A/77/PV.91 General Assembly

This meeting is being held today because of the inability of the Security Council to adopt a draft resolution (S/2023/506) extending the cross-border aid delivery mechanism to Syria. As members know, the weeks leading up to the voting were marked by several rounds of consultations facilitated by the penholders, Brazil and Switzerland. As an elected member of the Council, the United Arab Emirates was keen to engage intensively and constructively in those consultations at various levels, in our knowledge that the delivery of relief aid to millions of Syrians was at stake. During the negotiations the United Arab Emirates stressed its firm position on extending the mechanism for 12 months, based on the needs of the humanitarian community, and we also ensured that provisions on demining were included in the draft resolution as part of early-recovery projects. Mines have devastating effects on the lives of civilians as well as on the efforts of humanitarian workers. Furthermore, mine clearance is crucial to creating conditions conducive to the voluntary and safe return of refugees and internally displaced persons to their homes. At the same time, we also sought to promote cross-line delivery in order to ensure that aid would be provided by all available means. When it became clear that reaching a consensus on extending the mechanism for a period of 12 months was not possible, we proposed, together with the three African members of the Security Council, to extend the mechanism for nine months. Unfortunately, that proposal was not accepted. In that regard, we want to emphasize that we spared no effort during the consultation period to bridge viewpoints and find a solution amenable to all, with the goal of alleviating the humanitarian situation facing Syrians. We made those efforts in line with our duty as diplomats and members of a responsible body to find common ground even in cases where hope remains elusive. We did indeed have an opportunity to extend the mechanism — if for a less optimal period — but the current geopolitical reality has closed the door on any possibility of reaching consensus. That day, 11 July, was a sad one for multilateralism and for the people who have endured the scourge of a war that has lasted more than 12 years and was followed by a devastating earthquake earlier this year. In the light of the Council’s inability to extend the mechanism, the United Arab Emirates therefore welcomes the Syrian Government’s decision to grant the United Nations permission to deliver humanitarian aid through the Bab Al-Hawa crossing for a period of six months, in addition to its previous decision to extend the opening of two additional crossings. That decision came at a crucial time. While we are fully aware that the international community will need time to adapt to the new reality, we underscore the need to move quickly during this transitional period to ensure that aid is delivered to the Syrian people by all available means. In conclusion, we want to stress that prioritizing the interests of our brother people of Syria demands that the members of the Security Council refrain from internal divisions over a purely humanitarian issue. It also requires finding common ground and moving forward amid our new reality in a spirit of cooperation, understanding and mutual respect.

Today’s meeting is an opportunity for us to address the important issue of Security Council draft resolution S/2023/506, on the humanitarian situation in Syria, which was vetoed last week (see S/PV.9371). We are once again having a discussion based on the mechanism established by resolution 76/262, which mandates a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council. My country considers the discussion of the use of the veto particularly important, as Qatar was in the original group of Member States presenting the draft resolution to the Assembly last year. The significant number of those States demonstrates how the Assembly can draw on the Charter of the United Nations to use its prerogatives regarding issues related to maintaining international peace and security, especially when the Security Council is unable to discharge its responsibilities as a result of the use of the veto. The adoption of resolution 76/262 reflects Member States’ interest in having their voices heard when discussing issues involving the use of the veto, since they have a number of economic, social, humanitarian and legal aspects, among others, that demand frank and open discussion. Qatar’s position on the mechanism is founded on its commitment to multilateralism and to strengthening and reviving the General Assembly’s central role as the most representative body of the United Nations. Resolution 76/262 does not infringe on the Security Council’s tasks or mandate, and the discussion in the Assembly is limited to its mandate and role under the Charter. We emphasize that the humanitarian situation in Syria is of great interest to Qatar and all other Member States, not just the members of the Security Council. The use of the right of veto last week represents an obstacle to the Council’s extension of an extremely important mechanism that provides millions of people with food, medicines and other basic supplies in north- western Syria, as humanitarian actors have attested. There is no realistic, acceptable or sufficient alternative to the cross-border mechanism. We therefore believe that our legal responsibility towards those civilians is to raise awareness about their grave humanitarian situation and take all possible measures to avoid a humanitarian disaster. Qatar has attached particular importance to the delivery of humanitarian aid to our brother people of Syria since the beginning of the Syrian crisis. We have made several commitments during the Brussels conferences for Syria, most recently at this year’s conference in June, when we contributed $75 million. We emphasize the importance of distinguishing between humanitarian aspects and political considerations in all situations. There can be no doubt that ending the humanitarian crisis in Syria requires a comprehensive settlement through a process leading to a political transition based on the Geneva communiqué (S/2012/522, annex) and resolution 2254 (2015) that can realize the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people and preserve Syria’s unity, sovereignty and independence. In conclusion, I would like to thank members of the Security Council for their efforts, in particular the co-penholders Brazil and Switzerland. We hope this meeting can help to reach a consensus, especially with regard to the discussion of humanitarian issues and preventing future use of the veto regarding Syria and other situations on the Council’s agenda.

Slovenia aligns itself with the statement delivered this morning on behalf of the European Union (see A/77/PV.90), and we would like to add some remarks in our national capacity. Twelve years of conflict, economic collapse and other factors have pushed 90 per cent of the Syrian population below the poverty line. The devastating earthquake in February caused the situation to deteriorate even further. The message of Mr. Martin Griffiths, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, to the Security Council was very clear. The humanitarian crisis in Syria is one of the worst in the world and the Syrian people desperately need our help. In that regard, I will focus on three points today. First and foremost, a renewal of the cross-border mechanism remains critical to our efforts to ensure that the humanitarian needs of the Syrian people are adequately addressed. I would like to thank Switzerland and Brazil, the penholders for Security Council resolution 2672 (2023), and the 10 elected members of the Security Council for their indispensable and united efforts in guiding the Security Council to respond to the desperate plight of the Syrian people. We are alarmed that the General Assembly has once again been called to discuss the use of the veto on the renewal of the Syrian cross-border mechanism. My country deeply regrets the Russian Federation’s use of the veto to block a renewal of the provisions of resolution 2672 (2023) (see S/PV.9371). We are concerned about the profound effects that the veto will have on the lives of the Syrian people on the ground. Secondly, Slovenia notes the Government of Syria’s decision of 13 July to allow the United Nations and its agencies to deliver aid to north-western Syria through the Bab Al-Hawa crossing for six months. However, we would like to emphasize that the main aim of the cross- border mechanism established by the Security Council is to ensure the delivery of humanitarian assistance and to provide the immediate, sustained and unhindered delivery of humanitarian relief directly to the people in need. The mechanism enables that to be done safely, predictably and in line with international humanitarian law and humanitarian principles. The humanitarian actors themselves have called for a 12-month authorization, which would bring greater predictability and enable better humanitarian outcomes and more deliberate operation planning. Slovenia firmly believes that the members of the Security Council must shoulder their responsibility in that regard and do their utmost to ensure that the plight of the Syrian people is the sole consideration in these discussions. Slovenia fully supports the penholders of the Syrian humanitarian file in their efforts to achieve a renewal of the cross- border mechanism with a timeline that would allow for the predictable functioning of the mechanism and the humanitarian operations. I particularly want to emphasize the humanitarian nature of the resolution in question. With that in mind, humanitarian principles should be at the forefront of the Council’s deliberations and fully respected. As an incoming non-permanent member of the Security Council, Slovenia shares the firm position of the current elected members of the Council. Thirdly, my country has been a consistent and reliable humanitarian partner to the people of Syria. We have provided more than $30 million in humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people in Syria and the region since 2014. Our funds have been allocated through international organizations such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Committee of the Red Cross, UNICEF and the World Food Programme, as well as via in-kind assistance, bilateral projects and other channels. In response to the devastating earthquake in Türkiye and Syria early this year, Slovenia allocated a substantial amount of its humanitarian funds to Syria and complemented its response with an additional pledge at the seventh Brussels Conference on supporting the future of Syria and the region, held last month. In conclusion, I want to emphasize that the only way to resolve the Syrian crisis is through a political settlement in accordance with Security Council resolution 2254 (2015).

The United Nations cross- border mechanism has played an indispensable role since 2014 in delivering humanitarian assistance predictably, transparently and effectively to millions of people in need. Given the record levels of humanitarian needs, which have been further exacerbated in the aftermath of February’s devastating earthquakes, it is clear that the mechanism should continue. We therefore deplore the fact that the veto has been used once again on this humanitarian issue. It is also deplorable that the Council has so far failed to reach an agreement on extending a crucial mechanism, despite urgent calls from the United Nations and humanitarian partners, as well as the ongoing strong support for such an agreement by the great majority of its members. While we have taken note of the Syrian regime’s granting of permission for the United Nations convoy crossings to use the Bab Al-Hawa border gate for six months, we share the concerns raised by the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs regarding the conditions attached to the permission, and we will continue our assessment of the issue, together with the United Nations and our partners. Ensuring the safe, sustained and unimpeded delivery of United Nations cross-border aid to the people in need is essential. As it stands, the United Nations cross-border mechanism remains the most transparent, effective, accountable and impartial method of delivering aid across the border. We reiterate our call on all Council members to continue to be guided solely by humanitarian considerations and to engage in further efforts to find realistic and practical common ground for the renewal of the mandate. According to Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, the Security Council acts on behalf of all States Members of the United Nations. However, the Council has failed to carry out its mandate on numerous occasions, and as we all know, it is the power of the veto that is the reason for the frequent paralysis we have witnessed in the Council. That is all the more disturbing when the use of the veto complicates humanitarian action. The business of the Security Council is maintaining international peace and security, not preventing desperate people from receiving the humanitarian aid they need. It is therefore important for the Council to take into consideration the prevailing views in the General Assembly and redouble its efforts to forge a common ground accordingly. The last convoy of United Nations humanitarian aid crossed Bab Al-Hawa 10 days ago. Now there is yet another anxious wait for the Syrian people and international humanitarian partners. We cannot abandon millions of Syrians in need to their fate. The cross-border aid deliveries should continue as soon as possible and for as long as needed. We therefore call on all sides to abide by their responsibility to fulfil that humanitarian and moral imperative.

