S/PV.7754 Security Council

In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representative of South 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/2016/705, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by the United States of America. 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.

The draft resolution received 11 votes in favour, none against and four abstentions. The draft resolution has been adopted as resolution 2304 (2016). I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements following the voting.

Last week, the United Nations reported that during the month of July when fighting in Juba surged, soldiers killed innocent civilians and raped women in broad daylight. The United Nations documented 217 cases of sexual violence between 8 and 25 July in Juba alone. Those are the cases that were reported. The actual number is undoubtedly much higher. In a single incident, on 18 July, 16 women and 12 girls were reportedly raped by soldiers at a Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) checkpoint in the capital. It is grotesque, and it must stop. Since 7 July alone, more than 69,000 people, the overwhelming majority of whom are women and children, have fled South Sudan for Uganda. The status quo in South Sudan is unbearable. The status quo for the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) is unsustainable. Today, the Security Council has taken important action in support of calls from key regional partners to address this. It is because of this horrific violence that South Sudan’s regional partners and the African Union have called upon the Security Council to authorize urgently a regional protection force. Resolution 2304 (2016) does that. In our deliberations, some members of the Council expressed concern that we were moving too quickly. The opposite is true. It has been more than one month since the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Council of Ministers called for urgent revisions to the UNMISS mandate with additional troops to secure Juba — a decision that the African Union Peace and Security Council endorsed the same day. On 5 August, IGAD Plus Heads of State and Government again called upon the Security Council to urgently extend the mission of UNMISS with a revised mandate, including the deployment of a regional protection force. That decision was endorsed once again by the African Union Peace and Security Council just yesterday. South Sudan’s neighbours have been clear about what this moment requires, and the resolution adopted today responds directly to those repeated and urgent calls. Further delays would not help those in Juba wondering if they can venture outside safely to find food. Further delays would not have helped those waiting for humanitarian aid that currently cannot arrive. Further delays would not have helped protect those who face extraordinary threats with each passing day. We consulted extensively with fellow Security Council members and countries in the region to shape the resolution. While we hoped to achieve unity on the vote, let us be clear: we have had Security Council unity on UNMISS for some time, and one only need look at what unity has achieved with respect to UNMISS’s ability to operate on the ground. UNMISS is facing daily threats, daily impediments and daily and sometimes deadly challenges. Security Council unity has not solved that. Additional authorities and resources might. The Council simply could not wait any longer to give UNMISS the tools that it needs to respond. The resolution sets out three priorities for the 4,000-strong regional protection force. First, the force will facilitate safe and free movement in the capital. Secondly, it will protect key facilities essential to the well-being of the people of Juba. Thirdly, it will have the authority to prevent attacks against civilians, the United Nations and humanitarian actors. Like the UNMISS troops already on the ground, the force will operate under a United Nations Charter Chapter VII mandate, with the authority to use all the necessary means to carry out its responsibilities. The regional protection force is part of UNMISS’s broader mission, the core responsibilities of which include protecting civilians, monitoring human rights, facilitating conditions for the delivery of humanitarian assistance and supporting the implementation of the peace agreement. We are grateful to the UNMISS troop contributors for the sacrifices that they have made during this incredibly challenging period and to the troops who serve in the Mission, some of whom have made the ultimate sacrifice. The regional protection force has been created in response to the collapse of security in Juba, and it will remain until South Sudan’s leaders take the steps necessary to provide that security for their own people. Some Council members today will speak about the importance of obtaining the South Sudanese Government’s consent. We recognize the importance of Government cooperation, but the United States would point to the actions of the Government. For while we expect the South Sudanese Government to treat the United Nations like the partner that it is, that is simply not what is happening on the ground in South Sudan today. Instead, as we all know, the Government of South Sudan’s troops are actively blocking United Nations personnel from carrying out their life-saving work, which in some cases has led to the death of United Nations peacekeepers. Those peacekeepers, including from countries represented on the Council, who are operating under a mandate adopted by the Council, could not be evacuated to receive urgent medical attention because the South Sudanese Government would not provide flight clearances. Consent is of course important, and the Government of South Sudan, in dialogue with the Heads of State of Uganda, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Kenya, the Sudan, Djibouti and Somalia and the presidential representatives of Algeria, Chad, Nigeria and South Africa, has offered its consent to the deployment of the regional protection force in principle. But we must be clear-eyed about the challenges that UNMISS and its new regional protection force are up against. I appeal to all Security Council members — the Ambassadors on the Council — to read the three-page letter the Secretary-General sent to the Council a few days ago setting out the severe restrictions by the Government of South Sudan, which are crippling the Mission’s ability to operate. Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations confers upon the Council the responsibility to take steps necessary to restore peace and security. That includes giving UNMISS the mandate that it needs to protect civilians and maintain security in Juba. To suggest otherwise would mean negotiating a mandate with the same Government that has consistently restricted the movement of those very peacekeepers, organized protests against those peacekeepers and harassed humanitarian staff generally. The Council can deliberate only for so long about the terms of a mandate as the situation in South Sudan deteriorates, an increasing number of innocent people are killed, women and girls are raped and the country’s neighbours call for action and express a readiness to respond. More time will amount to only more death and suffering. Today, the Council has taken a step forward in its efforts to prevent that from happening. The stakes are high, and the consequences of continued obstruction should be clear. By adopting this resolution, the Security Council has made very clear that if the Government of South Sudan obstructs the deployment of UNMISS’s regional protection force or continues to stand in the way of UNMISS carrying out its mandate, the Security Council is prepared to vote on the arms embargo draft resolution that is contained in annexed to resolution 2304 (2016). The United States is prepared to support imposing an arms embargo on South Sudan if the obstruction continues. If in 30 days the Secretary- General reports obstruction, the Council has decided to vote, and we are confident that consequences will follow. While the resolution marks a steps towards addressing the violence in South Sudan, UNMISS alone cannot bring an end to the persistent struggle for power among the country’s leaders, which has caused the suffering of so many people. Until the leaders of South Sudan are willing to put what is good for their people before themselves, putting peace ahead of personal ambition and power, and until they show the will to find a political solution to this grinding conflict, the people of South Sudan will continue to suffer from the bloodshed and instability that their leaders reap. Let me conclude with the account of a young South Sudanese woman, a 19-year-old named Betty Christian. Betty fled her home in Juba last month during the latest wave of violence. Betty told a reporter that as she fled her home that she had to pass by a group of soldiers who debated whether or not to shoot her. Eventually, they decided to let her live, and so Betty thanked them. She thanked them for not killing her. That is the world in which so many of South Sudan’s people live today: they thank people for letting them live. Far too many people do not even get to do that. Perhaps no other country has invested as much in South Sudan’s future as the United States of America has. We share the desire of the people of South Sudan for a peaceful and prosperous future, but it is the actions of South Sudan’s leaders — their dangerous, deadly choices — that stand in the way of that future. When South Sudan’s leaders recommit to the cause of peace, they will find in the United States a steadfast partner. In the meantime, we will continue to seek a way to end the atrocities on the ground so that people like Betty Christian do not have to be thankful every time they are not killed.

