A/75/PV.102 General Assembly

We shall now proceed to consider draft decision A/75/L.133, entitled “Closing date of the seventy-fifth session of the General Assembly”. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt draft decision A/75/L.133?

I invite the attention of the Assembly to draft decision A/75/L.134, circulated under agenda item 25, entitled “Operational activities for development”. Members will recall that the Assembly concluded its consideration of agenda item 25 at its 48th plenary meeting, on 31 December 2020. In order for the Assembly to take action on the draft decision, it will be necessary to reopen consideration of agenda item 25. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to reopen its consideration of agenda item 25?

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the General Assembly decided to allocate agenda item 25 to the Second Committee. In order to enable the Assembly to take action expeditiously on the draft decision, may I take it that the Assembly wishes to consider agenda item 25 directly in plenary meeting and proceed immediately to its consideration? It was so decided (decision 75/50 4B).

We shall now proceed to consider draft decision A/75/L.134. In this connection, I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

The following statement is made in accordance with rule 153 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. Under the terms of paragraph (b) of draft decision A/75/L.134, the General Assembly would also decide to convene the United Nations Pledging Conference for Development Activities on an annual basis shortly after the “Operational activities for development” segment of the Economic and Social Council session, in order to be informed by the discussions, within existing resources and seeking additional funding through voluntary contributions, as necessary. The adoption of the draft decision would not entail any budgetary implications with regard to the programme budget. Pursuant to paragraph (b) of the draft decision, it is understood that the annual Conference would consist of one day of two meetings: one in the morning and one in the afternoon. That would constitute an addition to the meeting workload of the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management, which would be accommodated within existing resources on an if-available basis. If the Conference is extended for a longer period, the costs for additional service would need to be met by voluntary contributions. In order to ensure the highest probability of interpretation services, the date of the Conference is to be determined in consultation with the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management. The statement that I just read was distributed through the plenary place on the e-deleGATE portal and will be made available in the Journal of the United Nations under the e-statements link for this meeting.

I now give the floor to the representative of Paraguay, who wishes to speak in explanation of position before adoption.

I am pleased to inform the General Assembly about draft decision A/75/L.134, whose goal is to strengthen the United Nations Pledging Conference for Development Activities. It was a great honour to be asked by you, Mr. President, to lead the informal dialogue, which explored possibilities that would enable the event to be less rigid and more dynamic. I was glad to take on the challenge, as I firmly believe that today the purpose of the Pledging Conference is more important than ever. Sustainable and flexible financing for the United Nations development system is vital to its ability to support countries in their efforts to build back better in the wake of the coronavirus disease crisis and to achieve their development goals. That will enable us to reach the people we serve by optimizing development operational activities and to live up to our commitment — as we regularly say within the United Nations — to leave no one behind. In the past few months we have consulted with Member States through informal dialogue and written exchanges to discuss the various options. The submission of today’s draft decision is the outcome of those discussions, and I would like to thank all delegations for their active participation and constructive engagement during the informal consultations. As facilitator, I took into account the views of Member States in order to produce a balanced text that could be supported by all. The final text modifies the scope and the annual date of the Conference. The change in scope will enable the Conference to include fundraising for activities of the entire system centred on collective outcomes, a critical catalyst for reform of the United Nations development system and an essential element in achieving its goals. The Conference will also include United Nations funds, programmes and specialized agencies engaged in operational activities for development. The change in the annual date for the Conference will ensure that it is complemented by the debates in the operational activities development segment of the Economic and Social Council session, as well as informed by the Secretary-General’s annual analysis of the funding of the development system, published in April. The new annual Conference date, shortly after the operational activities development segment, will also make it more convenient and compatible with the budget cycles of major donors. We are pleased with the outcome and firmly believe that the changes will help the Conference be more effective in achieving its objectives. It was a great pleasure to note that the text was also very well received by delegations and that the silent procedure of the informal consultations was not broken, which reflected every Member’s resolve. I would like to personally thank you, Mr. President, for entrusting me with this important task. I also once again thank all delegations for participating and expressing their views during the enriching consultation process. In conclusion, I would like to highlight the conscientious, timely and detail-oriented work of the Secretariat, in particular the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management and the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, whose support has been key to the entire process.

We have heard the only speaker in explanation of position before adoption. The Assembly will now take action on draft decision A/75/L.134, entitled “United Nations Pledging Conference for Development Activities”. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt draft decision A/75/L.134?

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Ambassador Julio Arriola Ramírez of Paraguay, the facilitator of the intergovernmental consultations, who so ably conducted the discussions and complex negotiations. I am sure the members of the Assembly join me in extending to him our sincere appreciation. May I take it that is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 25?

The Assembly will now take action on draft decision A/75/L.130, entitled “2022 United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt draft decision A/75/L.130? Decision A/75/L.130 was adopted (decision 75/578).

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 19. May I take it that it is wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 76 and of agenda item 76, as a whole?

I now give the floor to the representative of Guinea to introduce draft resolution A/75/L.111/Rev. 1 on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Group of 77 (G-77) and China. We would first like to stress that the countries of Africa have strengthened their commitments and actions in the area of socioeconomic development and have continued to undertake the actions and efforts necessary for achieving a sustainable and resilient recovery from the coronavirus disease pandemic. In that regard, it is very important to highlight their crucial role in transforming the development agenda through the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development represents the rock-solid commitment of leaders of all countries to multilateralism, the central role of the United Nations and the promotion of sustainable development. In that context, draft resolution A/75/L.111/Rev.1, entitled “New Partnership for Africa’s Development: progress in implementation and international support”, is a shared pledge by Africa and all its partners, based on a common vision and their firm and shared belief that they have a pressing duty to eradicate poverty in Africa and put the continent on a path to sustainable growth and development. The G-77 and China, which endorses the draft resolution, has always supported the ambition of the Group of African States to encourage international cooperation with Africa in a spirit of mutual benefit and international solidarity. We would like to extend our thanks and appreciation to the African Group, represented by the coordinators, Ms. Meriem El Hilali of Morocco and Ms. Lily Mwanjila of Kenya, for revitalizing, streamlining and reinforcing the text of the annual draft resolution and for the excellent work representing the G-77 and China during the negotiation process. In addition, we want to thank the facilitator, Mr. Ahmed Sahraoui of Algeria, for his outstanding leadership and stewardship of the process. We would also like to thank all partners for their active commitment, which enabled us to arrive at a consensus text. In the past few years, this important annual resolution for Africa has been adopted by a recorded vote, which has adversely affected global solidarity and partnership. The G-77 and China has made tremendous efforts to address the concerns of all parties and has shown the greatest possible flexibility in formulating alternative language for the NEPAD resolution in order to arrive at a consensus on the text. We must reiterate that international cooperation in a spirit of mutual benefit is of great significance to developing countries, including African countries. Bearing that in mind, we will step up our efforts to cooperate with all partners around the world in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in synergy with the African Union’s Agenda 2063, for the shared development and prosperity of all African countries.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/75/L.111/Rev.1, entitled “New Partnership for Africa’s Development: progress in implementation and international support”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I would like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to the delegations listed in document, Turkey has also become a sponsor of draft resolution A/75/L.111/Rev.1.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt draft resolution A/75/L.111/Rev.1?