Peru was one of the countries supporting the General Assembly’s adoption of resolution 76/262, which calls for an official meeting of the Assembly when one or another permanent member of the Security Council exercises its right to the veto. Today we find ourselves in that situation once again. We have decided to participate in the debate because the resolution represents progress with regard to the transparent, responsible and accountable functioning of the Council. It is also a tangible demonstration of the role of the General Assembly in the maintenance of international peace and security, and it reaffirms the fact that the mandate entrusted to the countries that make up the Council, including its permanent members, is conferred on them by the Member States of the United Nations as a whole. As we did the first time the Assembly met after the use of the veto in the Security Council, we have a realistic perspective. We are aware that it would not have been possible to found the United Nations without the Charter’s inclusion of the veto for the Council’s five permanent members. The Organization was explicitly designed so that the Council’s decisions require the support or at least the acquiescence of its permanent members. However, we also advocate a teleological and systematic reading of the Charter whereby all its provisions, including the veto, must be understood in relation to its purposes. According to Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Charter, those purposes include solving international problems of a humanitarian nature. We also want to point out that Article 24, paragraph 2, provides that in discharging its duties, the Security Council must proceed in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Consequently, the veto should not be used in a way that has a negative impact on the fulfilment of the Organization’s purposes. It has been widely said that we are facing global circumstances that are very different from those of 1945. I would add that since then, we have accumulated considerable experience regarding the consequences of maintaining certain dynamics in the work of the Council and with respect to certain ways of using the veto. In that regard, various initiatives have been put forward to regulate the use of the veto, such as the code of conduct of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group, to which Peru belongs, and the Franco-Mexican initiative, which my country also supports. In the light of recent events, it is worth discussing the inclusion of humanitarian considerations as one of the parameters in future initiatives of a similar nature. The realistic perspective that I spoke of also means that we approach all these debates in the same way. We do not prejudge responsibilities but rather state the facts. And unfortunately, the truth is that at its meeting on 11 July (see S/PV.9371), the Council failed to adopt draft resolution S/2023/506, which would have enabled the renewal of the cross-border mechanism for humanitarian aid to Syria through the Bab Al-Hawa crossing. We listened carefully to the explanations of the Russian Federation regarding the use it made of its veto at that Security Council meeting, as we did to the perspectives of other Member States on the issue. We have also taken note  — through various media outlets and the statements of the representative of the Secretary-General — of the letter from the Permanent Representative of Syria in which he communicates that his Government has decided to authorize the use of the Bab Al-Hawa crossing for six months under certain conditions that are being examined by Secretary- General António Guterres and Mr. Martin Griffiths, the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs. We have also noted the Syrian Government’s decision to authorize new border crossings at Bab Al-Salam and Bab Al-Rai, which are already being used. I reiterate that we are not prejudging responsibilities but stating facts. In order to fully comply with the purposes of the Charter, it is essential that all members of the Security Council avoid politicizing humanitarian affairs. It is precisely in addressing humanitarian and emergency relief issues that the members of the Council have a greater responsibility to achieve the necessary consensus, because human lives are at stake. Whenever such issues are addressed, the Council must take steps to ensure that humanitarian assistance is provided on the basis of need, without being affected by bias or political interests. The members of the Security Council must also prioritize negotiation, diplomacy and the quest for solutions that avoid the use of the veto in humanitarian matters, as well as demanding that all parties allow quick, safe and unimpeded access to humanitarian assistance. Peru reiterates its firm commitment to ensuring that all humanitarian assistance, wherever it is required, is provided in accordance with the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality, and with respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and national unity of States.

The Charter of the United Nations clearly states that the purposes of our Organization are to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace. The work of the Security Council must be carried out in full compliance with the principles of the Charter, and every decision should be made in a way that ensures full respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity and takes into account the legitimate concerns of the Member States directly concerned in the agenda item in question. The Syrian Government has long expressed its concerns about the cross-border relief mechanism, which violates its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and has reiterated its unwavering position that a cross-line relief mechanism under Syrian Government ownership of all processes, in close cooperation with United Nations entities, should become the primary modality for any humanitarian assistance to Syria. We hear an ever-increasing number of voices in the international community recognizing that the cross-border relief mechanism was merely a temporary arrangement made in specific circumstances, and that there is a need to speed up the transition to cross-line assistance and to phase out the cross-border mechanism as soon as possible. Most unfortunately, however, the United States and its Western allies, taking advantage of the power imbalance in the Security Council, tried to force through a politically motivated draft resolution (S/2023/506) that was written without the full engagement of the different members in discussion and without sufficient flexibility to enable the Council to reach an adequate solution to the issue. At that critical moment the Russian delegation therefore had no option but to oppose such an unjustified and politically motivated draft resolution with a view to ensuring full respect for Syrian sovereignty and taking its legitimate and justified concerns into consideration. At the same time, we should remind the Assembly of the facts about the countries that are desperately trying to blame the Russian delegation for using the veto. They are the same countries that voted against Russia’s own draft resolution (S/2023/507), which had no significant differences. Moreover, the countries that claim to be so concerned about the humanitarian situation in Syria are the same ones imposing the illegal and inhumane unilateral coercive measures on Syria that have had a devastating negative impact on the livelihoods of the Syrian people as a whole. We can see that the Cold War era is still casting its shadow over attitudes in the Security Council today. The high-handedness and arbitrariness shown by a certain bloc Power in its pursuit of its own political interests have reached an extreme level, with misconduct, double standards and wrongful actions threatening peace and security rampant in every corner of the Council. The Council’s mishandling of the issue of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a typical example. There can be no question that the Security Council has turned into a political tool of a certain Power and has abandoned its primary mission of maintaining genuine peace and security. It is witness to the fact that it will be impossible to maintain international peace and security until the Council’s existing, faulty bureaucratic structure and the double standards in its working methods are completely reformed. Every year, the United States and its vassal forces in the region conduct a series of large-scale joint military exercises on the Korean peninsula and beyond, mobilizing massive numbers of armed forces, introducing all kinds of strategic assets, waging seriously provocative nuclear war games aimed at the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and posing grave threats to peace and security on the peninsula. However, the Security Council has turned a blind eye to that reality, making an issue only of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, denouncing its legitimate rights, and its measures taken in self-defence to safeguard its sovereignty and protect its people from the scourge of war, as provocations and threats to peace and security. The delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea welcomes the decision made by the Syrian Government to allow the United Nations agencies to carry out their humanitarian aid deliveries through the Bab Al-Hawa border for another six months, and we agree with the conditions that the Government has outlined for conducting those humanitarian efforts during this period. In conclusion, the delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would like to take this opportunity to once again express its unreserved support to and solidarity with the Government and the people of Syria in their struggle to maintain sustainable peace and security in the region, end all illegal unilateral sanctions, coercive measures and attempts to overthrow the legitimate system in Syria imposed by the United States and its allies, and realize their country’s independent development and prosperity.

Nicaragua aligns itself with the statement delivered by the representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations (see A/77/PV.90). We met in the General Assembly a year ago to discuss this very same topic (see A/76/PV.95 and A/76/PV.96). Today we are once again witnessing the politicization, double standards and selectivity with which resolution 76/262, on the standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council, has been applied. On 11 July (see S/PV.9371) we were able to observe the manoeuvres and abuses of Western countries in the Security Council. They continued to encourage a trend that results in negative votes by other permanent members of the Council on draft resolutions that obviously favour only their own selfish interests and Western agendas. We underscore that these are the countries responsible for undermining any good-faith negotiating effort in the Security Council, which is putting the maintenance of international peace and security in real jeopardy. The issue of the extension of the authorization of the cross-border humanitarian assistance mechanism in Syria could have been resolved if draft resolution S/2023/507, presented by the Russian Federation, had been adopted. The draft resolution proposed the extension of the aforementioned mechanism for another six months, exactly the same term that had been agreed in January and the same one that Syria, the party concerned, accepted on 13 July. In that regard, we have to thank the Russian Federation for its explanation of vote in the Security Council, for its solidarity vis-à-vis the humanitarian situation in Syria by not allowing humanitarian aid to be politicized, and for the defence of the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and self-determination of the people and Government of the Syrian Arab Republic. We are struck by the Western countries’ discourse whereby according to them they are prioritizing the needs of the Syrian people while they continue to politicize humanitarian assistance and apply a criminal policy of double standards, imposing illegal and inhumane unilateral coercive measures against the people and the Government of Syria. They are the real obstacle to the work of the United Nations and its humanitarian agencies in Syria. We also wonder how they intended to extend the cross-border mechanism for a period of more than six months when it is not clear whether there are sufficient funds for its operation. Nicaragua rejects any attempt to politicize humanitarian assistance, and we reaffirm our support for the guiding principles of humanitarian assistance, international law and international humanitarian law. We reiterate our principled position on respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all peoples. As a peace-loving people, respectful of international law, we do not recognize or accept initiatives that violate the sovereignty of Syria, which has suffered attacks on and violations of its territorial integrity and political independence. Any resolution or decision on the situation in Syria, whether in the General Assembly or the Security Council, must take into account the legitimate concerns of the State, which is the main stakeholder in the resolution of this issue, in its reconstruction and in peace. To truly address the humanitarian situation in Syria, we must demand an end to the efforts to isolate it, to the hostility and the policies of unilateral coercive measures. We must find a way to create an enabling environment for a Syrian- owned and -led political solution, without external interference, so as to restore the country’s security and stability, enable the reconstruction of what terrorism, interventionism and foreign aggression have destroyed and allow the voluntary and dignified return of refugees and the displaced to their homes. Finally, as we have heard today, both Nicaragua and the international community expect transparency and accountability to prevail in the meetings on this issue. In that regard, the permanent members of the Council that voted against draft resolution S/2023/507, submitted by Russia on 11 July (see S/PV.9371), should also be here explaining why they did so, with a view to maintaining the credibility of the Assembly.

My delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union (see A/77/PV.90), and I would like to add some remarks in my national capacity. France regrets that draft resolution S/2023/506, which was submitted on 11 July by Switzerland and Brazil and received 13 votes in favour from the members of the Security Council (see S/PV.9371), was not adopted following the lone veto cast by the Russian Federation. Worse still, having refused to participate in the negotiation process in any way, Russia did not hesitate to issue an ultimatum that its text, draft resolution S/2023/507, should be adopted — or nothing. In doing so, it not only held the Council hostage, as the representative of Canada mentioned (see A/77/PV.90), it held hostage the more than 4 million people who are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance in north- western Syria, more than 80 per cent of them women and children. Russia is vainly attempting to disguise its manipulative actions as humanitarian concerns. No one should be fooled. Russia’s interest in Syria is not humanitarian in nature but based purely on political calculation. The Russian Federation’s decision not to extend the Black Sea Grain Initiative is equally cynical. It is now crucial to find a solution as soon as possible in order to guarantee the conditions for the predictable and transparent delivery of humanitarian aid, in line with international humanitarian law and the interests of the Syrian people. After 12 years of conflict and the earthquake of 6 February, the living conditions for Syrians have continued to deteriorate. The Secretary-General has clearly identified the needs in that regard. Those needs must be met by guaranteeing safe and unhindered access for humanitarian actors and the predictable delivery and distribution of aid based on the humanitarian principles of independence, impartiality and neutrality. Let us recall in that regard that 96 per cent of humanitarian funding comes from the European Union and its member States, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Norway and Japan. We will continue to fully assume our humanitarian responsibilities in the spirit of the Secretary-General’s parameters and principles for United Nations assistance in Syria.