The United Kingdom welcomes the adoption of resolution 2304 (2016) today. It is a vitally important decision that needed to be taken now. Through this resolution, we have created a protection force under the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), a protection force called for by both the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and the African Union (AU), a protection force that the Government of South Sudan agreed to in principle. This resolution should strengthen the United Nations ability to protect people and to save lives. It should mean a safer and more secure Juba. It should mean that food, supplies and support can reach people who are so desperately in need. It should mean the road back to the political process. But the key word is “should”. All those things can happen only if the Government of South Sudan makes good on its promises. The Government bears the primary responsibility to help its people. That means the Government supporting, not obstructing, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and the United Nations troops. It means the Government engaging quickly in addressing the practicalities of a protection force. And it means the Government holding to account anyone responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses, including rape. We welcome the continued support of IGAD and the AU to help the Government fulfil those important commitments. Many outside the Chamber today will ask whether we have done enough, when hundreds of people have been killed in Juba in the past month, when hundreds of women and girls have been raped or gang-raped, when tens of thousands have been forced to flee their homes. Behind each and every one of these unspeakable acts lies unspeakable violence, violence perpetrated by those with guns against those without. Therefore, yes, today we have agreed to strengthen the United Nations Mission, which should save lives if the text is implemented fully. But today we also had a chance to stop the violence by implementing an immediate arms embargo on South Sudan. On that, we failed. We must and we will return to this issue.

The Russian delegation abstained in the voting on resolution 2304 (2016). We agree that an acute worsening of the situation in South Sudan requires an appropriate reaction from the Security Council. We support the initiative of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) on strengthening security in South Sudan, including the establishment of the regional protection force. At the same time, in working on the United States draft, a whole range of important issues was not resolved, such as the agreement of the South Sudanese authorities to the mandate of the force, its presence outside of the capital, the force’s possible use of force and the sanctions annex, which should have been treated in the form of a separate draft resolution. We consider that paragraph 10 of the resolution will be implemented in close cooperation with Juba. We consider the consent of the host country to be a cornerstone, not only from the point of view of respect for the sovereignty of South Sudan and for the basic principles of United Nations peacekeeping, but also from a practical point of view, specifically in terms of implementing the mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, including the work of the regional protection force. The security of peacekeepers will depend on such consent. We call on IGAD and the Secretariat to work constructively with the Government of South Sudan with a view to finding the modalities for implementing resolution 2304 (2016).

China applauds the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the African Union and countries of the region for their good offices in seeking to resolve the conflict in South Sudan. China supports the people of Africa in resolving African issues in an African way. We also support IGAD in playing its leading role in addressing the issue of South Sudan. China’s position on the issue of South Sudan is underpinned by an immediate restoration of peace and stability in the country in order to ease the impact of the situation on countries of the region. As the situation in South Sudan remains serious and complex, the international community must make collective efforts to bring the parties concerned back to the path of political settlement and implementation of the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan, so as to immediately achieve stability and national development and to provide the people of South Sudan with a peace dividend at the earliest date. The regional protection force, in its deployment process, must conduct full consultations with the Transitional Government of National Unity of South Sudan on specific issues, obtain the consent of and work in coordination with the Government, and carry out its work in a way that is truly useful for the process of bringing about peace in South Sudan and is conducive to the efforts of the Transitional Government to maintain stability. Only by doing that will the regional protection force truly achieve what is provided for in resolution 2304 (2016) in terms of promoting peace and stability in South Sudan with a view to creating favourable conditions for the implementation of the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict by all parties in the country. Due to the fact that those principles are not fully reflected in resolution 2304 (2016), and that the revisions that China and some of the African members proposed are not fully incorporated in the adopted text, China had no other option but to abstain in the voting on resolution 2304 (2016). As directed by the IGAD Plus Extraordinary Summit on 5 August, the IGAD regional Chiefs of Defence Staff will hold consultations with the military leaders of the Transitional Government of National Unity of South Sudan on the deployment of the regional protection force. The African Union Peace and Security Council will also hold a meeting on 18 August to discuss the deployment of the force. China hopes that all the parties concerned will reach consensus on specific issues related to the regional protection force and is ready to continue playing its constructive role in favour of sustainable peace and stability in South Sudan.

