely different. While we acknowledge the important stimulus the resolution provided in April, we were disappointed that no efforts were undertaken for further consultations, although they would have been feasible. We also view some of the elements in the resolution out-dated already by developments in the meantime. Furthermore, all aspects are now covered in the omnibus resolution, which was meant to supersede all initiatives on COVID-19. This resolution therefore raises important concerns, as it is not conducive to coherence in the General Assembly’s response to COVID-19. In conclusion, please be assured that the European Union stands firmly united in this crisis and is ready to play its part. The European Union member States are fully supportive of a united response to this crisis and will continue to support the close cooperation and united multilateral approaches in combating this unprecedented crisis.

We have heard the last speaker for this item. Before giving the floor to speakers in the exercise of right of reply, may I remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and five minutes for the second intervention, and should be made by delegations from their seats. I now give the floor to the representative of China.

I thank you, Sir, for giving me the opportunity to exercise the right of reply. The representative of the United States of America just made a statement misusing the General Assembly platform to spread a political virus in an attempt to serve its a domestic and political agenda. China firmly opposes and rejects this practice. Since the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), China, in an open, transparent and responsible manner, took timely and comprehensive measures and brought the disease under control in a very short period. China, without delay, shared information on the disease with the World Health Organization (WHO) and many countries, including the United States, published the genetic sequencing of this coronavirus, facilitated international cooperation among disease-control experts and lent support to countries with outbreaks of the disease, thereby playing a major role in the global response to the disease. China’s efforts have been broadly recognized and praised by the United Nations, WHO and the international community. No one can deny or wipe away these basic facts. On the other hand, the United States, while the most medically advanced country in the world, now has the most confirmed cases in the world. The United States, instead of focusing on mounting a response to the disease, has been trying to divert attention and shift the blame to China, but also to the WHO for no good reason. It has withdrawn from and seeks to defund WHO, placing itself in opposition to the international community. This has damaged the ability of that organization to promote cooperation in responding to the pandemic and provide assistance to developing countries. We would like to remind the United States that politicizing, stigmatizing and labelling the disease, confounding right and wrong and shifting the blame will not help it bring back the time it has wasted and the innocent lives it has lost. We hope that the United States will focus its time and energy on safeguarding the lives and health of its own people, effectively shouldering the responsibility in leading the United States and its people to swiftly overcome this disease. The virus is a common enemy of the world, whether of China or of the United States; we are both victims in face of the virus. In the face of the virus, we should stand side by side and join hands together in mounting a response. China calls on the membership of the United Nations to demand jointly that the United States respect facts and science when it comes to the disease and show genuine concern for the lives and health of its own people, rather than engaging in the spreading of a political virus and placing itself in opposition to the international community and thereby moving farther in the wrong direction.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 123?

I should like to remind delegations that the following agenda items remain open for consideration during the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly: 4, 5, 6, 9 to 12, 15, 19 and its sub-items (e) and (f), 21 and its sub-item (a), 23 and its sub-items (a) and (b), 25 and its sub-item (a), 27, 28, 29, 31 and its sub-item (a), 34, 35, 40 to 46, 52, 62, 67, 68, 71 and its sub-items (a) through (c), 74 and its sub-item (a), 79, 87, 98, sub-item (b) of agenda item 100, 106, 107, 111, 113 and its sub-items (a) and (b), 114 and its sub-item (a), 117, 118, 119, 122, 124, 129, 132 to 153, 155 to 165. As members are aware, those items have been included in the draft agenda of the seventy-fifth session of the General Assembly, with the exception of: item 29, entitled “Support by the United Nations system of the efforts of Governments to promote and consolidate new or restored democracies”; item 87, entitled “Request for an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the consequences of legal obligations of States under different sources of international law with respect to immunities of Heads of State and Government and other senior officials”; item 124, entitled “United Nations reform: measures and proposals”; item 134, entitled “Programme budget for the biennium 2018-2019”; and item 145, entitled “Review of the implementation of General Assembly resolutions 48/218 B, 54/244, 59/272, 64/263 and 69/253”. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda items 4, 5, 6, 9 to 12, 15, 19 as a whole, 21 as a whole, 23 as a whole, 25 as a whole, 27, 28, 29, 31 as a whole, 34, 35, 40 to 46, 52, 62, 67, 68, 71 as a whole, 74 as a whole, 79, 87, 98, sub-item (b) of agenda item 100, 106, 107, 111, 113 as a whole, 114 as a whole, 117, 118, 119, 122, 124, 129, 132 to 153, 155 to 165 at the present session?

Before adjourning the meeting, I would like to inform Member States that, pursuant to decision 74/563, of 12 August 2020, the closing of the seventy-fourth session will be held on Tuesday, 15 September, at 3 p.m. The General Assembly Hall will have the seating protocol for the seventy-fifth session of the General Assembly as of 3 p.m. Therefore, the delegation of Iceland will sit at the first desk at the right of the President. Also, as announced in The Journal of the United Nations, may I remind members that the first plenary meeting of the thirty-first special session of the General Assembly will be held immediately following the adjournment of this meeting. May I therefore invite representatives to remind seated.