Italy aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union (see A/77/PV.90), and I would like to add some remarks in my national capacity. Today is the third time that resolution 76/262, on strengthening the United Nations system, has compelled the General Assembly to debate the use of the veto in the Security Council. It is the second time in two years that a veto has prevented the adoption of a humanitarian draft resolution. That is yet another blow to United Nations humanitarian aid aimed at supporting and protecting the most vulnerable. Russia’s decision to veto draft resolution S/2023/506, on the cross-border mechanism in Syria, will have tangible humanitarian consequences, disrupting the delivery of life-saving supplies to the millions of people who are most in need. The Secretary-General and Under-Secretary- General Griffiths strongly requested a renewal for 12 months. The draft resolution by the penholders, which proposed renewing the use of the border crossing at Bab Al-Hawa for nine months, was already a compromise. Italy appreciates the hard work done by Switzerland and Brazil in balancing the positions of all Council members. The draft resolution they proposed would have ensured much-needed planning, favoured early recovery and supported cross-line methods with more efficient United Nations-coordinated cross- border assistance. Russia’s decision to veto the draft resolution after a genuine diplomatic effort will once again create a sense of uncertainty about the future for the Syrian population and put the humanitarian system under heavy stress. As we have said in other United Nations contexts, the veto power blatantly contradicts a fundamental principle of the Charter of the United Nations — the sovereign equality of States — and on too many occasions has prevented the Council from discharging its vital responsibilities on international peace and security. This is one of those occasions. We take note of the recent decision of the Syrian regime to allow the United Nations and its agencies to cross through Bab Al-Hawa for six months. It is a short-term bilateral agreement, however, and still not enough to provide either sufficient predictability for humanitarian organizations or humanitarian assistance in an efficient manner. The Security Council cannot fail to address the urgent humanitarian needs of a suffering population. It must ensure the continuation of cross-border assistance to the people in north-west Syria through Bab Al-Hawa, which is the only lifeline for millions of people. Italy calls on the Council to undertake every effort to find a solution that will enable the cross-border assistance to continue. We once again commend the exceptional work of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and its implementing partners in Syria. They can continue to count on Italy’s unwavering support.

Albania aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union (see A/77/PV.90). On 11 July the Security Council failed to adopt draft resolution S/2023/506, on the cross-border delivery of humanitarian assistance to the people of north-west Syria. Today we once again deplore Russia’s use of the veto for a second time on the renewal of Council resolution 2672 (2023). It is another shameless misuse of the veto and a terrible setback. The 12-month extension period asked for by the international community, the United Nations and humanitarian and non-governmental organizations was supposed to alleviate the needs and realities on the ground, after more than 12 years of conflict and hardships that were worsened by the earthquake in February. The veto by Russia, a permanent member of the Security Council, now stands between assistance in the form of food, medicine and life-saving humanitarian aid and the more than 4 million people in need in north- west Syria. It denies the United Nations-led cross- border response and prohibits humanitarian actors from delivering critical humanitarian aid, services and early- recovery assistance to more than 2.7 million people every month, 80 per cent of them women and children. We want to once again express our concern about the broader implications of the loss of the Council’s authorization of cross-border assistance. We have taken note of Syria’s letter of 13 July allowing the United Nations and its agencies to cross through Bab Al-Hawa for six months to deliver aid in north- west Syria. As we have pointed out in the discussions in the Council, we think that announcement does not provide sufficient predictability for humanitarian organizations to plan and deliver humanitarian assistance in a timely and efficient manner. Cross- border assistance remains a must. It is the most critical supply line for providing food, medical care and shelter and the only lifeline for those in need. Humanitarian aid should flow to all who need it through a resolution of the Council, in a predictable manner, in line with humanitarian principles and without interference. Life-saving and life-sustaining humanitarian actions must not be disrupted, targeted or politicized. We fully support the unconditional and unimpeded operation of the United Nations and its partners in delivering humanitarian aid to those in need, as was envisaged in the draft resolution presented to the Council by Brazil and Switzerland, which a majority of the members of the Council supported. We strongly underline the need for the continuation of the monitoring mechanism in any decision about the continuation of humanitarian aid in Syria. I reiterate Albania’s firm position that humanitarian realities on the ground must drive us to find a solution sanctioned in a resolution. Principled and sustainable access to humanitarian aid must remain the international community’s priority. We must put people first and show Syrians that they are not forgotten.