Before giving the floor for explanations of position following adoption, I would like to remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Group of African States. I would like to align my remarks with the statement just made by the Permanent Representative of Guinea on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. The African Group values and welcomes the consensus adoption of resolution 75/322 on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). The resolution lies at the heart of Africa’s priorities and is considered a milestone in highlighting the progress that African countries have made in the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in synergy with the African Union’s 2063 Agenda. Its value cannot be overstated. The NEPAD resolution provides a crucial space in which to focus on the areas that require support in the implementation of the SDGs, areas that need greater attention because they have been heavily affected by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. In that regard, we welcome the reaffirmation of the importance of international support for Africa’s development, as stated in the resolution. The African Group would also like to emphasize the specific call in paragraph 9 for global solidarity with regard to equitable access to vaccines in Africa. Immediate action is urgently required to enable global, equitable, affordable and timely access to safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, diagnostics and health-care services. The African Group also emphasizes that international cooperation in a spirit of mutual benefit is extremely significant for all developing countries, including those in Africa. With that in mind, the African Group remains committed to stepping up its efforts and cooperating with all its development partners. This year, despite the effects of COVID-19 on our methods of work, the African Group, with the valuable support of the Group of 77 and China, made tremendous efforts to submit a text that is streamlined, concise and fit for purpose, and that delivers better on the key messages of the annual resolution. It has indeed been a successful endeavour. I want to express our sincere thanks and appreciation to the coordinators, who on behalf of the G-77 and China conducted the negotiations on the draft resolution brilliantly. We would also like to thank all delegations for their constructive engagement and valuable input throughout the negotiation process. The African Group welcomes the remarkable collective effort this year to consider the views and concerns of all parties and the flexibility shown in formulating consensus language throughout the text of the resolution. We also thank the facilitator for his tireless work and efforts to move the process towards a consensus. Lastly, we would like to take this opportunity to thank the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa for its support throughout the preparation and negotiation process.

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of Australia, New Zealand and my own country, Canada. We would like to thank the facilitator, the representative of the Permanent Mission of Algeria, as well as all the delegations that took part in the negotiations on resolution 75/322, on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), for their active and constructive engagement. Our countries’ delegations are very pleased that the annual resolution has returned to a path of consensus after years of divergence. We would like to congratulate our colleagues from the African delegations on ensuring that the resolution remained focused on the issues that are most critical to their continent. This resolution is important for Africa, as well as for Canada, Australia and New Zealand. We support the overall goals and aspirations of NEPAD and Agenda 2063, including the need for balanced, integrated, economic, social and environmental development. We also firmly support commitments to promoting peaceful and inclusive societies and empowering all girls and women, as both are essential to sustained, inclusive and equitable economic growth and sustainable development. Today Canada, Australia and New Zealand are pleased to join the consensus and thereby lend their strong support for the internationally agreed principles of development, cooperation and sustainable development for all.

We welcome the adoption by consensus of resolution 75/322 on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. The resolution contains crucial elements and we fully support its content. The return to a consensus-based and balanced text does justice to the resolution’s importance. We also hope that draft resolution A/75/L.112/Rev.1, entitled “Implementation of the recommendations contained in the report of the Secretary-General on the promotion of durable peace and sustainable development in Africa”, will be adopted by consensus tomorrow.

Hungary would like to express its appreciation to the facilitator and coordinators for their tireless work and commitment in formulating resolution 75/322, which we have just adopted. At the same time, we would like to add the following remarks in our national capacity. We would like to remind the Assembly of the fact that Hungary voted against the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration at its adoption (see A/73/PV.60) and is not involved in its implementation in any way. That is why Hungary cannot accept any reference to it in the resolution, especially considering the Compact’s reference to migration as the best solution for the labour market and demographic problems of destination countries. Hungary believes in the effectiveness of on-site support for developing countries, guaranteeing local populations peaceful and prosperous lives in their home countries, and not in promoting their migration. The Hungarian Government therefore works to implement development programmes establishing lasting solutions locally for those in need and improving the living conditions of people in vulnerable situations. That is why we are unable to accept the reference to the Compact in resolution 75/322 and would like to dissociate ourselves from its eighteenth preambular paragraph.

I would like to start by thanking the facilitator and the negotiators for their hard work in this year’s negotiations on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. The United Kingdom attaches great importance to Africa’s sustainable development. We support African- led efforts to unlock inclusive economic growth, strengthen security and stability, build resilience to the effects of climate change and invest in education, health and job creation, including through the African Union. We are pleased to see the consensus this year on this important resolution (resolution 75/322) and want to express our appreciation for the flexibility and good faith that members have shown in order to reach that milestone. The text focuses on critical issues for Africa’s future, and our ability to reach a consensus demonstrates that past challenges do not preclude future cooperation.

The United States is pleased to see consensus on the text of resolution 75/322 today. We are committed to our partnership with the African Union (AU) and strongly support the AU’s efforts to realize the goals and aspirations of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. We are pleased with the constructive engagement and consensus- focused approach demonstrated by all parties throughout the course of the negotiations, aimed at achieving a more stable and prosperous Africa. I would like to take this opportunity to clarify the position of the United States on some of the language in the resolution. Regarding the references to the Debt Service Suspension Initiative in operative paragraph 18, the Group of 20 has been clear that the extension of the Debt Service Suspension Initiative through December 2021 is the final one and that countries requiring additional debt relief should seek debt treatments under the common framework. The fact that only three countries have requested common framework treatments suggests that broad-based deferrals of debt- service payments under the Debt Service Suspension Initiative are not needed beyond 2021, particularly in the light of other important international financial institution initiatives to support developing countries. We must therefore dissociate ourselves from operative paragraph 18. The United States reaffirms its explanation of position on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, as delivered on 1 September 2015 (see A/69/PV.101), which continues to guide United States engagement on the 2030 Agenda today. Specifically, the 2030 Agenda recognizes that each country must work towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in accordance with its own national policies and priorities, and does not prejudge or serve as precedent for its decisions and actions under way in other forums, including the World Trade Organization, in accordance with paragraphs 18 and 58 of the 2030 Agenda. On technology transfer, the United States reaffirms and appreciates other delegations recognizing in the resolution that references to the transfer of, or access to, technology refer to technology transfer on voluntary and mutually agreed terms and conditions. In addition, all references to access to information or knowledge are to information or knowledge that is made available with the authorization of the legitimate holder. While the United States acknowledges that the United Nations system increasingly uses the term “illicit financial flows”, we continue to be concerned about the fact that the term lacks an agreed-upon international definition. With regard to paragraph 13, the United States recognizes that mobilizing finance on a scale required to tackle the climate crisis requires financing and investment from a wide variety of public and private sources and channels. The United States also underscores the critical importance of article 2.1 (c) of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, which establishes a goal of “making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development”, which is pivotal to global efforts to keep a limit of 1.5°C of warming within reach. We also recognize the importance of the $100 billion mobilization goal and are committed to working with other donors to meet that goal as soon as possible. We note that the language of describing the $100 billion mobilization goal in paragraph 13 includes language not reflected in the goal itself, as adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. We underscore that that goal is to be understood as it was adopted in that forum and that nothing in the language should be understood as altering it. With those clarifications, the United States is pleased to join consensus on the resolution. I would like to conclude by extending our sincere thanks to Algeria for its role as facilitator and for its leadership, which has helped us to reach a consensus for the first time in four years.

China associates itself with the statement made by the representative of Guinea on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. China’s firm support for the cause of peace and development in Africa has been consistent. We stand united with Africa in seeking common development and will continue to engage in South-South cooperation and joint development of the Belt and Road Initiative in order to support African countries on a development path that aligns with their own national conditions and accelerates their implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the African Union’s Agenda 2063. Since the onset of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, China has delivered multiple shipments of emergency supplies and medical aid to African countries. We have provided COVID-19 vaccines to more than 30 African countries in need and launched the construction of the headquarters of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention ahead of schedule. We have fully implemented the Group of 20 Debt Service Suspension Initiative and have signed agreements with 16 African countries for debt relief. Within the framework of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, we cancelled the interest- free loans due to mature at the end of 2020 for 15 African countries. At the end of this year, China and Africa will jointly convene another Forum on China- Africa Cooperation summit and begin the next chapter of friendly cooperation between China and Africa. Recently, China and Africa jointly launched the Initiative on Partnership for Africa’s Development, calling on the international community to redouble its support to Africa in areas such as COVID-19 response and recovery, trade and investment, debt relief, food security, poverty reduction, climate action and industrialization. We look forward to seeing more countries and international organizations join that initiative. China has always supported the General Assembly’s adoption by consensus of its annual resolution on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. Regrettably, a few countries have been in denial about the important consensus reached by all Member States in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and have been determined to focus on their political manipulation of the relevant development concepts, which has forced the Assembly to conduct a recorded vote on the resolution for the past few years. This year China responded actively to African countries’ desire to see the resolution adopted by consensus. We participated constructively in the consultations on the draft text, showed the greatest possible flexibility and made tremendous efforts to reach a consensus. We also want to stress that win-win cooperation is a consensus that is integral to the 2030 Agenda and other important United Nations documents. It represents an important principle and a successful practice for the international community in its efforts to eliminate the development gap and help developing countries, especially African States, to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Efforts to negate that consensus and politicize development concepts seriously undermine Member States’ unity and cooperation and do not help the implementation of the 2030 Agenda or the achievement of post-COVID-19 recovery. As a reliable partner for Africa’s development, China will not cease in its efforts to deepen its cooperation with African countries in various areas, take concrete action, stay committed to win-win cooperation and inject new and greater impetus into the realization of China and Africa’s common development and a community with a shared future for humankind.

The Czech Republic aligns itself with the statement to be delivered on behalf of the European Union and its member States and would like to make some brief remarks in its national capacity. The Czech Republic is pleased to join consensus on today’s important resolution (resolution 75/322), entitled “New Partnership for Africa’s Development: progress in implementation and international support”. We fully recognize the importance of the implementation of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. Through its development cooperation, the Czech Republic assists partner countries in Africa in promoting democracy, human rights and good governance, as well as in building resilience and achieving sustainable development. The Czech Republic did not join the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration or participate in the Intergovernmental Conference in Marrakech and voted against resolution 73/195, by which the General Assembly endorsed the Global Compact, for reasons we made clear in our explanation of vote delivered on 19 December 2018 (see A/73/PV.60). In recalling those facts, the Czech Republic cannot accept the word “reaffirm” in the eighteenth preambular paragraph of the resolution and must therefore dissociate itself from the paragraph. The Czech Republic reaffirms its full support for multilateralism, the rule of law and human rights, and recognizes that multilateral cooperation is indispensable in finding global solutions to global challenges such as migration.

With reservations, the Government of Chile voted in favour of adopting the text of the eighteenth preambular paragraph of resolution 75/322, entitled “New Partnership for Africa’s Development: progress in implementation and international support”, because Chile is currently updating its migration legislation, which seeks to legally establish a foundation for its adequate management of migration in order to ensure that it is safe, orderly and regular.

Japan is pleased to join the consensus on resolution 75/322, and appreciates the tireless efforts of the facilitator and coordinators, the Permanent Missions of Algeria, Kenya and Morocco, respectively, to find mutually agreeable solutions to bring this important annual resolution back to a consensus-based outcome. We would also like to thank all our colleagues for their constructive engagement in a difficult negotiation process. Japan applauds the resolution’s reaffirmation of our collective commitment to advancing the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals in Africa, including through quality infrastructure investment, poverty eradication, the strengthening of health systems and the furthering of African countries’ transition to universal health coverage, good governance and the rule of law, food security and nutrition, enhanced education, job creation, digital development, respect for human rights and the empowerment of women and girls. However, we feel obliged to express our concern about the lack of transparency we witnessed after the conclusion of the informal consultations and during the silence procedure. Transparent and inclusive consultations are an integral part of the core values and principles of the General Assembly. We hope that the informal consultations will start earlier next year and that the whole process will be carried out in a transparent manner. Japan has been a long-standing partner and supporter of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) since its establishment in 2001. As enshrined in the principles of both NEPAD and the Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD), African leadership and ownership are essential to fostering more just and sustainable results, as are international partnerships. The TICAD 8 meeting will be held next year in Tunisia, organized jointly by the United Nations Office of the Special Adviser on Africa, the United Nations Development Programme, the African Union and the World Bank. Its aim is to chart a path for African development in the post-coronavirus era, making full use of the unique dynamism created by the private sector. TICAD 8 will also serve as an avenue for contributing to sustainable and inclusive development in Africa aligned with the African vision contained in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the African Union’s Agenda 2063.

We welcome the Assembly’s consensus adoption of resolution 75/322, entitled “New Partnership for Africa’s Development: progress in implementation and international support”. We greatly appreciate the tireless efforts of the facilitator to yield that constructive result in a spirit of multilateralism, and we hope and expect a similarly satisfactory outcome for the forthcoming session of the General Assembly as well. We take note of the resolution’s significance in driving sustainable development across the African continent in cooperation and partnership with the United Nations. The Republic of Korea will also remain committed to furthering development cooperation with its African partners. Our cooperation will proceed in accordance with the spirit of our legislation under our Framework Act on international development cooperation, which defines its basic objectives as reducing poverty; improving the human rights of women, children, people with disabilities and youth; achieving gender equality; realizing sustainable development and humanitarianism; promoting economic cooperation with partner countries and pursuing peace and prosperity everywhere.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position. I now give the floor to the representative of the European Union, in its capacity as observer, to make a statement after adoption.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its member States. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro and Albania, as well as the Republic of Moldova, align themselves with this statement. At the outset, I would like to express the EU’s gratitude to Algeria, as the facilitator of the negotiation process on resolution 75/322, and to Kenya and Morocco, as coordinators for the Group of 77, as well as to our colleagues representing the groups and Member States that participated in informal consultations. I would also like to direct special thanks to the Group of African States. We know how important the resolution is for them. Regrettably, the EU was not able to vote in favour of last year’s resolution, owing to the inclusion of controversial language that does not enjoy universal support. This year we welcome the fact that we were able to find alternative language that everyone could support. We know that the African Group worked hard to achieve that consensus. We also appreciate the efforts to update the resolution and make it more focused and action-oriented. That is something we have long called for, and we will continue to work to echo that positive step in all relevant resolutions. However, I too would like to express our disappointment with the way the process ended, as one delegation decided to question the facilitator’s proposal and introduce changes that were not discussed during meetings. We would like to re-emphasize that the European Union has shown the greatest possible flexibility in order to ensure that we could return to a consensus this year, and we urge all Member States to adhere to the established principles and standards when negotiating these documents in future. Africa and the EU have a close and long-standing partnership in both security and development. The EU is Africa’s biggest development, investment and trading partner. Deepening our partnership with Africa is at the very top of the EU’s priorities. In 2020 alone more than €10 billion in investments in Africa was leveraged through one of EU’s instruments, the External Investment Plan, in addition to directly disbursed funds. Those investments are aimed at generating sustainable growth and jobs by supporting small businesses, the self-employed, women entrepreneurs and businesses led by young people and migrants. They will support a roll-out of broad infrastructure and the development of innovation for digital green growth, as well as the expansion of capacity for renewable and sustainable energy. They are aimed at strengthening Africa’s health sector, among many others. In that regard, the EU has provided more than 1 billion vaccines through the COVAX facility, and as Team Europe intends to donate at least 200 million vaccine doses globally until the end of the year. The EU has been a committed partner in assisting African countries in dealing with the health emergency but also in addressing the socioeconomic fallout of the crisis, including by supporting debt-relief efforts for African countries. Peace and security issues also remain at the core of the African Union-EU Partnership, based on mutual responsibility, national ownership and reciprocal commitment. The EU’s support to Africa is both financial and political. We believe that Africa should have an even stronger voice in multilateral forums. Our daily work in the United Nations to promote sustainable development and conflict prevention and resolution on the African continent bears witness to the priority we give those issues. That is why resolution 75/322 so important to us. In conclusion, let me reassure the Assembly of our ongoing and unwavering support to the African Group. The EU and its member States will continue to work for enhanced and strengthened cooperation with our African partner countries.

