A/76/PV.88 General Assembly

Let me begin by thanking the President for convening this formal debate of the General Assembly on the responsibility to protect. In aligning itself with the statement delivered by the representative of Costa Rica on behalf of the Group of Friends on the Responsibility to Protect (see A/76/ PV.86), the delegation of Ghana would like to make the following reflections and contribution in its national capacity. We join other Member States in thanking the Secretary-General for his comprehensive report (A/76/844) and for giving special attention to the critical needs of children and young people in the context of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. We share his view that the best way to protect children from atrocity crimes is to prevent the crimes in the first place, and in that regard, we welcome the seven priority actions outlined to enhance national and global protection capacities. Children in conflict are currently at greater risk of harm than at any time in recorded history. Globally, they constitute close to 40 per cent of people displaced by conflict and violence. Conflict disrupts societies, leaving children vulnerable and deprived of basic rights such as education and access to health care, and it puts their future in jeopardy. Those who are not killed may be maimed, sexually abused or exploited and even trafficked. In some cases, children as young as six years old have been forcibly recruited, radicalized and trained for combat. In non-conflict settings, we have witnessed the painful sight of children forcibly separated from their parents and deprived of rights based on their race, religion, ethnicity or nationality. Despite the multiple burdens that conflicts and atrocity situations inflict, and their traumatic physical and psychological effects on children and young people, they are scarcely factored into the frameworks aimed at influencing the policymakers and actors who deal with such situations. They are often ignored when it comes to solutions devised to address such issues, and the cost comes in the failure to recognize their value in early-warning, prevention and peace and reconciliation processes. In order for atrocity prevention and response mechanisms to be effective, it is imperative that account be duly taken of the situation of children and youth in all conflict and in post-conflict settings. Their needs must be prioritized to protect them from egregious harm. The safety, protection and welfare of children facing the risk of mass atrocity crimes are fundamental to the objectives of the responsibility to protect. The six grave violations of child rights, including forcible recruitment, abduction, killing, maiming, rape and other forms of sexual violence, either amount to atrocity crimes or can be an important risk factor. Eliminating the risk of such violations requires intensifying efforts to implement the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other international mandates on the protection of children, including those relating to children in armed conflict. Corruption, poverty, economic exclusion and burgeoning youth populations, coupled with high rates of unemployment, dwindling opportunities and frustration among young people, are some of the driving factors of conflict and atrocity crimes. Indeed, research has shown that there is a strong correlation between violence and income inequality. Unless such structural issues are addressed effectively, the conditions that produce atrocities will remain and peace will elude the world. It is in that context that we lay emphasis on the development factors that drive conflict and draw attention to the need to urgently address the underlying causes that make people, particularly children and youth, vulnerable to conflict and atrocity crimes. In spite of the multiplicity of actors and processes seeking to prevent atrocity crimes, the concept of the responsibility to protect is premised on the sovereign responsibility of a State to protect and provide security for its people. However, sometimes the custodians of State sovereignty act in sharp contravention of the notion of sovereignty and themselves become the source of threats to their people’s security and safety. In other cases, although States may be committed to preventing atrocity crimes, they may lack the requisite capacity to do so. It is in such instances that the international community is expected to respond decisively, while using the available means dictated by the Charter of the United Nations and other international treaties. We acknowledge the pivotal role of the media, civil society, political parties and youth groups in preventing atrocities and underscore the need for active and inclusive engagement with those sectors in peace processes. Ghana has continued its fervent efforts to implement the responsibility to protect through regulations, policies and institutional arrangements, in the belief that establishing an infrastructure for peace is a true mechanism for building peaceful and resilient communities and preventing atrocities. Our national peace architecture is designed to deepen national cohesion, tolerance and peaceful coexistence among the people of Ghana. In addressing issues concerning children and young people, Ghana’s National Peace Council employs preventive mechanisms such as research, training and advocacy on vulnerability issues, with a view to protecting children and youth from radicalization, conflict, violent extremism and terrorism. Ahead of the 2020 presidential and parliamentary elections, for example, more than 600 young journalists, working in diverse media spaces, were trained on conflict sensitivities, including in areas such as hate speech and inflammatory language in the media. In addition, in concert with our National Youth Authority, the National Peace Council convened the leaders of some 50 youth groups from across the country to sign the National Youth Peace Charter. Those measures helped to contribute to stability immediately after the election and enable a peaceful transition of power. We would like to encourage the establishment of a national peace infrastructure as an early-warning and response mechanism for atrocity crimes, especially in conflict- prone and developing countries. In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that children and young people should not be seen merely as victims of conflict and atrocities. In many instances, given the prioritization and support they need, they have proved to be effective agents of peace and peacebuilding. We support youth-inclusive peace processes at the national, regional and international levels. The international community has made remarkable progress towards the implementation of the commitment to protecting populations from atrocity crimes. However, there are still daunting challenges that require us to renew and sustain our commitment to protecting succeeding generations from the scourge of war.

It has been 17 years since the General Assembly’s adoption of resolution 60/1, the World Summit Outcome document — 17 years since Member States proclaimed in the Assembly Hall that every State has a responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Yet even today we continue to see the perpetration of atrocities against civilians in situations around the world. As the Secretary-General has urged, we, the States Members of the United Nations, must do more to protect the most vulnerable individuals in the world from the most horrific crimes. We welcome the Secretary-General’s focus in this year’s report (A/76/844) on the risk and impact of atrocity crimes on children and young people and on the importance of prevention. As the first pillar of the responsibility to protect provides, each Member State has its own responsibility to protect its child population from mass atrocities. Since 2005, more than 100,000 children have been killed or maimed in armed conflict. More than 93,000 have been unlawfully recruited or used as child soldiers. Countless more remain vulnerable to rape and sexual violence. How many more children have to be killed or harmed before we take effective action? The suffering and harm to children takes many forms. Unlawful attacks on schools rob children not only of their education but of their hope for a better future. Displaced families often flee with their children as internally displaced persons or refugees, thereby causing a disruption that creates lasting trauma. While displaced, children face ongoing threats and remain vulnerable to exploitation. It is clear that we have not done enough. The United States remains committed to protecting children from the impact of conflict, as demonstrated by our push in the Security Council to elevate and better integrate the agenda on children and armed conflict in the Council’s work. We also recognize the need to update toolkits by addressing the specific needs of children in ongoing conflicts or atrocities, as well as those in the context of conflict or the risk of atrocities. Member States should make every effort to implement the seven priorities in the Secretary-General’s report this year. In particular, we need to leverage education for peace in the prevention of atrocities. Teachers can play a critical role in building societies that are inclusive, tolerant, respectful of diversity and able to manage conflicts. We must also recall the importance of accountability as a critical deterrent to future perpetrators of atrocities and as one of the most important tools for prevention. In most countries affected by conflict, children make up a majority of their populations. When we work collectively to protect children, we are not just saving lives, we are also safeguarding our future. Finally, I cannot conclude without decrying the horrific atrocities that have been committed by Russian forces against civilians in Ukraine. We reiterate our call to the international community to take collective action to put a halt to such horrors. As we have said in other settings, the United States is resolutely committed to pursuing accountability for such crimes. The international community must ensure that they do not go unpunished.

The Philippines supported the inclusion of the concept of the responsibility to protect as a regular agenda item because we believe in the need for formal and continuing consideration by the General Assembly of the still evolving concept of the responsibility to protect. The concept should never be used as a licence to intervene in domestic internal affairs or undermine the sovereignty of States. We are pleased that the responsibility to protect has become part of the regular agenda, enabling us to deliberate on its content and come to a common understanding, as well as to focus on how best to use the limited resources of the Secretariat in implementing the strategy for the responsibility to protect, in full accord with the wishes of the Member States and the Charter of the United Nations. We thank the Secretary-General for his report (A/76/844), which focuses on the responsibility to protect while prioritizing children and young people. The report highlights the persistent and disproportionate vulnerability of children and young people, with a view to ending the perpetration of atrocities against them. It calls into question the unanimously endorsed commitment by States to protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Children embody the most compelling justification for the existence of a State, which is to protect its most vulnerable charges as it would preserve itself. For what is a State without children if not on the brink of extinction? The Government of the Philippines takes its role seriously as the protector of its children. Our Constitution requires us to do so. Indeed, children should be at the very heart of and the motive for our efforts to prevent those crimes. We agree that prevention is key to guaranteeing the safety of children and young people from atrocity crimes. Going forward, in relation to the recommendations in the report for a whole-of-Government approach to the implementation of the seven priority actions, we are pleased to share the views of the Philippines. The first duty of States is to protect their populations, including children and young people, from actual harm and threats to their safety and well-being. That is after all the basis of State legitimacy. As a constitutional democracy that values the dignity of every person and protects the most vulnerable, especially children, the Philippines understands sovereignty as responsibility. Among other things, that responsibility would include ensuring that there are systems to monitor and respond to early warnings of atrocity crimes; joining and implementing relevant and regional instruments to protect children; leveraging the education sector in building tolerant societies; enacting laws to protect children in armed conflict and placing children at the centre of efforts to prevent atrocities. We have enacted a law on the special protection of children in armed conflict, which reaffirms that children are zones of peace and cannot be recruited into Government forces or allowed to participate in armed conflict. They must be treated as victims, not enemies, and protected from maiming, torture, abduction, rape or killing. Communities are required to preserve children’s peaceful integrity. The law prohibits attacks on schools, hospitals, places of worship, child development and day care centres, playgrounds and recreation parks. The Government reiterates its solemn responsibility to protect children, its most vulnerable population, from malignant forces by any means to achieve the defining purpose of the existence and expense of the State. Even in cases involving children and young people, the application of the principle of the responsibility to protect must be in strict accordance with the parameters of the 2005 World Summit Outcome document and the Charter of the United Nations. It should not be misused for political purposes or as a means to justify foreign intervention. The assessment of possible cases of failure of the responsibility to protect must be impartial and evidence-based, free from double standards and hidden agendas. Trust and respect for sovereignty are essential to moving forward with the seven priority actions to safeguard children and young people from atrocity crimes.

At the outset, we thank the President of the General Assembly for convening today’s important debate, which comes at a critical time. We also thank Secretary-General Guterres for his report (A/76/844) on this important topic and for highlighting the critical need to protect our children this year. Israel considers it vital to ensure that all civilians, and especially children, receive proper protection. Unfortunately, Israel is dealing with terrorist groups, including Iran’s proxy Hizbullah to our north and Hamas to our south, that willingly and knowingly put civilians in harm’s way on a daily basis as part of their modus operandi. They do it as a cynical publicity stunt, carefully crafted to drive up civilian casualty counts and garner international sympathy and support. Those terrorist groups purposely use Lebanese and Palestinian civilians, including children, as their human shields, while targeting and directly attacking Israeli civilians, also including children. They recruit minors on an ongoing basis to act as fighters and terrorists, and they incite their own populations, and again children in particular, to violent extremism and anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hatred. Given such challenges, which Israel and others face on a daily basis, we applaud the Secretary-General for highlighting, in this year’s report on the principle of the responsibility to protect, the vulnerability of children to intentional targeting, abuse or exploitation by armed forces and terrorist groups and for condemning the continued recruitment of minors, which is done by Hamas, Hizbullah and other terrorist groups in our region. We also commend the Secretary-General’s call to combat incitement to hostility and violence and underscore the importance of ending derogatory stereotyping, particularly of our young people. We in Israel have witnessed far too often the poisonous, fatal and destructive results of hatred and anti-Semitism coupled with the glorification of acts of terrorism and so-called martyrdom. As we have stressed in the past — and we think that the Secretary-General has done a good job of underscoring the point in his report — it is critical that the principle of the responsibility to protect also address the role and responsibility of non-State actors and terrorist groups that commit atrocities while blatantly disregarding international law and upending peace and security on a global scale. As my Government has stated in the past, from a legal perspective, we view the principle of the responsibility to protect as an emerging doctrine to be construed and applied within a framework of existing legal norms rather than constituting or creating novel legal rules or obligations. Moreover, it should be applied only in the direst of situations, involving mass atrocity crimes, ethnic cleansing or genocide. In conclusion, it is our sincere hope and prayer that there is never a reason to invoke the principle of the responsibility to protect. It is imperative that the entire international community take it upon itself to grant civilians, starting with children, the basic protections that all humans need and deserve.