The delegation of Senegal welcomes the adoption of resolution 2304 (2016) today, Friday, August 12, which marks the end of the current mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS). In doing so, the Security Council is responding to the earnest pleas by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Plus Extraordinary Summit, which, in paragraph 11 of its communiqué, urged the Security Council to immediately extend the UNMISS mandate with a revised mandate that includes deployment of a regional protection force. We therefore answered the appeal, and the Council has done its job. The excitement that accompanied the independence of South Sudan gave way to tragic events, including internally displaced persons and the loss of human life, thereby making the civilian population the main victims of a conflict that has overwhelmed them. That turn of events had previously led the Security Council, in resolution 2155 (2014), to place the protection of civilians, in particular women and children, at the heart of the UNMISS mandate. The same applies to the subsequent resolutions 2223 (2015) and 2252 (2015). Therefore, the resolution we have just adopted extends the mandate of UNMISS until 15 December by adding a regional protection force, established for an initial period that would conclude in December. That is certainly a sign of our collective commitment and sustained attention to following up the political and security situation of that great country, South Sudan. Senegal voted in favour of the resolution in order to respond to the appeals of the Heads of State and Government of the States members of IGAD to support the resolution. The African Union Peace and Security Council also endorsed IGAD’s decision, and the penholder of the resolution, the United States delegation, recalled the Secretary-General’s impassioned appeal along these lines when he addressed the Council. Through our vote, Senegal also helps the civilian population of the sister Republic of South Sudan. The resolution allows UNMISS to carry out its mandate to protect civilians and commits the countries of the region, the African Union Peace and Security Council and IGAD to work together with the authorities of the Republic of South Sudan to resolve this political crisis and ensure the swift deployment of the force. To conclude, the delegation of Senegal stresses the key role of regional actors in achieving the objectives of the peacekeeping and peacebuilding missions established by the Council.

We are deeply concerned about the deteriorating situation in South Sudan. We believe that it is necessary to put an immediate stop to the violence and we are troubled by the difficult situation faced by the South Sudanese people. We condemn the fact that the parties are not honouring their obligations under human rights law or their agreement to resolve the conflict in the Republic of South Sudan. We stress that we firmly and steadfastly advocate for the protection of the civil population. Nevertheless, we are concerned that the resolution 2304 (2016) was drafted without consulting South Sudan’s Transitional Government of National Unity, which, in its letter of 9 August 2016, stated that the approval of the resolution “would strengthen foreign forces under UNMISS, in addition to the deployment of a regional protection force, in preparation for an invasion of South Sudan, and its relegation to the status of a protectorate of the United Nations”. The deployment of such a force without the consent of the host State could make the situation on the ground even more tense and violent. In these conditions, we are not convinced that the deployment of a regional protection force would result in the attainment of our common goal — the immediate end of violence and the protection of civilians. Furthermore, we do not have clear information on the details of the implementation of the resolution, including who will participate using what resources, and how exactly the measures envisioned in the mandate will be implemented. We hope that the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of South Sudan will be fully respected. We are of the view that if we are to protect the people of South Sudan and to ensure a lasting and sustainable solution to the conflict, we will need more diplomacy and dialogue and fewer of the threats and sanctions offered by the resolution. In our view, that was the spirit of the decisions adopted by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, with the support of the African Union, and that is the tone that we hoped to maintain in the resolution. The solution to this crisis is a political one and we will continue to insist on that approach. Our vote today should be interpreted in no way as condoning the behaviour of the parties in South Sudan or as indifference to the need to protect civilians and their rights, but rather as a call for caution so as to not repeat past mistakes.

Spain welcomes the adoption of resolution 2304 (2016) and warmly thanks the United States for its efforts towards its adoption. The Security Council has reacted swiftly to the clear and unambiguous call from the region and addressed the serious concern of the international community over the grave situation in South Sudan by renewing its firm commitment to peace, stability and the protection of civilians in that country. We have done what is expected of us. We have fulfilled our responsibility. The resolution is not perfect. Spain believes that we have squandered a good opportunity to establish an immediate and unconditional arms embargo. We truly do not understand the reasons not to do so; in any case, no one has explained these reasons to us. Perhaps they cannot be mentioned in public or private, but what is certain is that the situation on the ground and peace and security concerns have long necessitated an arms embargo. Even though the resolution is not the one we would have desired, it does meets the minimum needs and, given the urgency of the situation, we have supported it unequivocally. These were not the right circumstances for approving a more ambitious resolution, as any delay in its adoption would have been unacceptable. When a country is plunged in violence and instability, as is South Sudan, our responsibility is to act with a sense of urgency, especially when the regional actors, both the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and the African Union, are unambiguously calling on us to do so. We cannot err on the side of omission; inaction is simply not an option. Now, the Council, the African Union and IGAD must maintain their unity of intention and action in order to effectively and quickly deploy the regional protection force. We trust that the Transitional Government of National Unity will take note of the unswerving commitment of the international community and the region to the security of the people of South Sudan, set aside its obstructive attitude and fully cooperate with the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, the United Nations, IGAD and the African Union. It is the primary responsibility of the Government of South Sudan to protect its own people. With this resolution, the Security Council and the region are offering the help and support that the people of South Sudan so urgently need. It is an opportunity that the Government of South Sudan cannot and must not pass up.

First of all, I would like to thank the United States for showing strong leadership in preparing resolution 2304 (2016). Japan supported the resolution in the strong belief that action is urgently needed after the shocking fighting in Juba last month, and strengthening the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) is the most effective response to address the situation. I should like to take this opportunity to emphasize three points. First, the resolution establishes a regional protection force within UNMISS. Japan, as a country contributing troops to UNMISS, appreciates the willingness and the preparedness expressed by countries in the region to deploy personnel. Japan believes that this new force will contribute significantly to South Sudan’s stability. Needless to say, the basic principles of peacekeeping, including consent of the parties, must be observed and maintained. For the smooth deployment of this force and for the force to be effective, close coordination and consultation among the Transitional Government of National Unity of South Sudan, the countries of the region and the United Nations should continue. We must also emphasize that hostile acts, threats and harassment towards UNMISS personnel, including obstruction of their freedom of movement, are unacceptable. UNMISS personnel are on the ground in order to restore peace and stability for the people of South Sudan. The Security Council should closely monitor the situation and remain committed to ensuring stability on the ground. Secondly, the implementation of the August 2015 Agreement is vital to achieving lasting peace and sustainable development in South Sudan. Japan continues to urge the political leaders and uniformed forces of South Sudan to fully abide by the ceasefire and cessation of hostilities and to seriously work on the implementation of the Agreement. In this regard, Japan commends the efforts made by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission, the African Union and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development and hopes to see further efforts to this end. Finally, I wish to return to the reason we are all gathered here today: our commitment to the people of South Sudan. Five years ago, the Council witnessed the birth of South Sudan as the world’s newest country. Sadly, there was no room to celebrate during this year’s Independence Day. We must help South Sudan achieve its promise by standing by the country when it needs us the most. It is Japan’s sincere hope for South Sudan that it will achieve peace and stability and make great strides on the path towards development. Japan has supported South Sudan since its independence and pledges to continue to be a partner in its development and reconciliation, as a true friend to its people. We must all work together to ensure that by this time next year, we are able to celebrate progress and stability in South Sudan on the occasion of its sixth anniversary.

My delegation voted in favour of resolution 2304 (2016), as we believe that the Security Council can no longer watch idly the accelerating collapse of the security and political situation in South Sudan. The enhancement of the mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) and the deployment of the Regional Protection Force in South Sudan, as requested by the region and consented to in principle by the Government of South Sudan, should facilitate the establishment of an environment conducive to the further work of the Transitional Government of National Unity, which is the cornerstone of the peaceful settlement of the conflict in South Sudan. In this regard, we look forward to the swift deployment of and the assumption of security tasks by the Regional Force, as mandated by the Council. However, sustainable peace cannot be achieved unless the South Sudanese leaders fully adhere to the commitments they have undertaken under the peace agreement. This includes the cessation of hostilities, engagement and dialogue and holding accountable those involved in gross violations and abuses of human rights, including rape. We urge the South Sudanese leadership to put the well-being of their people above all other interests. As Ukraine is one of the countries contributing troops and police to UNMISS, it also wishes to flag its total rejection of attacks on UNMISS personnel and premises in South Sudan. The United Nations is there to help the South Sudanese people. It is the people of South Sudan who need the United Nations. In this light, we call on the Government of South Sudan to lift all restrictions on UNMISS operations so as to enable the Mission effectively to carry out its mandate.

