S/PV.7380 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/2015/97, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by the United States of America. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2015/31, which contains the text of a letter dated 16 January 2015 from the Vice-Chair of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1591 (2005), concerning the Sudan, addressed to the President of the Security Council. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to the vote the draft resolution before it. I shall put the draft resolution to the vote now.

There were 15 votes in favour. The draft resolution has been adopted unanimously as resolution 2200 (2015). I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements following the adoption of the resolution.

Last November, the Security Council was confronted with reports of an alleged mass rape in Thabit, a town in North Darfur, the Sudan. The United Nations peacekeeping mission in Darfur attempted to investigate, but was systematically denied meaningful access. The one time the peacekeepers were permitted to reach Thabit, Sudanese military and intelligence officials refused to let them interview alleged rape victims in private, and in some cases recorded the interviews. To this day, the Government of the Sudan has shamefully denied the United Nations the ability to properly investigate the incident, despite the Council’s mandate for the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) to do precisely that. Yesterday, a report released by Human Rights Watch alleged that at least 221 women and girls were raped in an organized attack on Thabit over a period of 36 harrowing hours, beginning on 30 October 2014. According to the report, Sudanese soldiers went door- to-door looting, beating and raping inhabitants. Over 50 current and former residents provided testimony corroborating the crimes, as did two reported army defectors who separately told Human Rights Watch that their superiors had ordered them to rape women. Because the Government of the Sudan denied the United Nations a proper investigation, we have to rely on organizations such as Human Rights Watch to gather witness and perpetrator testimony and to shine a light on what happened. One woman told Human Rights Watch that soldiers entered her home and said, “You killed our man, we are going to show you true hell”. Then, she said, “They started beating us. They raped my three daughters and me. Some of them were holding the girl down while another one was raping her. They did it one by one”. Two of her daughters were younger than 11 years old, she said. Many of the witnesses interviewed told Human Rights Watch that Government officials had threatened to kill them if they told anybody what happened. Nearly 10 years after the Security Council adopted resolution 1591 (2005), with the aim of protecting civilians in Darfur and stopping the violence there, the horror of Thabit is just one attack in one place out of too many to count. In 2014 alone, more than 450,000 additional people were displaced in Darfur — the highest number of new internally displaced persons (IDPs) in any year since 2004 — adding to the approximately 2 million people already displaced. In the first six weeks of this year, humanitarian organizations estimate an additional 36,000 people have been driven from their homes in North Darfur state. people living in areas afflicted by violence are in desperate need of humanitarian aid; yet obstruction, harassment and direct attacks by the Sudanese Government have made them increasingly hard to reach. Two weeks ago, Médecins sans frontières shut down its operations in three states in the Sudan, including two in Darfur, citing “the Government’s systematic denial of access” to communities in the greatest need. In one example Médecins sans frontières cited, the Government of the Sudan prevented its emergency workers from travelling to the IDP camp in El Sireaf in Darfur, where the organization said residents did not have enough drinking water to survive. Médecins sans frontières also suspended operations in South Kordofan state, where its hospital was bombed by a Sudanese Air Force jet. Today we renewed the mandate of an important United Nations Panel that monitors the sanctions imposed by the Council — sanctions that the Government of the Sudan continues to flout. The Government and armed groups it supports routinely violate the arms embargo, a fact that they openly acknowledge. They continue to launch deliberate attacks on civilians, as well as on UNAMID peacekepers. According to the Panel of Experts, between December 2013 and April 2014 alone, 3,324 villages were destroyed in Darfur. And the Sudanese Government continues to allow individuals subject to sanctions to travel and access their finances. Today we renewed a sanctions-monitoring Panel that has provided thorough, independent monitoring of the Government of the Sudan and other armed groups in Darfur, with a resolution that is more forward-leaving than its predecessors. But even as we take this important step, we are reminded that the sanctions regime is impotent when the Sudanese Government systematically violates it and the Council cannot agree to impose sanctions on those responsible for the violence and the abuses. Nonetheless, today’s resolution 2200 (2015) matters. It speaks to our deep concern about the ongoing violations. It presses the Government of the Sudan to take the long-overdue steps necessary to protect the people of Darfur and stop the violence. For the first time, in condemns the violence perpetrated by the Government-backed Rapid Support Forces — the heirs to the janjaweed — and urges the Sudanese Government to account for the situation of civilian populations that are suffering from devastating waves of attacks in North Darfur, like the reported mass rapes at Thabit. Yet encouraging as it is to see some very modest improvements to today’s resolution on renewals, the most important measure of our efforts will be our ability to alleviate the immeasurable suffering of the people of Darfur, and on that front the Council and the international community have failed. Our complacency is deadly for the people of Darfur, so perhaps today, with a slightly more robust sanctions resolution, we can reignite the Council’s engagement in this continuing crisis. People’s lives depend on it, and so does the credibility of the Council, because our ability to promote international peace and security depends on our ability to keep our word and implement the measures we impose. We need to do that, because for every Thabit we know about, there are so many more villages that have been the victims of unspeakable atrocities over the past decade in Darfur. They demand that we find a way to stop this, and we must.

I call on the representative of the Sudan.