Germany fully aligns itself with the statement delivered by the observer of the European Union (see A/77/PV.90). In addition, I would like to add the following remarks in my national capacity. At the outset, let me stress that we deeply regret the latest veto cast by Russia against the resolution proposed by Brazil and Switzerland for a 12-month renewal of the cross-border mechanism in Bab Al-Hawa. Casting a veto against the extension of a mechanism to provide humanitarian aid is irresponsible and inhumane. By doing so, Russia has shown that it does not live up to its responsibility as a permanent member of the Security Council. Germany is the world’s second largest humanitarian donor. Over the past eight years, thousands of truckloads of humanitarian goods have been delivered to north- west Syria. We are grateful to all humanitarian workers who have worked tirelessly to save the lives of Syrians in need. Humanitarian access to those in need is governed by international humanitarian law. The parties to the conflict must allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief for civilians in need. Such consent must not be refused. The conditions set out in the letter sent out by the Syrian regime on 13 July are not in line with humanitarian principles. Moreover, the Syrian regime has shown time and again that it has no respect for international agreements or its obligation to grant unhindered humanitarian access. We call on the Security Council to renew the cross-border mandate. Moreover, we call on the Syrian regime not to politicize the delivery of humanitarian aid. We fully support the relentless and persistent efforts of penholders Brazil and Switzerland. The draft text, which proposed to renew the border crossing at Bab Al-Hawa for nine months, was a genuine and constructive effort to balance the wishes of all Council members. We must not fail in ensuring that assistance reaches those in need. Humanitarian assistance should make use of all access modalities and follow a whole-of- Syria approach. Let us also bear in mind that a real solution for sustainable peace and stability, for prosperity and hope for the whole of Syria, lies with the political process in accordance with Security Council resolution 2254 (2015) and the Geneva process. This very process is obstructed by the same forces now telling us that a cross-border resolution is not needed any longer. As long as one member of the Security Council continues to disregard the most basic principles of the United Nations and humanity, we will also have to discuss whether the General Assembly should put a stronger focus on the humanitarian situation in Syria.

We endorse the statement delivered by the representative of Venezuela on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations (see A/77/PV.90). Following the adoption of resolution 76/262, entitled “Standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council”, our delegation registered its concerns and interpretations of the text, which was not thoroughly discussed in due course, nor with sufficient time. Under said resolution, we are meeting today for the second time in less than a year to discuss Syria. We see the shortcomings of the automatic mechanism set out by resolution 76/262, which provides no leeway for Member States to decide whether or not a meeting of the General Assembly is necessary. It is unfortunate that, in the Security Council, instead of addressing the concerns of non-member States of the Council, especially on issues of direct concern to them, forced action on draft resolutions continues to be taken when there are still significant differences as to their content and scope. We reject any politicization of humanitarian assistance or its use as an instrument for political blackmail. We reaffirm the full validity of the guiding principles of humanitarian assistance set out in resolution 46/182. The consent of the country concerned is essential. The key responsibility to ensure that humanitarian aid reaches all Syrians lies with their Government, so any decision taken by the Security Council on the humanitarian situation in Syria must take into account all of the Syrian Government’s concerns regarding assistance, as well as the genuine interests and aspirations of its people. Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity must be fully respected. The United States, which claims to be very concerned about the humanitarian situation of the Syrian people, promotes a punitive approach against Syria in international organizations on the basis of manipulation, selectivity and political bias, while maintaining criminal unilateral coercive measures against that country. The impact of such measures is deepening in the face of the consequences of more than 10 years of war imposed against Syria, in addition to the socioeconomic and humanitarian effects of the multiple global crises, exacerbated in the aftermath of the coronavirus disease pandemic. If the United States were truly concerned about the Syrian people, it would urgently eliminate the unilateral coercive measures that impose enormous suffering on the Arab nation, hamper its sustainable development and, in the current context, also hinder the response to the effects of the devastating earthquake that struck Syrian territory at the beginning of the year. Likewise, it should withdraw from the Syrian territory it now illegally occupies, where it plunders its natural resources. We recall that today’s debate takes place less than a month after the imposition of a new politically motivated platform against Syria within the framework of the United Nations, based on the manipulation of the noble humanitarian mantle. International mechanisms against this country are multiplying, which we strongly reject. We warn of the danger of similar initiatives being replicated in future against other developing countries. The decision of the Syrian Government to allow the United Nations and its specialized agencies to use the Bab Al-Hawa crossing for the delivery of humanitarian aid to civilians in need in north-west Syria for a period of six months, beginning 13 July, in full cooperation and coordination with the Government, should be respected. We reaffirm our unequivocal support for the search for a peaceful and negotiated solution to the conflict in Syria, in strict compliance with the Charter of the United Nations and international law. We have full confidence in the ability of the Syrian people and authorities to achieve that goal. The international community has a moral responsibility to contribute to that, through cooperation with the Syrian authorities, without engaging in external interference, posing conditions or politicization.