My delegation takes note of the Secretary-General’s report (A/76/844) on the item under discussion. Egypt would like to stress its steadfast commitment to the international criteria relating to the protection of populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. At the same time, we underscore our position regarding the need for the international community to continue its efforts to reach a consensus on the conceptual framework of the principle of the responsibility to protect before it is mainstreamed into the United Nations system. We believe that such a consensus is a prerequisite for ensuring the success and effectiveness of the inclusion of the concept of the responsibility to protect as an item on the General Assembly’s agenda and before taking any practical steps to activate it, including through accountability. In that regard, we would like to stress Egypt’s firm commitment to preventing impunity and ensuring accountability in addressing violations of international humanitarian law. We also underscore that Member States bear a primary responsibility to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. In that regard, the essential role of the international community should be focused on enabling and assisting countries to develop their own capabilities to bear those responsibilities, while respecting the principle of national ownership in established policies and programmes. We should also focus on adopting a comprehensive approach that is not confined to military or security aspects but also addresses the root causes of conflicts, including foreign occupation, poverty, food insecurity, environmental degradation, religious and racial discrimination and intolerance. The title of the agenda item under consideration makes separate issues of the responsibility to protect and the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, while paragraph 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome document (resolution 60/1) leaves no room for doubt that the responsibility to protect is directly related to preventing those four crimes in particular. The deviation of the title of the agenda item from the international consensus in the 2005 document was one of the reasons that prompted Egypt to vote against its inclusion in the agenda for the seventy-fifth session. We appreciate the efforts made in issuing the latest report of the Secretary-General, entitled “Responsibility to protect: prioritizing children and young people”, but in some places the report mentions the four crimes stipulated in the 2005 document while in others it uses the term “atrocity crimes” — something not mentioned in the outcome document — raising legitimate questions about whether that was intentionally done in order to use the concept of the responsibility to protect for other crimes not defined by international consensus. Moreover, the report focuses on the prioritization of children and young people, despite the fact that the 2005 document made no such distinction but stressed that the State is responsible for protecting its entire population from the four crimes. Fragmenting societies into priority categories turns the discussion to subsidiary matters that are not consistent with paragraph 140 of the 2005 consensus document. That undermines the possibility of effectively implementing the concept and diverts the discussion from the General Assembly’s need to continue discussing the responsibility to protect and its dimensions. We must therefore start by focusing on the conceptual aspects with a view to reaching an international consensus. We must also focus on a triggering mechanism for the role of the international community that complements the role of the State, as well as how to overcome the institutional obstacles that have impeded the main organs of the Organization throughout its history and rendered it unable to end crimes against humanity in chronic conflicts and to achieve justice and reparation for their victims. In conclusion, Egypt once again underscores its firm and steadfast commitment to the international criteria in the context of international law regarding the protection of people from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. We urge for continued efforts to reach a consensus on all aspects of the responsibility to protect in a way that meets the concerns of Member States and provides essential protection for all the peoples of the world.

At the outset, I would like to thank the President and commend him for convening this General Assembly debate on the responsibility to protect. Our meeting is timelier and relevant than ever. Since the Secretary-General’s first report on the implementation of the responsibility to protect was issued in 2009 (A/63/677), the concept has taken on a new dimension in the light of recent developments in the world, marked by the emergence of new threats, actors and crises, notably the coronavirus disease pandemic. In that regard, it is important to reaffirm our collective commitment to the responsibility to protect in order to improve our responses in preventing genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. Furthermore, the inclusion of the responsibility to protect on the General Assembly’s agenda for the past four years reflects Member States’ strong interest in sharing ideas and best practices, especially with regard to enhancing our collective power so as to improve the international community’s capacity to prevent genocide, war crimes. crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. Morocco has always supported a consensus-based approach when it comes to the responsibility to protect. We therefore believe that prevention efforts must be holistic, given that the roots of the challenges we have to deal with are many and multifaceted. Morocco reiterates its firm belief that the various areas of multilateral cooperation are crucial to ensuring the effective and credible implementation of the principles of the responsibility to protect. In that regard, the United Nations remains at the centre of the world’s efforts, galvanizing stakeholders to adopt a common vision of peaceful coexistence rather than inciting discrimination, hatred and violence and exclusion. I would like to raise the following points of view on behalf of my delegation. First, in order to make progress on the responsibility to protect, we need a prevention programme. No Member State or region can consider itself immune to the risk of atrocity crimes, which is why the implementation of a robust institutional architecture at the national level is so important. That can not only contribute to defending the rule of law, democracy and respect for fundamental freedoms, it will also specifically help to ensure respect for human rights, peace and security and development. Secondly, Morocco believes firmly that our commitment to gender equality is vital to ensuring development at the national level of the responsibility to protect agenda and to preventing violations in any form. Against that backdrop, and in collaboration with UN-Women, Morocco has developed a national action plan on women and peace and security, based on three major pillars — mediation and peacekeeping, prevention and women’s economic empowerment. Thirdly, Morocco believes that there is no better investment for the international community than in national resilience. In that regard, we are resolutely committed to the full implementation of the Fez Plan of Action for Religious Leaders and Actors to Prevent Incitement to Violence that Could Lead to Atrocity Crimes, which highlights the voice, authority and exemplary role of religious leaders in the fight against hate speech and the prevention of violent extremism — two potentially significant factors in the commission of mass atrocity crimes — as well as the Rabat Plan of Action, on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred. Fourthly, fully conscious that hate speech is a precursor to severe human rights violations, Morocco has made its fight against that scourge a priority at the national and international levels. On 18 June, for the first time since the adoption of resolution 75/309, submitted to the Assembly by Morocco and adopted by consensus in 2020, the international community marked the International Day for Countering Hate Speech. Fifthly, States must fulfil their obligations in the fight against impunity in order to prevent a recurrence of mass atrocity crimes. In that regard, efforts for national accountability must be encouraged and supported, particularly by strengthening legal cooperation among States. Sixthly and lastly, the various United Nations bodies could make better use of the tools available to them to prevent genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing and thereby strengthen international accountability. Important mechanisms such as the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) are well placed to support prevention efforts, and we encourage Member States to make better use the UPR process as a preventive mechanism. In conclusion, the Kingdom of Morocco shares the Secretary-General’s firm belief that the responsibility to protect necessarily involves strengthening democracy and the rule of law, as well as implementing the provisions of international humanitarian law and human rights law. Morocco supports the Secretary- General in all of his efforts to promote peace, security, conflict prevention, the peaceful settlement of disputes and respect for human rights.

At the outset, I would like to thank the President for convening this fifth formal debate of the General Assembly on the responsibility to protect, which provides Member States with the opportunity to reflect on and assess the efforts made to prevent crimes against humanity and mass atrocities. Before I begin my statement in my national capacity, I would like to express my delegation’s support for the statement made by the representative of Costa Rica on behalf of the Group of Friends of the Responsibility to Protect (see A/76/PV.86). We welcome and appreciate the report of the Secretary-General (A/76/844), entitled “Responsibility to protect: prioritizing children and young people”. Children and young people are disproportionately affected by conflict and atrocities, and grave violations against children, including their recruitment, abduction, killing, maiming, rape and other forms of sexual violence, constitute atrocity crimes. It is therefore increasingly vital to strengthen child protection capacities and put children and youth at the centre of our efforts to prevent atrocities. We encourage States that have not yet done so to accede to the relevant conventions and agreements on child protection, including the Paris Principles, the Vancouver Principles and the Safe Schools Declaration. I would also like to point to our Ministry of National Defence’s November 2021 publication of a national guide for child protection instructors in peacekeeping missions, which includes chapters on training, prevention, detection, the protection of victims’ rights, the creation of reports and the conduct of investigations, to be provided to personnel prior to their deployment. In that regard, Uruguay’s national peace operations training institute is now equipped to include in its curriculum issues related to the protection of children and civilians in armed conflict, making our country a regional education and training hub for future contingents in peacekeeping missions in countries requiring them, in line with our national commitment to maintaining peace through the peaceful settlement of conflicts. This year’s debate is taking place at a time when the world is facing unprecedented levels of violence, mass atrocities and displacement. And despite our collective efforts to prevent the escalation of conflict and protect populations, more than 100 million people have so far been displaced by conflicts, persecution and atrocities, a statistic that demonstrates once again that the responsibility to protect remains the best principle for compelling the international community to act in concert when vulnerable populations are threatened by genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing or crimes against humanity. In that regard, my delegation encourages the members of the Security Council to make use of the Council’s working methods to consider situations that could potentially involve atrocities as early as possible. We also support holding open debates on the responsibility to protect, the threat of atrocity crimes and the role of the Council in their prevention, and we urge Council members to request regular briefings by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. I also want to point out that as a member of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group, Uruguay affirms its support for the proposal for a code of conduct for the Security Council with regard to draft resolutions aimed at protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, and endorses the French-Mexican declaration asking the permanent members of the Council to abstain voluntarily from the use of the veto when mass atrocities are committed. We also support the work of the Special Advisers on the Prevention of Genocide and on the Responsibility to Protect and encourage them to share their analyses of developing crises with members and provide recommendations and early warnings on atrocity prevention to the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council. We cannot overemphasize the importance of the work of the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms, including the Universal Periodic Review, the Special Procedures and the treaty bodies, and of the technical assistance provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, all of which play a fundamental role in early warnings of risks and detecting indicators of mass atrocity crimes. Uruguay recognizes the three pillars of the responsibility to protect and emphasizes that the use of force should be used only as a last resort and in keeping with all the safeguards established in the Charter of the United Nations, including any explicit resolutions of the Security Council. However, our country favours the first and second pillars, concerning prevention, as the most effective means for taking on the responsibility to protect. We advocate for a preventive and comprehensive approach based on cooperation and an analysis of the underlying causes of conflicts. My delegation believes that accountability, in addition to affording justice, plays an effective role in preventing atrocity crimes. We cannot allow impunity to shield the perpetrators of such crimes, and as the primary bearers of the duty to ensure that their populations’ human rights are respected, States must guarantee accountability within their borders and ensure that the perpetrators of crimes that violate the most basic standards of humanity are brought to justice. The Security Council, which is mandated by the Charter with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, must make every effort and provide effective measures to protect the civilian population and prevent atrocity crimes. And from the perspective of a representative of a troop-contributing country, I would also like to emphasize the usefulness of peacekeeping missions as one of the most effective tools we have for preventing atrocity crimes and protecting civilians from them. In conclusion, Uruguay reaffirms its commitment to the responsibility to protect and calls for continued efforts to advance its proper implementation.

I want to begin by acknowledging the importance of this annual debate and the provision of the annual report of the Secretary- General, and I thank him for this year’s report (A/76/844), entitled “Responsibility to protect: prioritizing children and young people”. It is also important to applaud the complementary role provided by the Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect and the mandate of the two Special Advisers. South Africa agrees with the Secretary-General’s assessment that while many States and the international community have embraced this fundamental norm and further recognized and acknowledged its critical importance of providing protections to children and young people, the members of that vulnerable group continue to be victims and survivors of atrocity crimes, and we need specific efforts to prevent that. It is therefore it is our duty as States and the international community to commit to preventing such acts and to establishing methodologies that do a better job of preventing them, as outlined in the Secretary-General’s report. As we are all aware, the notion of the responsibility to protect was defined in the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document, which highlights that it is the responsibility of the State to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. It is recalled that one of the most effective ways of achieving such protections is by closing the impunity gap for the perpetrators of such crimes, that is, to criminalize and prosecute offenders in a State’s domestic law. South Africa has adopted several pieces of legislation in that regard. This report has been particularly valuable in demonstrating the importance of a State’s role in creating an enabling environment that encourages tolerance and diversity, especially among children and young people, not only during times of conflict but also during times of relative stability and peace. In that regard, South Africa would like to highlight the following points. First, the continued exposure of children and young people to atrocity crimes in conflict areas throughout the world is an area of particular concern for South Africa. The inability of the international community to seek a means to end those conflicts and provide critical support to children and people in conflict zones raises questions about our own commitment to honouring the second and third pillar of that ideal, namely, the commitment of the international community to assist States in meeting their obligations and the responsibility of Member States to collectively respond when a State is manifestly failing to provide such protection. As indicated in the report of the Secretary-General, a primary area of concern remains the exposure of children and young people to atrocity crimes in conflict areas, and it is of concern to South Africa that the report notes the use and escalation of rape and sexual violence, which disproportionately impacts young women and girls in such situations. We cannot ignore the fact that the exposure of children and young people to such crimes is also increased due to their heightened vulnerability, and it is incumbent upon us to find solutions that do not exacerbate the situation through increased conflict but, rather, seek to protect the most vulnerable in those circumstances. The international community must strengthen the tools provided by the Charter for the pacific settlement of disputes. At the 2005 World Summit, Member States committed themselves to protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. However, since then, conflicts have drastically changed, becoming more complex and multidimensional. Thus we must find innovative and peaceful means to address those unprecedented threats and challenges. The international community has access to a multitude of tools provided by the Charter of the United Nations on preventive measures for conflicts and atrocity crimes. It should utilize the full array of tools available to the international community to seek peaceful solutions to conflict and the prevention of such crimes. In that regard, South Africa encourages the increased roles played by the regional bodies as centres, and we were pleased to note that the report of the Secretary-General acknowledges the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child as an important tool towards preventing such crimes from being perpetrated against children and young people. We should also note that the report substantively discusses the importance of preventive measures during periods of stability. To that end, South Africa concurs with the report’s specific acknowledgement that States should be encouraged to build societies that promote socioeconomic equality and that value difference and diversity, and that have systems in place to identify and respond to early warnings and therefore align the responsibility to protect with sustainable development. South Africa will continue to support the primacy of prevention through a strong development agenda that is centred on human rights. South Africa also recognizes that enabling conditions for atrocity crimes are created in environments where there is structural inequality, discrimination and the marginalization of others and notes the value provided through strong educational systems that promote racial tolerance and intercultural dialogue, thereby creating a culture of mutual respect. That should include the developing of national curricula that promote an understanding of and respect for cultural, religious, ethnic and gender diversity and teach a balanced account of history, including in relation to past atrocities. Such systems are necessary to avoid the proliferation of hate speech, which has been cited as a driver of hate crimes and atrocity crimes; South Africa serves as its own example in that regard, as we moved from our own tumultuous past. Lastly, I wish to take this opportunity to reiterate that South Africa remains committed to instruments that promote and implement the responsibility to protect and further acknowledges the details contained in the Secretary-General’s report. In particular, we appreciate the inclusive nature of the report in identifying several concrete actions that can be undertaken to not only prevent such crimes against children and young people but also to include young people in the process of conflict prevention and peacebuilding and place them at the centre of prevention. We are pleased that the report recognizes that the African Union has begun to act inclusively towards the role of young people through the African Youth Charter, as well as the Continental Framework on Youth, Peace and Security of the African Union. In conclusion, we must acknowledge that this plenary meeting is more critical today than ever before as we strive together to protect people from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. We have witnessed the impact of such crimes against children and young people in conflict zones and areas of fragility and stress the importance of the obligation and legal responsibility of occupying Powers over the people they occupy to protect them from such atrocity crimes. The application of the principles of the responsibility to protect should not be selective but apply universally to all States. That is reinforced by frank and open debates that are critical to recognizing our current shortcomings such that we are able to advance as an international community.