May I take is that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 66?

I now give the floor to the representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines to introduce draft resolution A/75/L.132.

On behalf of the 14 member States of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/75/L.132, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community”, under sub-item (h) of agenda item 130. In addition to the main sponsors, the following Member States have become sponsors of the draft resolution since it was submitted: Angola, Argentina, Australia, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia, Guatemala, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall Islands, Morocco, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Portugal, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Ukraine and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The members of the Caribbean Community chose to present a succinct yet substantive text, building on its predecessor resolutions 71/329 and 73/347, adopted during the seventy-first and seventy-third sessions, and on the discussions from the virtual eleventh general meeting between the Caribbean Community secretariat and associated institutions and the United Nations and its agencies, and the joint statement issued thereafter. Apart from providing the rollover of the agenda item to the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly, the draft resolution ensures that the strong foundation of partnership between CARICOM and the United Nations can continue to be vigorously pursued and deepened while acknowledging the region’s inherent vulnerabilities to external economic and financial shocks, and given the urgency of the needs of our small island developing States with regard to achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and recovering from the coronavirus disease pandemic. It emphasizes CARICOM’s commitment to implementing the 2030 Agenda and the SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action (SAMOA) Pathway, empowering women and girls, promoting education and vocational training for all, maintaining peace and security and addressing communicable and non-communicable diseases. Moreover, it encourages further collaboration to combat poverty and unemployment, terrorism and onerous debt, and to address financing for development issues, blacklisting, de-risking and the withdrawal of correspondent banking relations in the region. Our region continues to be hammered by the adverse effects of climate change and natural disasters, notably the passage of Tropical Storm Grace and Hurricane Ida across our region last month; the earthquake that struck Haiti on 14 August; and the eruption of La Soufrière volcano in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. Such events reinforce the importance of scaling up our efforts to address the interconnected and systemic nature of the risks that have disrupted our societies throughout the region. It is therefore imperative to fast-track the development of critical initiatives to advance socioeconomic transformation in CARICOM, including the debt swap initiative of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean and the Caribbean Resilience Fund, as well as the ongoing work by the international system on the development of a multidimensional vulnerability index. Lastly, CARICOM underscores the commitment of the United Nations to Haiti’s long-term stability and socioeconomic development as an important cornerstone of the Organization’s engagement with the region. As such, we reiterate the critical role played by the United Nations in assisting the Haitian Government and its people through the United Nations country team and the United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti. In conclusion, I would like to take this opportunity to express our special appreciation to the delegation of Trinidad and Tobago for its role as facilitator of the draft resolution. Their open and collaborative approach throughout the consultative process contributed enormously to the broad support that the draft resolution enjoys, which will send a strong signal from the international community to both organizations and strengthen the cooperation between the United Nations and CARICOM in achieving more concrete solutions and results for our peoples. I would also like to express CARICOM’s gratitude to all the delegations that took an active part in drafting the text before us today and whose spirit of solidarity and consensus will, I hope, enable us to adopt the draft resolution by consensus. We express our appreciation to the delegations that have sponsored draft resolution A/75/L.132 and encourage those that have not done so to lend their support and become sponsors of a draft resolution that is so important for our region, the United Nations system and the international community.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/75/L.132, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I would like to announce that since the submission of draft resolution A/75/L.132 and in addition to the delegations listed in the document, the following countries have also become sponsors of draft resolution A/75/L.132: Angola, Argentina, Australia, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Botswana, Canada, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kenya, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Portugal, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uruguay and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/75/L.132?

I now give the floor to the representative of the United States, who wishes to speak in explanation of position after adoption.

We would like to thank the delegation of Trinidad and Tobago for its work on this resolution (resolution 75/323). The United States supports the work of the Caribbean Community in enhancing economic development and prosperity in the Caribbean region. The United States is supportive of the act of cooperation between the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean and the Caribbean Community. However, debt swaps are not appropriate for countries with unsustainable debt and are unlikely to serve as a major tool for addressing debt vulnerabilities or climate challenges. We believe that other approaches with higher potential to deliver success at scale should be the primary focus of efforts to address climate objectives. Regarding concessional finance, the proper forums for discussing eligibility measures are the boards of multilateral development banks and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

We have heard the only speaker in explanation of position after adoption. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (h) of agenda item 130?

I now give the floor to the representative of Turkmenistan to introduce draft resolution A/75/L.131.

The delegation of Turkmenistan, on behalf of the 10 members of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), has the honour to introduce draft resolution A/75/L.131, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is the most serious test that the world has faced for many generations. Many peoples and communities continue to be severely affected both by the disease and its economic and social consequences. Against the backdrop of the global changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the complex socioeconomic issues arising from it, regional economic cooperation is becoming ever more vital and indispensable. Cooperation between neighbouring countries and countries in the region in the context of institutional frameworks such as the Economic Cooperation Organization has proved its value in terms of economic development and to the benefit of the countries concerned. The Economic Cooperation Organization is globally recognized as a major and authoritative international body that has evolved into a dynamic and open regional organization that has succeeded in developing a broad range of cooperation mechanisms, economic and non-economic. Over the years of the Economic Cooperation Organization’s activity, its members have concluded various agreements and taken decisions on priority issues concerning inter-State partnerships. As one of the world’s major groups, the Economic Cooperation Organization encompasses 10 countries in West and East Asia as well as Central Asia and the Caucasus, thereby linking Europe to China and Russia together with countries of the Persian Gulf. The Economic Cooperation Organization is expanding its partnership connections and cooperation mechanisms with potential partners. The United Nations system has always been a focus of ECO’s informational and awareness-raising work aimed at facilitating the implementation of the global agenda in our part of the world. In that context, we believe that the relations between the United Nations and ECO, as enshrined in draft resolution A/75/L.131, which is before us today, are mutually beneficial to both parties. They help ECO to use the capacities, resources and knowledge of United Nations agencies in the interests of its member States and give the United Nations the opportunity to make use of the potential of the regional networks and platforms that have been developed by the Economic Cooperation Organization. The international community has entered the Decade of Action for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. However, the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has further complicated the task of achieving the SDGs on time. At this time, when we are all particularly focused on their timely implementation, the member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization, working from ECO’s prospective development plan for the period up to 2025, which aligns with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, are making major efforts to ramp up their implementation of the SDGs. Our development plan was formulated to take into account regional needs and demands and based on the global development agenda. The draft resolution submitted for the Assembly’s consideration is based on resolution 73/330 and consists of four preambular paragraphs and 39 operative paragraphs. It encompasses various aspects of the relationship between the United Nations and ECO, provides a basis for further cooperation with the United Nations system, including its specialized agencies, funds and programmes, and covers a broad range of areas that are relevant to ECO, such as trade, transport, energy, agriculture, industry, the development of human resources, tourism, dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic and achieving the SDGs in the area of health care. The draft resolution also notes the specific development needs of landlocked countries and calls on United Nations agencies and international financial bodies to provide assistance to ECO and to work with it to help landlocked countries solve their problems. We are confident that the draft resolution expands the opportunities for strengthening cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization. I would like to thank delegations for their constructive approach and support to the draft resolution, as well as the delegations that have become sponsors, and urge all members to join them in supporting and sponsoring it. We hope to see it adopted by consensus.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/75/L.131, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that since the submission of draft resolution A/75/L.131, and in addition to the delegations listed in the document, the following countries have also become sponsors of the draft resolution: Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkey and Uzbekistan.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/75/L.131?

Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of position after adoption, I would like to remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I have the honour to deliver this explanation of position on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its member States. The European Union and its member States will continue to support resolution 75/324, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”, and to encourage further cooperation between the two organizations, in line with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations. However, it contains problematic language that has made it very difficult for the EU and its member States to join the consensus on it in previous years. Considering how constructive our approach has been despite our concerns, we might have expected more thorough consultations and attempts to address those concerns when considering the draft resolution. Unfortunately, that has not happened. In addition, new language has been introduced, in operative paragraph 6, that has exacerbated our concerns. With regard to the resolution’s language concerning the Baku Declaration and the outcomes of the fourteenth summit meeting of the Heads of State and Government of the member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization, the EU stresses that the references to Cyprus in those documents are not consistent with existing Security Council and General Assembly resolutions on that issue and therefore also run counter to international law and the Charter. We therefore dissociate ourselves from the references to those documents in operative paragraph 3 and the new operative paragraph 6 and once again urge the Economic Cooperation Organization to refrain from adopting positions that undermine international law and the Charter of the United Nations. The adoption of this resolution does not amount to the General Assembly’s endorsement of those documents. The EU trusts that its position will be taken into account in future so that it can continue to support this resolution.

We thank Turkmenistan for its work in facilitating resolution 75/324, on the Economic Cooperation Organization. The United States notes that this resolution is a technical rollover and does not take into account any recent developments or circumstances in particular Member States. The United States therefore does not consider that the historical previously agreed language in operative paragraphs 13 and 33 reflects any view on the part of the General Assembly on the current situation in any particular Member State or future activities involving any reference to a Member State. It is our view that the United Nations must respect the independent mandates of other processes and institutions, including trade negotiations, and must not involve itself in decisions and actions in other forums, including at the World Trade Organization (WTO). The United Nations is not the appropriate venue for those discussions, and there should be no expectation or misconception that the United States would understand the recommendations made by the General Assembly or the Economic and Social Council on such issues to be binding. That includes invitations to the WTO to develop strategies on trade liberalization, the promotion of foreign direct investment or the integration of global and regional economies, as well as calls for the WTO to support United Nations efforts to develop trade facilitation strategies and agreements or to take other actions to enhance regional trade or invitations for the WTO to extend technical assistance for the implementation of trade agreements. With those clarifications, the United States is pleased to join the consensus on the resolution.

I am taking the floor to explain Armenia’s position on resolution 75/324, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. Operative paragraph 3 of the resolution refers to a document adopted in 2012 that contains formulations blatantly distorting the essence and principles of the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. The formulations in the Baku Declaration run counter to the principles and elements of the conflict settlement reflected in the documents of the co-chairship of the Minsk Group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the internationally agreed mediation format mandated to deal with the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. The Declaration, as well as other documents adopted by the Economic Cooperation Organization and referred to in the resolution, contains selective references to the principles of international law in the context of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, while specifically omitting the principles of the equal rights and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. We call on the member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization to reject the attempts by some to abuse their organization’s platform in order to propagate ill-conceived conflict narratives and distorted views. The delegation of Armenia therefore dissociates itself from operative paragraph 3, as well as other paragraphs where references are made to documents containing formulations on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict that contradict well-known principles regarding the resolution of the conflict.

Argentina is pleased to join the consensus on resolution 75/324, based on its support for strengthening international cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. In that regard, Argentina is in favour of harnessing the resources and advantages of regional organizations in order to address specific situations in their respective geographic areas. In the case of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), Argentina would like to welcome its new Secretary General, Khusrav Noziri, and wish him every success in his work. Without prejudice to that, my country would like to point out that Hadi Soleimanpour, Mr. Noziri’s immediate predecessor as Secretary General of ECO, is subject to a national and international arrest warrant issued by the Argentine courts in 2006, charged in the case of the terrorist attack on the headquarters of the Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina in 1994. In that connection, Argentina is grateful for any cooperation that member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization may be able to provide with regard to the warrant, which is currently still in force.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position after adoption. The exercise of the right of reply has been requested. I would like to remind members that statements in the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and five minutes for the second, and should be made by delegations from their seats.

Before I reply to an issue raised in the explanation made by the representative of Slovenia on behalf of the European Union (EU), I would first like to welcome the adoption of resolution 75/324, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. As a founding member of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), Turkey attaches great importance to it as a platform that contributes to the development of its member States and as an important tool for strengthening cultural and historical ties within its region. Turkey also strongly supports enhancing the cooperation between the United Nations and ECO in order to maximize the synergies between their activities. We regret that the explanation of position delivered on behalf of the European Union and the approach it reflects are neither objective nor constructive. As with other disputes involving Cyprus, only a freely negotiated settlement that is based on dialogue and diplomacy can be sustainable. That requires a genuine and serious stance accompanied by open-mindedness, which the Turkish Cypriot side has clearly demonstrated, most recently in April during the informal 5+UN meeting in Geneva. It is important that all the relevant parties, including the EU, contribute to the efforts to settle the Cyprus issue without bias or prejudice. As long as the EU’s positions reflect only the interests of Greek Cypriots and do not acknowledge even the existence of Turkish Cypriots, it will continue to disqualify itself from playing the role of an objective contributor in the work of finding a solution. Turkey will continue to support a just, realistic and sustainable settlement to the Cyprus issue based on the realities on the island.

Our delegation has requested the floor in exercise of our right of reply in connection with the statement made by the representative of Armenia in his explanation of position on resolution 75/324, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. Armenia’s long-standing record of confrontation regarding the united position of the international community is well known. It is therefore no coincidence that in his statement the representative of Armenia made selective references, while deliberately omitting to mention the four resolutions of the Security Council on the matter (resolutions 822 (1993), 853 (1993), 874 (1993) and 884 (1993)). The representative of Armenia also passed over in silence even the most recent related document, signed by his Prime Minister, namely, the statement of 9 November 2020 that ensured the cessation of all military hostilities and the withdrawal of Armenia’s armed forces from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan. Obviously, all the more, no commitments arise from the working papers discussed within the peace process, and none of those papers create any obligation to the United Nations or any other international organization. The comments of the representative of Armenia with regard to self-determination are equally ill founded, as they have nothing in common with that principle as it is set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and other international documents. As has been noted before with regard to the Security Council resolutions on the issue, what Armenia calls self-determination was qualified by the Council as the unlawful use of force against Azerbaijan in violation of the fundamental norm of respect for the territorial integrity of States. As the current situation offers real prospects for building peace, consolidating stability, restoring peaceful coexistence, advancing the reconciliation agenda and investing in economic development and cooperation, we will be stressing over and over again that there exists no alternative to the normalization of inter-State relations between the two countries based on mutual recognition and respect for each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within their internationally recognized borders.

Today I am taking the floor to exercise my right of reply with regard to the statement by the representative of Argentina, which left my delegation with no choice but to briefly touch on his nonsensical comment regarding the status of the Secretary General of the Economic Cooperation Organization. We deeply regret the fact that this forum has been used as an opportunity to make reference to such falsehoods, and we reject such desperate efforts to take advantage of this body to resolve any issues for political ends.

I am taking the floor to exercise my country’s right of reply to the statement made by the representative of Turkey. First, with regard to the way the representative of Turkey referred to my country, let me stress that it is imperative that we all respect one another and address each State Member of the United Nations using its correct name. Secondly, the Turkish statement today demonstrates once again that Turkey itself, and its long-standing agenda for partitioning Cyprus, is the source of the references to Cyprus in the documents of the Economic Cooperation Organization. The argument that such references are in line with international law and the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly is a very easy one to defeat if one simply reads Security Council resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984). In the past year, Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot leadership have overtly supported the partition of Cyprus by proposing a two-State solution outside the long-established United Nations parameters within which the Security Council has entrusted a good-offices mission to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. This serves the strategic objectives of Turkey, but not of Cyprus or the Cypriots. We urge Turkey to return to the Cyprus peace negotiations instead of focusing on undermining the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus and perpetuating the island’s division, thereby consolidating its interference in Cyprus, in violation of the Charter of the United Nations. Finally, I would like to reiterate the commitment of the Cyprus Government to finding a just, functional and viable solution to the Cyprus question — one that ensures respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all Cypriots and entails the withdrawal of foreign troops and the abolition of the anachronism of the guarantees, reuniting the country as a bicommunal, bizonal federation, in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council.

I am taking the floor in exercise of our right to reply to the delegation of Azerbaijan. There was no reference in our statement to Azerbaijan. However, we take note that the delegation of Azerbaijan recognized itself as the country abusing the platform of the Economic Cooperation Organization for propagating its distorted conflict narratives. We resolutely refute the allegations and the usual distortions just expressed by the delegation of Azerbaijan, which are aimed at misleading the Assembly with regard to the underlying causes, essence and principles of the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict and concealing Azerbaijan’s responsibility for unleashing its largest escalation during a pandemic. In view of the time constraints, I will limit my intervention to the following points. All attempts to misrepresent the Nagorno Karabakh conflict as an inter-State and territorial conflict, including through the selective invocation of certain provisions of Security Council resolutions 822 (1993), 853 (1993), 874 (1993) and 884 (1993) while conveniently omitting others, are nothing short of a deliberate distortion of the causes and consequences of the conflict and its historical context. For many years, in fact, Azerbaijan has been ignoring the Security Council’s requests to refrain from the use of force and commit to a political settlement within the framework of the co-chairship of the Minsk Group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the only international format mandated to deal with the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. The inalienable right to self-determination of the people of Nagorno Karabakh represents the fundamental principle in the settlement of the conflict, as acknowledged by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairship and reflected in the OSCE documents. By exploiting various international platforms for fabrications and distortions, mediation shopping and other procrastination tactics, Azerbaijan has refused for decades to engage in good faith in the negotiations on the peaceful settlement of the conflict under the auspices of the Minsk Group co-chairship, instead opting for military aggression. The pre-planned, well- prepared, large-scale military offensive against the people of Nagorno Karabakh launched by Azerbaijan on 27 September 2020 led to massive violence and destruction and gross violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law. I agree that we should reflect on the long-standing position of the international community that is reflected in the joint statement of 3 December 2020 by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs, who recalled their firm commitment to refraining from the use or threat of use of force to settle disputes and reiterated their consistent and united position in favour of a negotiated, comprehensive and sustainable settlement of all the remaining core substantive issues of the conflict, in line with the basic principles and elements. Azerbaijan’s attempts to impose unilateral solutions by the use of force against Armenia, or by incendiary rhetoric, territorial claims, constant military provocations on the ground and the instigation of anti-Armenian hatred, undermine the possibility for a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

In numerous communications circulated as documents of the General Assembly and the Security Council, our delegation has comprehensively addressed similar allegations from Armenia. I see no need to repeat them today, but I would like to briefly point out the following. What the representative of Armenia called a pre-planned military aggression was the exercise by Azerbaijan of its inherent right to self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations and customary international law. Specifically, Azerbaijan used a legitimate counter-force to end the occupation of its territories and the violation of its territorial integrity, and to protect its people and allow internally displaced persons to return to their homes. Indeed, it was a war of salvation after 30 years of aggression and occupation. In accordance with the Constitution of Azerbaijan, the territory of Azerbaijan is unitary, inviolable and indivisible. The references by Armenia to localities within the internationally recognized territory of Azerbaijan under different fake names are invalid, as they are clearly inconsistent with international law and the Constitution and legislation of Azerbaijan. Apart from the duties arising from the Charter of the United Nations and international law, the specific obligations to which both Armenia and Azerbaijan are now committed are those laid down in the statements of 9 November 2020 and 11 January 2021. Armenia must come to terms with its glaring misdeeds, learn its lessons and realize that the objectives of durable and lasting peace — if it is genuinely interested in that — can in no way be achieved through insults and hatred of neighbouring countries and peoples and contempt for their legitimate right to live in their own homeland. Post-conflict realities have paved the way for Armenia to release itself from mythology and racist prejudices. Compliance with international law and good-neighbourly relations are the main objectives to which Armenia should finally be aspiring. We hope it will not miss the opportunity.

I feel compelled to react to certain points just made by the delegation of Azerbaijan. The representative of Azerbaijan’s attempts to whitewash his country’s aggressive policies and responsibility for the large-scale war unleashed against the people of Nagorno Karabakh are futile for one very simple reason — the leader of Azerbaijan has himself recognized that Azerbaijan was responsible for starting the war. In a recent interview, on 14 August, he stated, “Azerbaijan started the war of salvation.” I hope that next time the representative of Azerbaijan will check his records more accurately to make sure that they correspond to the official statements of his leadership and relieve us of the unpleasant duty of refuting his allegations by quoting his own leader. As for the references to fake names, I would like to stress that the Nagorno Karabakh conflict is an internationally agreed term used regarding the issue in the documents of the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and other international organizations. I hope the representative of Azerbaijan was not making allegations against the entire international community when he referred to them as fake names.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (i) of agenda item 130?

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the General Assembly decided to include this item on the agenda of the seventy-fifth session. In connection with that, I have received a letter dated 25 September 2020 from the Chair of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space requesting that the consideration of the item be deferred to the seventy-sixth session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this item and to include it on the draft agenda of its seventy-sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/579).

May I also take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 29?

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this sub-item on the agenda of the seventy-fifth session. In connection with this item, the President of the General Assembly has received a letter dated 16 June 2021 from the Permanent Representatives of Finland and Turkey to the United Nations, as the Chairs of the Group of Friends of Mediation, requesting the inclusion of the sub-item on the provisional agenda of the seventy- sixth session of the Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this sub-item and to include it on the draft agenda of its seventy- sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/580). May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 34?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this item on the agenda of the seventy-fifth session, with the understanding that there would be no consideration of the item by the Assembly. In connection with this item, the President of the General Assembly has received a note verbale dated 7 April 2021 from the Permanent Mission of the Comoros to the United Nations requesting the inclusion of this item on the provisional agenda of the seventy- sixth session. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to include this item on the draft agenda of the seventy- sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/581).

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 41?

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this item on the agenda of the seventy-fifth session. In connection with the item, an identical letter dated 23 July 2021 from the Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the General Assembly has been issued as document A/75/974, in which it is requested that the item be retained on the agenda of the General Assembly and therefore included on the draft agenda of the Assembly at its seventy-sixth session. I now call on those members who wish to make statements before the voting.

With regard to Ukraine, we are unfortunately once again witnessing an unacceptable situation in which the General Assembly has become hostage to destructive methods. It is deplorable to see the world’s most representative platform for dialogue used by the Ukrainian delegation and its sponsors not for dialogue, but to promote a position that has nothing in common with reality and even less to do with finding solutions to pressing problems. We are seeing an alternative reality imposed on Member States in which an aggressor that has attacked its own people in eastern Ukraine presents itself as a victim of external factors. The civil conflict between Kyiv and the Ukrainian citizens in Donbas who refused to recognize the country’s 2014 coup d’état has now lasted six and a half years. That is something of which the Security Council  — which in its resolution 2202 (2015) endorsed specific parameters for resolving the situation back in 2015, the package of measures for the implementation of the Minsk agreements  — is well aware. It is just that Kyiv is in no hurry to implement it, or, rather, is openly sabotaging it. Here at the United Nations, we know that the key to resolving any internal disagreement is broad internal dialogue. That holds true for Asia, America, Africa and Europe. Yet only in Ukraine do the authorities continue to ignore the just demands of the people of Donbas. Instead, as we see, in its attempts to disguise its unwillingness to negotiate with its own people, Kyiv throws around accusations about Russia in the General Assembly as though there were no civil conflict in Ukraine, just Russian aggression. That is quite convenient, especially as these fairy tales are supported by its Western allies, which are willing to turn a blind eye to Kyiv’s obvious efforts to sabotage the Minsk agreements. That is why the Russian Federation is resolutely opposed to the continuation of this pernicious practice. We would like to request a vote on the proposal to include the Ukrainian delegation’s politicized agenda item, and we will vote against it. We hope that everyone in this Hall will at last give Ukraine’s destructive methods what they deserve and refuse to support its proposal. Instead of indulging the provocations of the Kyiv authorities, let us concentrate on finally calling on Ukraine to heed the voice of its compatriots in the eastern part of the country.

This is the fourth time that the Russian delegation has demanded a recorded vote on the decision to retain agenda item 65, entitled “The situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine”, on the agenda of the General Assembly session and to include it in the draft agenda of its seventy-sixth session . We were not taken by surprise, but we very much regret the sustained disrespectful attitude of the Russian delegation to the Member States and the General Assembly. As a party to the inter-State conflict, the Russian Federation’s position is quite predictable. The Russian Federation is an occupying Power, and I remind everyone that the General Assembly has declared it as such. It has not ceased its illegal actions in temporarily occupied Crimea, in contravention of international law, including international humanitarian law and the relevant General Assembly resolutions. It is continuing its militarization of the peninsula in violation of the law of the sea. The human rights situation in the temporarily occupied territories continues to deteriorate, as is clearly reflected in the most recent report of the Secretary-General, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, Ukraine” (A/HRC/47/58), which will be presented to the General Assembly at its seventy-sixth session pursuant to resolution 75/192. I would like to highlight the holding of the inaugural summit of the Crimea Platform, which took place in Kyiv on 23 August, with the broad cross-regional participation of Member States and representatives of NATO, the European Union, the Council of Europe and the Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova group. The Crimea Platform is a new international consultation and coordination forum designed to increase the effectiveness of the international response to the temporary occupation of Ukraine’s peninsula, end that occupation and restore peaceful control of Crimea to Ukraine. It is nevertheless regrettable that after the Crimea Platform summit, the Russian occupation authorities only worsened their repressive practices against Ukrainian citizens seeking to enjoy their human rights and fundamental freedoms in full. On 3 and 4 September, the Russian Federal Security Service conducted house searches and detained five Crimean Tatars, including Mr. Nariman Jalal, the First Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people. The fact that Mr. Jalal has publicly supported the Crimea Platform and took part in its inaugural summit is clearly the real reason for his persecution. The fate of Ukrainian citizens in Crimea, including those detained since 2014 and deprived of their rights and freedoms by the Russian Federation, is of profound concern. We are grateful to all the Member States that have condemned the Russian Federation’s illegal actions and call on the occupying Power to immediately release all Ukrainian citizens. I will not start a substantive discussion on this agenda item right now, as I am confident that the Assembly will rightly decide to retain the item on its agenda, despite the fact that problems related to the coronavirus disease pandemic have prevented some States from participating in today’s vote. Nevertheless, I hope that all Member States will have a chance to debate the issue later in the session, as we did during the last three sessions. At the same time, for the sake of clarity in the proceedings, I would like to highlight the following. First, my delegation is anxious to see the General Assembly respond positively to Ukraine’s request for the inclusion of the item on the provisional agenda for the seventy-sixth session, and calls on all Member States to vote in favour of it. Secondly, as the Acting President has already informed the Assembly, the Assembly decided to include the item on its agenda for the current session. I would like to point out that the decision at the beginning of the session was adopted by consensus, both in the General Committee and in plenary meetings. We therefore consider the demand for a recorded vote today as yet another attempt to undermine the special authority of the Assembly, as the most representative main organ of the Organization, to continue its consideration of an issue of practical importance. Thirdly, I would like to underline that the continuing foreign occupation in Ukraine is not a new topic for the General Assembly. All Member States are well aware that in 2014, in view of the Russian armed aggression being conducted against Ukraine, the General Assembly, in its resolution 68/262, entitled “Territorial integrity of Ukraine”, affirmed its commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine, within its internationally recognized borders. Since then, the Assembly has condemned Russia’s ongoing temporary occupation of parts of the territory of Ukraine in numerous subsequent resolutions. The Assembly’s retention of this item on its agenda establishes a much-needed framework and venue for the consideration of the situation in the temporarily occupied territories. The consideration of the item in plenary meetings for three years in a row has demonstrated the international community’s growing attention to the issue of the ongoing flagrant military actions against Ukraine. In that regard, I would also like to take this opportunity to inform the Assembly that 43 Member States and the European Union have joined the Crimea Platform summit’s declaration, which, in addition to safeguarding Ukraine’s territorial integrity and independence, includes important commitments for the protection of the international order based on the rule of law, including a legal regime for seas and oceans, as well as on compliance with international humanitarian law and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. I would like to call on all the States Members of the United Nations that could not participate in the inaugural summit to consider joining the declaration, which remains open, and to vote in favour of today’s procedural decision of the General Assembly. In so doing, they are investing in their own future security.