Recently, the Security Council held rounds of discussions on the renewal of the mandate for cross- border humanitarian assistance into Syria. The co-penholders did a lot of work, and Council members were tireless in their efforts. Regrettably, with the Council sharply divided and a lack of consensus on such issues as unilateral sanctions, neither of the draft resolutions presented (S/2023/506 and S/2023/507) was adopted (see S/PV.9371). The Syrian crisis has grinded on for more than a decade. The Syrian people have suffered severely. China has always had Syrian people’s well-being at heart and supported the United Nations and the international community in delivering humanitarian relief throughout Syria, in line with the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality, and on the basis of full respect for Syrian sovereignty and Syrian Government ownership, so as to meet the humanitarian needs of the entire Syrian population. The cross-border mechanism humanitarian system was established by the Council through its resolution 2165 (2014), to meet the humanitarian needs of the people in north-western Syria. The Syrian Government recently took the initiative to announce that it would allow the United Nations and its specialized agencies to provide humanitarian assistance to people in need in north-western Syria through the Bab Al-Hawa border crossing for the next six months. China welcomes this responsible and constructive sovereign decision by the Syrian Government. The Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has confirmed that the Syrian Government’s permission can be a basis for the United Nations to lawfully conduct humanitarian operations via the Bab Al-Hawa border crossing. China encourages the United Nations and the Syrian Government to properly resolve operational issues through dialogue and consultation in a way that fully respects the sovereignty of Syria and ownership by the Syrian Government and meets the humanitarian needs of north-western Syria. The smooth operation of Bab Al-Salam and Al-Rai, two additional crossings opened in February, could be a useful reference in this regard. The international community should create a favourable atmosphere for strengthening dialogue and deepening cooperation between the United Nations and Syria. At the same time, China reiterates that the cross- border mechanism is a temporary arrangement made under specific circumstances and that it is necessary to speed up the transition to cross-line assistance and phase out the cross-border mechanism until its eventual exit. Providing relief to north-western Syria does not address the whole picture of Syria’s humanitarian situation. It is important to step up humanitarian funding for Syria so it may secure adequate, balanced and sustainable funding for the entire territory of the country. Greater support is needed for early-recovery efforts, expansion of the scope of projects and support for the Syrian people in key areas, with a view to achieving sustainable development. Unilateral sanctions against Syria should be lifted immediately and unconditionally to mitigate the disruption of humanitarian assistance to Syria and curtain the damage being done to the foundations of its economic and social development. Finally, I would like to note that the ultimate solution to the Syrian humanitarian problem lies in the political settlement of the Syrian issue, in line with the principle of a Syrian-owned and Syrian-led process. China supports Mr. Pedersen as the Special Envoy in his efforts aimed at promoting the Syrian political process, as mandated by Security Council resolution 2254 (2015). With Syria’s return to the Arab family, we believe that the unity and cooperation of countries of the region will give new impetus to the political settlement of the Syrian issue. The international community should also play a constructive role in creating an external environment favourable to dialogue and reconciliation among the Syrian parties. Once again, we urge foreign forces to end their illegal military presence in the country and cease all acts that undermine Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The subject of today’s meeting is extremely relevant. We are witnessing political and social and economic transformations in an entire region. The question of the right of veto is an integral part of the issue of Security Council reform. Since such reform will affect the long- term prospects for the Organization’s development and involves the interests of all Member States, it should be carried out exclusively on the basis of a universal dialogue, broad consensus and a package decision that would take into account the opinions of all parties. We call for the preservation of the existing format of intergovernmental negotiations. There is no alternative to those negotiations. Currently, there are differing views among Member States on the use of the veto. Differences in States’ approaches are fundamental in nature. Not one of the proposed solutions has garnered any tangible majority support, which sends a clear message that in order to achieve a mutually acceptable outcome, we must continue to gradually move forward based on mutual trust and respect. Regarding the use of the veto, we are compelled to note once again that the veto should not be looked at solely as a privilege that a few certain members have. The right of the veto remains an exclusive element of the responsibility that permanent members of the Security Council have when it comes to considering matters pertaining to the maintenance of international peace and security. The mechanism of the veto is enshrined in the United Nations Charter and is an important tool for coming up with balanced decisions that will determine peace and security on our planet. However, what we see today is undoubtedly the result of many factors, some of which are worth mentioning. The first factor involves attempts by some countries to ignore and even replace the purposes and principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter with a new set of so-called rules that are still unknown to the majority. Secondly, there is an impulse to divide the world up into blocs, consciously ignoring the emergence of a multipolar world. And lastly, specific States wish to take a selective approach or adopt a conditional interpretation of the norms of international law. We are convinced that true multilateralism is possible only through efforts in favour of dialogue and the pursuit of compromise, taking into account the interests of all interested parties. Belarus stands ready and intends to support all parties in coming together to bridge the gap.

Ukraine aligns itself with the statement delivered by the representative of European Union, in its capacity as observer (see A/77/PV.90). We welcome today’s debate and condemn yet another abuse by the Russian Federation of the veto power, which prevented the renewal last week of the Syrian cross-border mechanism established under Security Council resolution 2165 (2014). Its decision aggravates the already poor humanitarian situation in north-west Syria and disrupts aid delivery to the Syrian people, who desperately need it. Russia is acting like a failed State by using civilians, both in Syria and elsewhere, as a means to blackmail the international community. It is attempting, as it always has, to put the burden of the irresponsible and reckless steps it has taken — and the consequences — on anyone else, just not itself. This despicable behaviour cannot fool the world: Russia will be held accountable for the decisions and steps it takes. In this respect, I would like to mention Russia’s recent unilateral withdrawal from the purely humanitarian Black Sea Grain Initiative, which puts millions around the world at risk of hunger. The consequences of Russia’s destructive and irresponsible acts and omissions are becoming increasingly felt across the globe: in Europe, in Africa and in the Middle East. That is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated. We call on all Member States to exert all possible pressure on the Russian Federation to make it refrain from misusing its veto power — a power that it, in fact, has unlawfully obtained. As envisaged by Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations, membership in the United Nations is open to all peace-loving States that accept the obligations contained in the Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out those obligations. Against the backdrop of the full-fledged war of aggression waged by the Russian Federation against Ukraine and its actions aimed at increasing human suffering in Syria and other parts of the world, such a judgment on the ability and willingness of the Russian Federation to act as a peace-loving State would appear to be a matter of urgency. The United Nations-coordinated cross-border delivery of humanitarian assistance should be allowed as soon as possible. Ukraine will support actions aimed at alleviating the plight of the Syrian people caused by the Russian Federation.