My delegation welcomes the convening of this formal debate on the theme of the responsibility to protect and the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. It also takes note of the report of the Secretary-General (A/76/844), entitled “Responsibility to protect: prioritizing children and young people”. During the 2005 World Summit, States solemnly affirmed and adopted the principle of the responsibility to protect. As is well known, that principle rests on three equally important pillars. The first is the commitment of each State to shoulder its responsibility to protect its population, notably from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. However, that responsibility requires the support of the international community in order to be fully carried out with strict respect for the sovereignty of the State concerned. The second pillar stresses the responsibility of the international community to help, when required, States to discharge their duty to protect their respective populations. Under the third pillar, the responsibility to protect lies, alternatively, with the international community of States as a whole. In his report, the Secretary-General stresses that in conflict situations, children and young people are generally targeted. They often face various forms of exploitation and violence. Young women and girls in particular are exposed to sexual violence during armed conflict, and the inability of children and young people to attend school in times of conflict also has a lasting negative impact on society. The State must therefore imperatively give pride of place to the protection of children and young people in all areas of public work. To that end, prevention is key, which is the most important aspect of the responsibility to protect populations from criminal atrocities. My delegation welcomes the Secretary-General’s recommendation that States and their partners combat the factors that cause children and young people to become the targets of criminal violence. My delegation believes that major progress has been made since the adoption of the principle of the responsibility to protect in 2005; however, we still face major challenges. According to the United Nations, in 2020, 42 per cent of forcibly displaced persons were children, and there were more than 1,200 cases of rape and other forms of sexual violence against children in armed conflict. That is one of the highest annual rates since 2005. It is also important to note that several international legal instruments have been adopted and/or ratified by many States in order to guarantee and protect the rights of children, including the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child; the 2000 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict; the 1999 Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention; and the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their two Additional Protocols. Haiti is facing multiple challenges, including gang violence and a deteriorating security situation, as noted in the latest report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti (S/2022/481). The situation is also characterized by abductions followed by confinement. Those phenomena affect all social groups and segments of society. The report also notes that among the categories most affected, abducted women and girls are very likely to be subject to sexual and gender-based violence during their captivity. Women and girls from the age of 5 are particularly exposed to sexual violence, including rape and sexual slavery, although men and boys are also affected. Despite the efforts made by the Haitian authorities to fully ensure the protection of our population, the situation remains critical. It is with that in mind that the Haitian Minister for Foreign Affairs, His Excellency Mr. Jean Victor Généus, in his most recent statement before the Security Council (see S/PV.9066), emphasized that it is urgent for the Haitian National Police to receive, in the coming days, not the coming weeks or the coming months, robust support from our international partners so that we can put an end to that unacceptable situation. The Republic of Haiti believes that the responsibility to protect is a principle that we need to observe by achieving synergetic cooperation not just between States and the international community but also civil- society organizations. In conclusion, my delegation encourages States to fully implement existing instruments, to ratify those that are pending and to take measures to address socioeconomic inequalities. To that end, it is necessary to ensure equitable access to education in order to reduce the vulnerability of children and young people to criminal atrocities, specifically by minimizing their exposure to exploitation and by improving their socioeconomic perspectives.

At the outset, Mr. President, I wish to thank you for having convened this important debate. I also thank the Secretary-General for his report (A/76/844) on the responsibility to protect, with a particular emphasis on children and young people. We welcome his recommendations and the priority actions provided in the report for protecting children and young people from atrocity crimes. I also thank the Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide for her presentation of the report (see A/76/ PV.86). Since the 2005 World Summit, States Members of the United Nations have repeatedly affirmed their commitment to the responsibility to protect their populations from atrocity crimes, namely, genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. There is no question that the primary responsibility for protecting people from those heinous crimes rests with States. The international community has a responsibility to help States fulfil that obligation. However, when peaceful means are inadequate and national authorities manifestly have failed to protect their population, the international community needs to take timely, decisive and collective action to protect the population in danger. The principle of the responsibility to protect entails both prevention and response. The principle does not warrant action in a reckless manner; instead, it clearly stipulates the responsibility to take collective action through the Security Council in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. The three pillars of prevention, international assistance and collective response are mutually reinforcing. A consistent, timely and unified response from the international community to atrocity crimes immensely contributes to deterring future violations involving such crimes and even their reoccurrence. In contrast, the failure to decisively respond to atrocity crimes has a severe negative impact on the promotion of respect for international law. While there is concern about the misuse of the principle, and it is not the role of the United Nations to replace the State in protecting people, the international community and the United Nations cannot shy away from upholding their responsibility to protect vulnerable populations around the world from atrocity crimes. My country, Myanmar, since the military coup in February 2021 has faced an unprecedented level of violence, mass atrocities and displacement. The illegal junta has been committing widespread and systematic serious atrocities against the civilian population, and the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, in its preliminary analysis, indicates that crimes against humanity have likely been committed. I echo the point made by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar in his report, which documented the inhumane military’s impact on Myanmar’s children and urged immediate, coordinated action to prevent the creation of a lost generation. The illegal junta has so far enjoyed total impunity despite the mounting evidence of their atrocities, particularly war crimes and crimes against humanity, extensively documented by the United Nations and other organizations. Junta forces have carried out multiple massacres, including the 2021 Christmas Eve massacre, which the Security Council condemned, stressing the need for accountability. More than 1.2 million people have been displaced by the military’s deliberate attacks against residential towns and villages, including by air strikes and wholesale arson. The barbaric and cruel nature of the junta troops can be witnessed in the most recent videos and photos recorded in the cell phone of a military soldier obtained by Radio Free Asia, which evidently describes the gruesome killing of civilians by the security forces. The military junta’s intended execution of pro-democracy individuals following secret sham trials by their so-called military tribunals would be nothing more than a murder by process. The head of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, in his recent statements, has also warned that a death sentence in such circumstances could constitute a crime against humanity or a war crime. The deteriorating crisis in Myanmar is not a situation where the national authority is failing to protect its people. It is a situation where the military is deliberately attacking its people to gain control over them by instilling terror and fear. The people of Myanmar have been largely frustrated at the limited level of response from the international community to the ongoing military atrocities. Because there is no domestic environment that can ensure accountability for the military’s atrocities, the current situation meets the threshold for invoking R2P doctrine and demands application of the third pillar of the R2P principle: decisive collective action through the Security Council. This is the appeal the people of Myanmar have made repeatedly. Ambassador Bob Rae of Canada rightly pointed this out yesterday (see A/76/PV.87). By holding up R2P placards, the people of Myanmar have been crying out for the application of the R2P principle to save lives. Sadly, their plea has not yet been heeded. The people of Myanmar consistently raise a question: how many more innocent lives have to be sacrificed before they get decisive collective action from the Security Council? The Security Council has the responsibility to protect the Myanmar population, particularly women and children, from further atrocities by the military. Every day that the military junta’s members face no accountability for their ongoing atrocities, they become more emboldened to continue to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Accordingly, the National Unity Government of Myanmar lodged a declaration with the registrar of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on 17 July 2021, accepting the Court’s jurisdiction with respect to the international crimes committed in the territory of Myanmar since July 2002. Moreover, Myanmar supports the code of conduct on Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes, as elaborated by the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group. Myanmar also supports the French-Mexican initiative on veto restraint in case of mass atrocity. We also thank Liechtenstein for its leadership in the adoption of the General Assembly veto initiative resolution last April (resolution 76/262). In conclusion, in his annual reports, the Secretary- General has offered a number of implementation tools, which remain available for the Security Council. In this regard, I urge the international community, specifically the Security Council, to take decisive unified action to end military impunity and ensure accountability by utilizing admissible evidence and criminal case files collected and built by the IIMM. The referral by the Security Council of the inhumane Myanmar military to the ICC is therefore urgently needed. Doing so will serve humankind, and it will make a major contribution to the transformative change we are pursuing towards a federal democratic future. I also urge the Security Council to urgently address the military’s blockage of humanitarian access, as more than 14.4 million people, including 5 million children, are in desperate need of humanitarian assistance in Myanmar. They need help and protection. I urge the international community, in particular the United Nations and its Security Council, to live up to its responsibilities, commitments and promises to protect the people from the Myanmar military’s atrocities.