The United Kingdom will vote in favour of the inclusion of this item on the agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy- sixth session and we encourage others to do the same. The position of the United Kingdom is clear. We do not recognize Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and remain concerned about the situation in the non-Government-controlled areas of eastern Ukraine. As long as that situation continues, the United Kingdom believes that the item should remain on the General Assembly’s agenda. Let me reiterate that the United Kingdom stands with the international community in its unwavering support for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its member States. The candidate countries Turkey, North Macedonia, Montenegro and Albania; the European Free Trade Association country Liechtenstein, member of the European Economic Area; as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Georgia, align themselves with this explanation of vote. The European Union reaffirms its resolute support for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders. We reiterate that we do not recognize and continue to condemn the illegal annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation, which is a violation of international law. It remains a direct challenge to international security, with grave implications for the international legal order, which protects the unity and sovereignty of all States. The EU continues to call for full compliance with international human rights standards on the Crimean peninsula. All pending cases of human rights violations and abuses, such as enforced disappearances, torture and killings, should be thoroughly investigated. International human rights observers must be granted full, free and unhindered access to the whole territory of Ukraine, including the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol. The EU recalls all the resolutions that have been adopted on the topic during the past few years and calls for their full implementation, including the Russian Federation’s obligations under applicable international humanitarian law. We reaffirm our full support to the endeavours of the Normandy format, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), including the work of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine and the OSCE Observer Mission at the Russian checkpoints at Gukovo and Donetsk, and the Trilateral Contact Group. The EU stresses the importance of enhancing negotiating efforts aimed at a sustainable and peaceful resolution of the conflict through the full implementation of the Minsk Agreements by all sides, and through measures aimed at rebuilding confidence, while underlining the responsibility of the Russian Federation in that regard. For all those reasons, the member States of the European Union and aligned countries have decided to vote in favour of the inclusion of the item “The situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine” on the regular agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-sixth session.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Nordic and Baltic countries — Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden and my own country, Latvia. Today we reaffirm our strong support for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, within its internationally recognized borders. The situation continues to deteriorate and the issue must remain high on the international agenda. We do not and will not recognize the illegal annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation, which constitutes an ongoing and serious breach of international law. We reaffirm our full support to the endeavours of the Normandy format and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), including the work of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine and the OSCE Observer Mission at the Russian checkpoints of Gukovo and Donetsk, as well as the Trilateral Contact Group. Together with our international partners, including the members of the recently created Crimea Platform, we will continue to implement measures aimed at avoiding any direct or implicit recognition of the illegal annexation. We call on other Member States to adopt similar measures. We support Ukraine in its request that the item entitled “The situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine” be retained on the agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-sixth session. We will vote in favour of its inclusion and call on other Member States to do the same.

I am taking the floor to explain our position on the inclusion of agenda item 65, entitled “The situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine”, on the agenda of the General Assembly at its upcoming session. We would like to reiterate our previous position that debating multifaceted issues of a highly political and controversial nature will be of little, if any, use in furthering the efforts to achieve a workable solution to an issue that has already been agreed on in the Minsk agreements of 2015, which were endorsed in Security Council resolution 2202 (2015). As long as there is an agreed international mechanism in place that is supported by the Security Council, inserting the dispute in question into the agenda of the General Assembly each year risks sowing division among Member States and exacerbating differences rather than bridging them. It could even undermine the internationally recognized agreed framework for a settlement of the situation in Ukraine. Iran’s principled position is to support a peaceful resolution to the Ukrainian-Russian dispute. We firmly believe that the issue should be addressed primarily by the two States concerned. A solution reached outside that framework will not work unless it is endorsed by both of them. The General Assembly, as a representative organ, should not prematurely engage in a debate on an item that has already been on the agenda of the Security Council. The Islamic Republic of Iran therefore does not support its inclusion on the agenda of the General Assembly at its upcoming session and will vote against the decision to include it.

The United States supports the retention of agenda item 65 on the provisional agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-sixth session. It is entirely appropriate for the General Assembly to continue its deliberations on Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, including its ongoing violations of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in Donbas and occupied Crimea. We urge all delegations to vote in favour of the decision.

My delegation aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Slovenia on behalf of the European Union, and I would like to add a few remarks in my national capacity. Georgia supports Ukraine’s request for the inclusion of item 65, entitled “The situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine”, on the agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-sixth session. We reiterate our unwavering support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. We do not and will not recognize the Russian Federation’s illegal annexation of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, which constitutes a grave violation of international law and infringes on fundamental principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Helsinki Final Act, including the principles of territorial integrity, the sovereign equality of States, the non-use or threat of use of force and the inviolability of internationally recognized borders. At the same time, we remain gravely concerned about the humanitarian and human rights situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. These are questions that directly affect the maintenance of regional, as well as international, peace and security. Maintaining the General Assembly’s close attention to this issue during its seventy-sixth session is therefore of vital importance. In that connection, Georgia will vote in favour of the inclusion of item 65 on the agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy- sixth session and encourages others to do the same.

In view of the objection that has been raised, the General Assembly will now proceed to a recorded vote on the proposal that agenda item 65, entitled “The situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine”, be included on the provisional agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-sixth session.

I give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation to make a statement.

I do not wish to distract the General Assembly as we move on to the other agenda item, but I asked for the floor simply to thank the 122 delegations that did not wish to vote in favour of the proposal by the Ukrainian delegation to include this item on the agenda of the General Assembly at its next session. We are sincerely grateful to all of them.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 65?

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this item on the agenda for its seventy-fifth session. In connection with the item, the President of the General Assembly has received a letter dated 24 June 2021 from the Permanent Representative of Mauritius to the United Nations requesting that the consideration of the item be deferred to the seventy- sixth session of the Assembly. May I therefore take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to include agenda item 91 on the provisional agenda of its seventy-sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/583).

The Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda item 91.

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this item on the agenda of the seventy-fifth session. In connection with the item, the President has received a letter dated 1 September 2021 from the Permanent Representatives of Andorra, Colombia and Côte d’Ivoire to the United Nations, issued as document A/75/1009, requesting the deferral of the consideration of this item, as well as of the reports of the Secretary-General (A/75/798) and the Joint Inspection Unit (A/75/960 and A/75/960/Add.1), and the inclusion of the item on the provisional agenda of the Assembly at its seventy-sixth session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this item, as well as the reports of the Secretary General and the Joint Inspection Unit, and to include the item on the provisional agenda for its seventy-sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/584).

The Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda item 129.

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this item on the agenda for its seventy-fifth session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to include it on the provisional agenda of the seventy-sixth session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to include agenda item 125 on the provisional agenda for its seventy-sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/585).

The Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda item 125.

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this sub-item on its agenda for the seventy-fifth session. In connection with the item, I have received a letter dated 5 September 2021 from the Permanent Representative of Angola to the United Nations requesting that the consideration of the sub-item be deferred to the Assembly’s seventy- sixth session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer its consideration of sub-item (r) of agenda item 130 and include it on the provisional agenda for its seventy-sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/586).

The Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item (r) of agenda item 130.

Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2020, the Assembly decided to include this item on its agenda for the seventy-fifth session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to defer consideration of this item to the Assembly’s seventy-sixth session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer its consideration of agenda item 160 and to include it on the provisional agenda for its seventy-sixth session? It was so decided (decision 75/587).

The General Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda item 160.