The people of Syria and their urgent humanitarian needs should be the first priority for the Security Council. We regret the non-renewal of the use of the Bab Al-Hawa crossing for another nine months due to a negative vote (see S/PV.9371). We note that draft resolution S/2023/506 received 13 votes in favour, with one abstention. We also regret the three negative votes on the competing draft resolution (S/2023/507), which provided for a six- month extension, noting the 10 abstentions and two votes in favour. With regard to the failure of the two draft resolutions due to the vetoes, we believe that their merit as instruments to meet the humanitarian needs of the Syrian people has been made captive to geopolitical rivalry and conflict. That is unacceptable. The Security Council should place the needs of innocent people first. The setback in the efforts to meet the dire humanitarian needs of the Syrian people is only the latest reason why we strongly call for a Security Council that is more balanced, democratic and inclusive. As the Assembly knows, Africa is the region where conflicts, displacement and humanitarian emergencies are most impacted by Security Council decisions. We therefore sympathize with the plight of the Syrian people. Without a more balanced Security Council, the needs of the world’s most vulnerable people will too often be compromised by geopolitical rivals with access to the veto. As such, in line with the Ezulwini Consensus, Kenya calls for the elimination of the veto. Failing that, we call for new permanent members of the Council from Africa to have the veto with its full prerogatives. We call for renewed efforts to strengthen the Syria cross-border mechanism for the continued and adequate provision of supplies and equipment. We also urge that strengthened efforts be made to generate and facilitate consensus and collaborative approaches towards peace, reconciliation and dignity, as the people of Syria deserve. We also express our strong concerns about the non-renewal of the Black Sea Grain Initiative. That initiative enabled almost 33 million tons of grain and foodstuffs to be exported from the three designated Ukrainian ports. That helped to suppress the initial sharp upward swings in global food prices and was therefore of critical humanitarian import. We regret that the initiative while under way did not do enough to enable exports of food and fertilizers from the Russian Federation. We therefore urge all parties to return to the negotiating table for the resumption of those critical humanitarian mechanisms for the sake of humanitarian needs worldwide.

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

I would argue that most religions of the world hold dear a central imperative. That concerns how we treat one another, and whether people are Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus or Buddhists, their faith teaches them that the only way for humankind to survive and thrive is to take to heart the call to treat their sisters and their brothers as themselves. In another Chamber of this building, we have spent the past week focusing on aspects of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as our Governments and citizens have taken to heart the call of the United Nations to protect our planet and share with all the benefits of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Throughout our SDG conversations, we have continually repeated the mantra that no one should be left behind. Now how hollow does that mantra seem when here we are again debating the technicalities and processes of what should be a given — protecting the sick, the vulnerable, the homeless and the forgotten ones. Like my colleague from the United Kingdom, I had the privilege last year of visiting a centre for Syrian refugees in southern Turkey. I then travelled to a hospital across the Syrian border operated under the auspices of the Syrian Independent Doctors Association, supported in part by the Sovereign Order of Malta. While there I was given the opportunity to visit a nearby refugee camp at Bab Al-Salam. Having personally witnessed the suffering and the deprivation in that part of northern Syria, I observed first-hand how the aid supplied by various agencies and the United Nations was making a significant and critical difference to the lives of the inhabitants. It became evident that those aid efforts are one of the last remaining sources of help for people in need. Our work in this region is extensive. The hospital I visited covers a catchment area of more than half a million people, and for them and for so many more the medicines and the humanitarian aid they receive through Bab Al-Hawa is truly the difference between life and death. We urge those who are making decisions about the viability and efficacy of border crossings to be mindful of the awesome responsibilities that they bear. Such entry points, even if they are in disputed territory, are vital to the survival of those who, ultimately, are the future of Syria and who will be needed to rebuild and re-establish their country. Alienating those who crouch in the wings and cry for peace, limiting access and imposing time limits and other controls on aid that is so generously given by the world community will do little to restore trust and faith and make a fragmented nation whole again, which at the end of the day is our commitment to Syria and to its people. The future well-being of millions of people is under consideration today. A total of 4.1 million people live in north-west Syria, 90 per cent of them in camps for internally displaced persons; 3.5 million of them are food-insecure. By many estimates, in Idlib governorate, in north-west Syria, fewer than 50 per cent of all health structures, centres, dispensaries and so on are functioning. Building back stability and providing for those in need must be our collective focus, but that will happen only if we are united in our desire to do the right thing and at the same time work to convince others, who are no less relevant and no less important but who might see things differently, of the necessity for compromise based on goodwill, compassion and, above all, mercy.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item. Before calling on speakers in exercise of the right of reply, may I remind delegations 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 now give the floor to the representative of the Republic of Korea.

My delegation has requested to speak in exercise of the right of reply in order to respond to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s absurd remarks. My delegation regrets that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has addressed the situation on the Korean peninsula in an inappropriate forum. My delegation takes this opportunity to make clear that the Republic of Korea-United States combined military exercises have long been conducted on a regular basis and are defensive in nature. Those exercises are intended to protect the lives and safety of our people from the threat posed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. It is simply nonsense to compare the totally lawful Republic of Korea-United States military exercises and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s illicit military provocations, which repeatedly violate multiple Security Council resolutions. My delegation strongly urges the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to stop its military provocations and to return to the dialogue table for denuclearization negotiations.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 60.