I am very surprised at the statement made by the representative of the United States, constituting as it does a blatant attempt to once again make erroneous accusations before the Security Council. As you are aware, Mr. President, those accusations were first made by Radio Dabanga, and for those who do not know about it, Radio Dabanga was created by a non-governmental organization based not in Darfur but in Amsterdam. Radio Dabanga encourages the rebel movements that reject the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur, and those movements have repeatedly refused the Council’s demands that they accept it. We have informed the Council of those refusals numerous times, to no avail. The Council requested that the rebel groups accept the Doha Document after the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) visited the region and made a report that completely exonerated the Sudanese Government. But the members of the Council rejected the report because what they had asked for was a report from UNAMID indicting the Government. Since, however, the report’s facts told a different story, it was rejected. Previously, we expected the Council to consider UNAMID’s reports credible. This time, the UNAMID report exonerated the Sudanese troops in the village of Thabit. Furthermore, the Government of the Sudan did not refuse the mission access, and it was able to reach the site. If it had been able to reach the site and found that it could not make an investigation, it should have returned and reported its inability to carry out an inquiry owing to a military presence there, but that was not what happened. The Mission reached the site and made a report. Since the report exonerated the Government of the Sudan, it was rejected. I am therefore very surprised to hear the representative of the United States mention Human Rights Watch, which has often spoken of the massacre or genocide of whole peoples. Every time the Council deals with information from organizations or the press that it characterizes as so-called unverified reports, it rejects them. But since this time we are talking about the Sudan, the great Powers accept such reports. Human Rights Watch is not an independent organization. The role it plays in the Sudan is well known, and it is not impartial. Regarding the indications in the report concerning Médecins Sans Frontières, as long ago as 2009 I spoke to the Council about Médecins Sans Frontières, asking that it leave the Sudan, since we knew it was involved in activities relating to Sudanese national security and espionage information. This latest report of Human Rights Watch to the Council is similarly fabricated. We do not and will not recognize reports made by organizations that persist in undermining the Sudan and its Government and whose positions are well known. Concerning the report under discussion today (S/2015/31), I am grateful to the States that have cooperated with us in efforts to reach a balanced representation that includes the positive developments in Darfur and the phases of implementation of the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur. Regrettably, the resolution that has just been adopted (resolution 2200 (2015)) does not reflect those positive developments, which raises a question. UNAMID has twice undergone a strategic review, and its troop numbers have been twice reduced, first the military component and then the police. Now we are seeing the Department of Peacekeeping Operation’s second application for a strategic review and implementation of the Mission’s withdrawal. We were expecting a report that reflected the positive developments in this important phase for peacebuilding in Darfur. At the same time, we were struck by the paragraphs introduced into today’s resolution by countries wishing to see peace, such as those that invite the rebel groups to participate in the peace process without preconditions and warning them against making any attempts to alter the balance of power by the use of force. In that regard, we reiterate the commitment of the Sudanese Government to the peace process, to achieving stability in Darfur, and to the inclusion of all the rebel groups, in accordance with its policy of inclusive national dialogue begun by the President of the Sudan in January 2014. Under that initiative, we have given assurances to the leaders of all the rebel movements to encourage them to join the peace process. All such assurances made it clear that their participation would be free, honest and under no pressure in order to ensure the inclusion of each and every citizen in the political process. The resolution adopted today refers to intercommunal fighting. The numbers cited by the representative of the United States show that such tribal violence has had disastrous effects on civilians. Several paragraphs of the resolution are devoted to violations of international humanitarian law. I would like to point out that tribal violence is a historical issue that goes back a very long way. We have talked about its causes in the past. Some paragraphs do commend the efforts of the Sudanese Government and its cooperation with UNAMID in order to contain the tribal violence and address its causes. With regard to the part of the resolution that mentions external military links with armed groups, we emphasize that we do not associate with militias. Units such as the Rapid Support Forces are similar to units that exist throughout the world, not just in the Sudan. Furthermore, we would like to express our reservations about the provisions of the resolution that compromise our sovereignty, which is guaranteed by the Charter of the United Nations. The Sudan is a completely sovereign nation. We are committed to protecting our territory and our citizens. Resolution 1591 (2005) and subsequent resolutions that renewed the mandate of the Panel of Experts should not undermine our rights as a sovereign nation. We have the right to possess all tools to preserve and protect our national security, sovereignty and our citizens. With regard to the Panel of Experts and what has been said about my Government’s failure to cooperate, none of that is true. The reports of the Panel of Experts refer to the Government’s cooperation with the Panel. I therefore do not understand these unfounded accusations. If the Panel itself speaks of the Sudanese Government’s cooperation, why then are there accusations? The Government of the Sudan has taken the unique step of appointing a senior official, General Mohammad Mustafa Al-Dabi, to lead a committee established precisely to implement resolution 1591 (2005). He has been mentioned in all the reports of the Panel. The committee includes relevant officials from various Ministries, such as the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, who were appointed to facilitate the work of the Panel of Experts. We challenge the Council to name a single instance where we have obstructed the Panel or where we denied it access to Darfur or any other province of the Sudan. That simply has not occurred at any point during our period of cooperation with the Panel of Experts. The Council should acknowledge our cooperation because we are well aware that other groups of experts in other countries have not enjoyed the same level of cooperation that my Government has shown to the Panel of Experts. Finally, given that this an extremely important phase in our national dialogue and in our efforts to include rebel groups in the political process, I would request that the Security Council fulfil its role and exert pressure on the rebel groups to join in the political process — today, not tomorrow — so that we can achieve peace.

There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda.