S/PV.6819 Security Council

In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representative of the Sudan to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. Members of the Council have before them document S/2012/582, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by France, Germany, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2012/548, which contains the report of the Secretary-General on the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it. I shall put the draft resolution to the vote now.

There were 14 votes in favour, none against and one abstention. The draft resolution has been adopted as resolution 2063 (2012). I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements after the voting.

Azerbaijan supports the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) and recognizes its contribution to the protection of civilians, the improvement of the security situation and the promotion of peace and the political process in Darfur. We note that some conclusions drawn in resolution 2063 (2012) do not coincide with our assessment of the current situation on the ground and are not fully reflective of the Secretary-General’s views contained in his recent reports on UNAMID. We believe that some additional important elements could have been included in the resolution. We also regret that discussions on the draft resolution were not sufficiently open, inclusive and transparent. For these reasons, Azerbaijan decided to abstain in the voting on the resolution just adopted.

Guatemala joined the consensus and voted in favour of resolution 2063 (2012), which extends the mandate of the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) until 31 July 2013. We hope that the adoption of the resolution will allow UNAMID to continue to exercise the mandate granted by the Council, particularly in protecting civilians and assisting the efforts to arrive at a prompt peace and stability in the region, based on the implementation of the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur. However, we note in our national capacity that, while having voted in favour of the resolution, we have serious reservations regarding paragraph 17, which refers to the Lord’s Resistance Army. Although we recognize that there may be indications of attacks by guerilla or armed groups in the Sudan, the decisions of the Council should be taken on the basis of evidence, facts or concrete information of the events on the ground. In the current case, the objective information from the Secretariat does not provide a basis for believing that there is any involvement of the Lord’s Resistance Army in the zone covered by UNAMID.

Pakistan supports a durable and peaceful resolution of the Darfur issue through an inclusive political process and in full respect for the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Sudan. The African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) continues to play an important role towards the realization of those goals, as well as in the maintenance of peace and security in Darfur. Pakistan has been closely associated with the Mission. Our troops and police units have made valuable contributions to its operations over the years, and we will continue to support the important work being undertaken by UNAMID in line with its mandate. Pakistan believes that the effective implementation of the UNAMID mandate and the objective of establishing durable peace and security in Darfur can best be achieved through cooperative and constructive engagement with the Government of the Sudan. Any actions or decisions to the contrary only risk undermining the objective of peace and security in Darfur. Eight years after the Council took up the Darfur issue, it is high time that we realize this imperative, which is crucial to success in Darfur. We find it very unhelpful that the text makes at best only a half-hearted attempt at acknowledging the achievements of the Government of Sudan and UNAMID. It also downplays and trivializes the challenge posed by the ever-widening network of alliances between Darfur-based rebel movements and those outside Darfur with the declared purpose of overthrowing the Government. The refusal to mention the Sudan Revolutionary Front in the Council’s decisions is not understandable. While some of these important issues have been ignored in the resolution, several others have been included on which several members have reservations and which have not even found mention in the reports of the Secretary-General. This is certainly not a helpful approach to advancing the goals of peace and stability in the region. The final text of the resolution could have been improved by including a more objective reflection of the issues. The Pakistan delegation made several proposals to that end; we are disappointed that they were not accommodated. A long-standing and complicated issue like that of Darfur requires the Council to send a united and consensual message based on a transparent and inclusive approach involving all Council members. Transparency and inclusiveness in the negotiations would have stood us in good stead. Despite Pakistan’s several reservations on the procedural and substantive aspects of the resolution, Pakistan decided to vote in favour of the text in order to support the efforts of the men and women of UNAMID who are working for the establishment of peace in the region. We will continue to play our role in the establishment of durable peace in Darfur and the broader region.

I give the floor to the representative of the Sudan.

Hearing the views of our colleagues can only help us to gain a better understanding of any subject, but refusing to listen to the ideas of others does not help in a practical or constructive way to promote peace and security. We represent States that enjoy full sovereignty, and while we may fail to listen to others the relevant diplomatic norms are clear. (spoke in English) We have a strong sense of dignity. We may ignore others if we want to do so, but diplomatic norms will not allow us to. (spoke in Arabic) Thus, with respect to the issue under consideration and in accordance with those diplomatic norms, every delegation must listen very patiently to the others and respond logically on the basis of clear and precise arguments. The Sudan has consistently cooperated with the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) since its establishment. The peace process in Darfur has enjoyed achievements that hold great promise for the future. We hope that it will achieve its aim of allowing Darfur to enjoy lasting peace in the near future, if God so wishes. We will pursue our cooperation with UNAMID in the future until peace is attained. That will not prevent us, however, from raising serious reservations with respect to paragraph 17 of resolution 2063 (2012), extending the mandate of UNAMID, in which reference is made to the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). These reservations arise from the fact that no evidence is presented in any report of the Secretary-General that the LRA is present in Darfur. Even his most recent report (S/2012/548) contains no indication of an LRA presence in the province. Moreover, when Mr. Ibrahim Gambari, Joint African Union-United Nations Special Representative for Darfur, addressed the Council on 24 July (see S/PV.6813), he made no reference whatsoever to an LRA presence in Darfur. Therefore, and on the basis of the logical argument that I am making with respect to the LRA, we believe that the resolution adopted today unfortunately does not address certain important and substantive issues relating to Darfur, which is at the heart of the Mission’s mandate, yet raises an issue that has no connection with the province. The resolution contains no clear, strong and direct condemnation of the Sudan Revolutionary Front, which is the primary cause of the instability, lack of peace and injustice in Darfur today. How can that be justified? I appeal to the conscience of Council members. How can the Council fail to seriously condemn rebel movements that promote instability and undermine peace? Why does the Council address issues that have no evidentiary or logical basis? Is that fair? (spoke in English) Where is the clear and explicit condemnation of the so-called Sudan Revolutionary Front? There is a total absence of a clear, explicit reference to the Front; there is only a very oblique, between-the-lines allusion to it. (spoke in Arabic) The Front has clearly affirmed its readiness to violently overthrow the Government of the Sudan. Finally, in order to ensure that the Council’s resolutions are logical, wise and based on the lawful principles that the Charter has laid down for the Council, it should be clearly indicated, where the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) is concerned, that the Council calls for cooperation and emphasizes the issue of rebel groups in the Sudan. (spoke in English) Although the Council is calling for an exchange of information and cooperation between the peacekeeping missions in the region, it does not do so where the resolution concerns UNMISS in the south. We would have expected it to include a call on UNMISS to cooperate and exchange views and information regarding all the Darfuri rebel groups being harboured by the Government of South Sudan. This is strange. (spoke in Arabic) Lastly, we will cooperate with UNAMID, but we have major reservations concerning paragraph 17, and hope that the Council will reconsider its position in the future.

The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda. Since today is 31 July and this is the last meeting of the Council that I will preside over on behalf of Colombia, I would like to warmly thank the members of the Council for their support and cooperation this month. It has been a particularly busy month for the Security Council, with some 38 formal and informal meetings held on very important subjects. I would also like to thank the Secretariat for its service and support, as well as our interpreters and Verbatim Reporters.