Ireland aligns itself with the statements made on behalf of the European Union and the Group of Friends of the Responsibility to Protect (see A/76/PV.87), and I would like to add the following remarks in my national capacity. Ireland thanks Special Adviser Nderitu for her briefing (see A/76/PV.87) and takes the opportunity to formally welcome the appointment of George Okoth- Obbo as Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the Responsibility to Protect. The report of the Secretary-General (A/76/844) clearly underlines the challenges we face in seeking to prevent atrocity crimes, but it also outlines the opportunities before us for positive change in developing the prevention agenda to be more inclusive of children and youth. Children and youth face distinct, serious risks when it comes to atrocity crimes, including recruitment as child soldiers and victimization by sexual violence. They are also particularly vulnerable to the psychological and developmental effects of atrocity crimes that damage the fabric of the societies in which they are growing up. But there are opportunities for action  — opportunities to pursue long-term avenues of atrocity prevention by investing in inclusive, unprejudiced education; by creating paths for children and youth to participate in remembrance and explore their history; and by empowering children and youth to engage in peacebuilding with the diversity of people with whom they share their communities and their future. There are also opportunities to pursue urgent prevention by creating inclusive early-warning systems that acknowledge the particular insights and contributions of children and youth, understanding that, for a system to be used in practice by those groups, it needs to be designed with their needs in mind. There remain underexplored opportunities to deepen our understanding of the gendered dynamics and drivers of atrocity crimes, including by examining the intersecting and mutually reinforcing efforts of the responsibility to protect and women and peace and security agendas. This could contribute to more holistic, inclusive, age- and gender-transformative approaches to early warning and response efforts. When we encourage women, girls and youth and children to raise their concerns, we must ensure that there are institutions to meet and respond to their needs. That is why Ireland partners with the Auschwitz Institute for the Prevention of Genocide and Mass Atrocities in the delivery of training for security- sector personnel on the prevention of conflict-related atrocity crimes. Projects such as this provide soldiers, police and officials with the skills they need to embed a prevention lens in their organizations. In so doing, they accelerate the capacity of their organizations to heed early warnings and respond effectively to protect their populations. Where we have failed in our collective responsibility to prevent atrocities, we must not fail in holding perpetrators to account. Accountability mechanisms, including the International Criminal Court, have a crucial role to play in allowing societies to heal and make progress. To succeed, processes of accountability, including transitional-justice mechanisms, must be inclusive of those who are most vulnerable to atrocity crimes, so that they may have a part in their redress and repair. We are only as safe as the least protected among us. We have a responsibility in the General Assembly, in the Security Council and across the United Nations system to those facing the devastating reality of atrocity crimes. That includes accounting for any use of the veto in the Security Council to the full membership of the United Nations through the veto initiative (resolution 76/262). As the international community declared in 2005 and as Ireland reaffirms today, we cannot step back from our collective responsibility or our moral duty to future generations.

I will begin with the pith of my statement. We noted that in the most recent report of the Secretary-General on the responsibility to protect (R2P) (A/76/844), he focused on children and young people. The switch to the subject of children, which is so popular on United Nations platforms, seemed to be intended to detract attention from those aspects of R2P that its ardent supporters do not wish to discuss or even allude to. In that regard, I am referring to the use of the concept as a tool for interfering in the domestic affairs of States and to topple, if possible, so-called inconvenient regimes. When the concept was being developed in 2005, we were told that that would never happen. Supposedly, R2P is not synonymous with humanitarian interventions, and the checks and balances in R2P would prevent it from being used to overthrow the legitimate Governments of sovereign States by force. Those who supported the concept emphasized that the 2005 World Summit outcome document placed the responsibility for protecting the population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity on States themselves, while the international community was granted a secondary role. The international community was supposed to help States and provide support. As for coercive measures, we were assured at the time that these would be a last resort that would require a decision by the Security Council in accordance with Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. All of those reassurances, however, were completely negated by subsequent events in Libya in 2011, where a reference to R2P was used as an excuse by Western countries to launch an unprovoked military aggression against this sovereign State. Accordingly, we saw that our concerns about the concept of R2P had actually been well founded, and not just because there was the risk of references to R2P being abused to promote Western countries’ geopolitical ideas. In fact, the concept was developed for that purpose. The advertised checks and balances do not work. The United States-led NATO coalition interpreted the provisions of the Security Council resolution on a no-fly zone as a carte blanche for a carpet bombing of Libya. This led to the destruction of the statehood of this once-flourishing country and plunged its population into a chaotic civil war that has lasted for years and continues to this day. Today no one has tallied up the lives lost in Libya as a result of the use of R2P, the very concept that we are discussing here today. No one has described the terrible crimes from which its citizens have suffered. No one has brought the perpetrators to justice. After the Security Council transferred the Libyan dossier to the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Court rushed to fabricate a case within just three days. I remember this very well; it fabricated a case against then-leader Al-Qadhafi. The ICC then stalled for many years under the guise of working and sent regular reports to the Security Council. The ICC decided to coyly sweep NATO bombardments of Libyan civilians under the rug. The ICC also did not investigate the violent murder of Al-Qadhafi itself, a murder that was done without due process. Seemingly, in the eyes of the ICC, there is nothing wrong with eliminating an undesirable head of a foreign country in such a way. The disastrous consequences of applying R2P in Libya were never properly evaluated by the international community. That much is true. As for the main perpetrators of these consequences, namely, the Western countries, they have shown no remorse. They continue to insist that the use of force was justified, meekly admitting that they did not do enough to stabilize the situation in the country. Against that backdrop, it is important to remember that R2P is not an international legal institution. It is simply a political framework that was relevant in 2005. But it was discredited by subsequent events. These events have shown the international community that R2P is simply a repackaging of the infamous concept of humanitarian intervention, which Western countries actively used from the 1960s to 1990s, in blatant violation of their responsibilities under the United Nations Charter.

At the outset, I would like to thank and commend all international efforts and those of the United Nations and its bodies aimed at promoting protection for all at the international, regional or local levels, in addition to raising awareness and building capacity to avoid the human mistakes that, throughout human history, have resulted in grave human and social disasters. There has always been a need for the international community to prevent genocide and punish perpetrators. Genocide is defined as a crime under international law pursuant to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948. This Convention considers committing genocide, planning for it, conspiring to perpetrate it, inciting it or involving others in it in any way as a crime. Genocide is in fact a planned, organized and deliberate strategy, and its considerable effects go beyond the borders of the country or society that is affected by it. Despite the adoption of the Genocide Convention and notwithstanding all international efforts to boost protection against genocide, we have nevertheless witnessed numerous colossal atrocities, which shows that, on many occasions, the international community has failed to actually prevent genocide. We believe that the international community must still adopt effective legal mechanisms that ensure the implementation of the Genocide Convention and its provisions and contribute to developing international law while promoting the prevention of genocide, especially among children and youth. In that context, we would like to thank the two Special Advisers of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide and on the Responsibility to Protect for their efforts aimed at strengthening the path to achieving protection and preventing genocide that reflects positively on development and the opportunities for the advancement of upcoming generations. We would like to commend the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide for her recent visit to Iraq and look forward to seeing important results in the interest of the families of the victims in my country. In addition, we look forward to seeing new efforts to promote cooperation among various stakeholders, in particular those affected by this tragedy, and to ensure accountability in the first place. In recent years, terrorist organizations have shown their ability to perpetrate atrocity crimes, including genocide, in a systematic and deliberate manner, which we witnessed in my country when the terrorist group Da’esh controlled large regions. subjecting the people to various crimes, including crimes that could be characterized as genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Those crimes were perpetrated against everyone who held an ideology different than that of Da’esh. That was referred to in the eight reports of the United Nations Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da’esh/ Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (UNITAD), which was established pursuant to resolution 2379 (2017). The Investigative Team has proved through clear and convincing evidence that Da’esh, the terrorist organization. committed genocide crimes against the Iraqi people. Iraq considers the establishment of UNITAD as a unique step towards systematic and innovative international cooperation between States and United Nations bodies in collecting, preserving and storing evidence to be used in national courts for prosecution, accountability and ensuring no impunity for perpetrators, which will further strengthen the concept of the responsibility to protect, not only at the national level but also at the international level. Iraq is taking important measures to ensure accountability for such crimes, with a view to rehabilitating populations and affected regions, while also taking necessary measures for displaced persons to voluntarily return home and ensuring security and social cohesion in areas that were subjected to such crimes. All those efforts will help to raise awareness about the danger that those terrorist organizations represent. That is in addition to making tireless efforts to strengthen Iraq’s contribution at the international level and joining conventions, along with their optional or mandatory protocols, that protect the rights of the child. Moreover, those efforts should lead to enacting national legislation ensures the protection of children and young people and prevent their use in conflicts or in fighting terrorism. In conclusion, we underscore that the primary responsibility to protect lies with each State in order to protect its citizens and ensure security to its population against the threat of any of the crimes that we are discussing today. Such crimes should be prevented, including inciting the perpetration of such crimes. That must be done through appropriate and necessary measures to be taken, first and foremost, at the national level.

Ukraine, as a candidate country, aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of the European Union (EU), in its capacity as observer (see A/76/PV.86). We are grateful to many delegations for their strong statements in support of Ukraine. At the outset, I would like to reaffirm my Government’s commitment to the World Summit Outcome Document. Among many important elements of that document, we committed to protecting all populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Those principles of the responsibility to protect (R2P) fully rule out the option of one State using military force against another State under the pretext of the protection of the population from alleged threats, with the actual goal of annexing another State’s territory. I reiterate that military force must not be used to alter borders or occupy territories. On 24 February, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine under the fake pretext of protection from genocide. The reality, however, was quite the opposite. Thousands of Ukrainian civilians, including children, killed everywhere within the reach of the Russian army, destroyed Mariupol, tortured Bucha and regular missile terrorism throughout Ukraine attest to the fact that it was a Russian plan to commit genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. As always, Russia has turned to its regular practice of aggressive mimicry, when a predator gains an advantage by presenting itself as a victim. It fabricated a claim of genocide in the Donbas region of Ukraine to justify its invasion of the entire country. The war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Russian soldiers in Ukraine have been camouflaged by the Russian leadership under the term “de-Nazification”. The legal response of Ukraine was immediate. We initiated the case in the International Court of Justice concerning Allegations of genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide). The Court ordered Russia to immediately suspend its so-called military operations. Predictably, Russia shows complete disregard for that ruling, as it has done before towards other orders of the International Court of Justice, and for the Charter of the United Nations, General Assembly resolutions and international law in general. The crimes that Russia continues to commit in Ukraine are also being investigated by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The referral of the situation in Ukraine, made by 43 States, and Ukraine’s previously given consent to the ICC’s jurisdiction over all crimes committed during the armed conflict since 2014 provide a solid basis for the work of the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC. Ukraine is strongly committed to cooperating with the Prosecutor in his efforts. Ukrainian national courts and law enforcement agencies are also working hard to establish the facts and investigate the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Russian soldiers in Ukraine. The first court verdicts for killing unarmed civilians and shelling civilian infrastructure have already been handed down. On many occasions while speaking about the second and third pillars of R2P, we highlighted the particular role of the United Nations in the prevention of atrocity crimes, with the special responsibility of the Security Council. Again, the use of the veto, or even the mere threat to use it, can stall the Council’s response in situations when urgent action is needed to protect civilians. Russia used the veto to prevent the Security Council from exercising its main responsibility at the beginning of the invasion (see S/PV.8979). Therefore, the General Assembly assumed its responsibility and played its role, adopting the three resolutions ES-11/1, ES-11/2 and ES-11/3 at its emergency special session. Any war brings the most suffering to the most vulnerable. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is no exception. As we meet today, Russian forces continue to raze Ukrainian cities and villages to the ground. The toll of casualties among civilians and Ukrainian servicemen grows on a daily basis. Children are on that sad list. At least 324 Ukrainian children were killed by Russia, and 593 were wounded. Those are crimes that are not subject to any statute of limitation. We also remain extremely concerned about the destiny of those Ukrainians who have been forcefully transferred to Russia. As Russia itself has confessed, more than 1 million Ukrainian citizens were transferred to different regions of Russia, including more than 234,000 children. Several thousands of them are orphans or are deprived of parental care. We strongly condemn the decision by Russia to simplify the procedure for obtaining Russian citizenship for Ukrainian orphans and children left without parental care. That decision grossly violates the Fourth Geneva Convention. The issue of the protection of children in times of conflict should be prioritized in the General Assembly. Taking into account the amount of verified data, including by the United Nations, we regret that the Secretary-General’s 2022 report on R2P, entitled “Responsibility to protect: prioritizing children and young people” (A/76/844), which highlights the impact of atrocities on children and young people, does not directly cover the immediate consequences of Russia’s invasion against Ukraine. In that regard, we would like to echo the EU statement, underlying that the collection of accurate, timely and reliable information on grave human rights violations perpetrated against children is clearly a key indicator for the R2P mandate.

I now give the floor to the Permanent Observer of the Sovereign Order of Malta.

The Sovereign Order of Malta commends the United Nations for calling this important issue to the attention of the General Assembly, and we look forward to the protection of children and young adults faced with the threat of genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Currently, there are at least 27 conflicts raging across our planet, and, sadly, whenever conflict erupts, sexual violence is present. Nelson Mandela once said that the true character of society is revealed in how it treats its children. Those words are incredibly sobering when reflecting on a 2021 report, published by Save the Children, suggesting that 17 per cent of the total 426 million children living in conflict areas, that is, one in six, are living near armed groups that perpetuate sexual violence against them. Therefore, while we echo calls for prevention to remain an important part and a focus for Member States to work towards, we must not lose sight of the importance of the support that international organizations continue to provide to victims of wartime sexual assault. The Sovereign Order of Malta stresses that that kind of violence against children and young people not only is a crime that violates international and natural law, but its impacts are long-term, multifaceted and complex in resolution. Not that it needs reiterating, but the long-term impacts include unwanted, unplanned pregnancies, chronic health conditions, including heart disease, cancer and diabetes, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, eating disorders and the increased risk of self- harm and, all too often, suicide. Despite the disproportionate targeting of sexual violence towards young women, it must not be forgotten that males, too, are targeted  — something that was recognized in Security Council resolution 2467 (2019). Researchers at the National University of Australia have estimated that up to 50 per cent of incarcerated prisoners of war in conflict zones reported some kind of sexual violence prior to, during or after captivity. The use of such weapons against boys and young men has been documented in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and in the current conflict in Ukraine. It is nearly impossible to find an absolute statistic for the number of people who have been sexually assaulted in that way, especially considering the underling taboo and stigma that are often associated with being a male victim. However, its prevalence is being noted more and more, and an increasing number of research studies, paralleling those being undertaken in respect of crimes against women and girls, are uncovering a swathe of data supporting the originally anecdotal reports from conflict zones. Males who sought help, rather than being given support, often faced ostracism as a consequence of cultural norms and the prevalence of a macho cult, particularly evident during war and civil conflict. They are also at risk of being prosecuted, considering that rape can be regarded as an illegal act and is criminalized in many countries. With such stigmas and the fear of social exclusion and prosecution, it is no wonder that many victims stay silent. As with the plight of women and girls, acts of sexual victimization and aggression often end up with blame being assigned to the victim. It seems fitting that the time to review our responsibility to protect and prioritize children and young people comes within two months of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and the rights of people with disabilities being discussed in this forum at the United Nations. Although progress and fruitful dialogue have been made in those and many other areas, we must question that, if we are truly serious about tackling the threats of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, then we must prove that by ensuring accountability among nation States, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organization in promoting and championing fundamental human rights at the international and governmental levels. The geopolitical landscape that currently prevails is proof that insufficient steps have been taken to mitigate those abhorrent crimes against girls, boys and adults. Our own mechanisms at the United Nations are faulty. Shutting down dialogue just because it is uncomfortable is no way for multilateralism to progress. Future generations already face an uncertain future because of our misuse of the Earth’s resources. Surely, we can begin to try and make amends by acting swiftly in protecting and supporting the next generation in the fight against indiscriminate acts of genocide, ethnic cleansing and war crimes, such as sexual violence.

The exercise of the right of reply has been requested. May I remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second intervention, and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I wish to take this opportunity to exercise my delegation’s right of reply to the false and baseless accusations made against my country by the representative of the occupying regime in the Palestinian territory. I would like to once again extend my condolences on the loss of Ms. Shireen Abu Akleh, the Al-Jazeera journalist who was brutally murdered by Israeli soldiers just recently. Her memory will be cherished by the countless lives that she touched. Nonsensical and baseless references to my country were made by that representative. In response, let me recall some facts that describe the nature of that brutal regime. The Zionist regime occupying Palestinian territory is a regime whose inception, creation and continuity are based on bloodshed, terrorism, occupation, mass killings, atrocities and a wide range of cruel acts, in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. That regime has a long history of misleading others and diverting attention from its inhuman and savage actions against innocent Palestinian and other nations in the Middle East. It is too early for people of the world to forget the atrocities in Gaza during the summer of 2014, which included war crimes and crimes against humanity documented by this Organization as well. We call on those who consider themselves staunch supporters of the notion of the responsibility to protect and pioneers of the defence of human rights to take practical and urgent action on the situation in Palestine and prevent the continuation of further atrocities against Palestinians.

I will not waste the time of this forum to respond to the last speaker, but I will just say that, as a Member State and a full member State of this forum, we would request, and demand, that our proper name be used. We are certainly not the regime, and we have a name. We are the State of Israel, and we would ask to be addressed like that. It is unfortunate that some members here have chosen to politicize this very important debate.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 134.