New Zealand, too, welcomes the adoption of resolution 2304 (2016). It is disappointing that the Council was unable to reach unanimity on the text, but on issues as important as this, sometimes that is just not possible. The Council has nonetheless adopted this resolution under Chapter VII of the Charter, as was the case for the earlier United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) resolutions, and we must give it our full support in its implementation. We thank the United States for its commendable efforts and made in the negotiations on the draft and the significant engagement of all Council members, including the Russian Federation, for calling the important discussion on the text at yesterday’s informal consultations. New Zealand’s vote in favour of the resolution demonstrates our strong support for the Council’s response to the clear message we have received from the Intergovernmental Authority on Development and the African Union that the Council needs to act urgently and decisively to mandate a Regional Protection Force within UNMISS. Any questions as to the need for this force are comprehensively answered in the letter from the Secretary-General to Council members earlier this week. In the deployment of peacekeeping forces, host State consent is desirable and should be worked for in every case. There is a clear practical reason why this important. In this respect, we note and welcome the in-principle consent given by the Transitional Government of National Unity of South Sudan. But consent to every aspect of a peacekeeping mission is not a requirement in a Chapter VII operation. The Council must ultimately be prepared to take the tough decisions in accordance with the Charter that are required for the maintenance of peace and security and in the best interest of the people of South Sudan and its region. We very much hope that the Government of South Sudan will cooperate with UNMISS. That is in the interest of South Sudan’s people as well as of the United Nations. But it would be a mistake to allow the Government of South Sudan, which was at least partially responsible for the current situation, to dictate the terms of the United Nations deployment. More broadly, the ongoing obstruction of UNMISS in the performance of its mandate, as evidenced by the catalog of violations of the status-of-forces agreement, is not acceptable. We welcome the clear signal in the resolution that the Council will take action, including through the establishment of an arms embargo, should the obstruction of UNMISS continue.

The Security Council has just adopted resolution 2304 (2016) renewing the mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS). Angola voted in favour of the draft resolution, and we would like to outline our point of view on the issue. As a member of the African Union and Chair of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, Angola remains committed to the quest for peace and stability in the Republic of South Sudan and to supporting the current peace process, for which international community support is critical. We express our agreement in general with the mandate of UNMISS, inter alia the high priority given to the protection of civilians, the creation of conditions conducive to the delivery of humanitarian assistance and support for the implementation of the peace process. The stand by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and the African Union represents a step forward in the direction we have been requesting for quite some time now, that is, a greater commitment by the region in addressing critical situations affecting the African continent. The decisions taken by IGAD are courageous, even challenging, and we are intent on working with the Government of South Sudan, regional players and the United Nations in order that they produce the desired results. We welcome the important decision adopted by the IGAD Plus Heads of State and Government on 16 July, and endorsed by the African Union. It is a decision that translates a renewed regional commitment to finding solutions to the conflict in South Sudan. It is our expectation that the deployment of a regional protection force, as decided by IGAD and now by the Security Council, while no easy matter or a magic potion for the immense problems facing South Sudan, will make a tangible contribution to the stabilization of the country and to the attainment of peace. During the negotiation of resolution 2304 (2016), Angola conveyed a number of concerns and presented constructive proposals addressing apprehensions expressed by the Transitional Government of National United of South Sudan, while trying to accommodate the demands of IGAD and the African Union. Most of those proposals and concerns did not receive appropriate consideration, which we deeply regret. Despite the fact that the United Nations Mission in South Sudan is under a Chapter VII mandate, the basic principles of peacekeeping call for the consent of the parties and, as referred to in a communication from the Secretariat to the members of the Security Council, “the lack or support or consent from the parties might have a negative impact on the way the parties, particularly the national authorities and local population, perceive the mission”. Now that the resolution has been adopted, we urge all efforts to be deployed in order to closely associate the Government of South Sudan with the deployment of the regional protection force and to guarantee its formal consent and cooperation more than merely in principle. We look forward to the discussions to take place between the East African Chiefs of Staff and their South Sudanese counterparts, as requested by IGAD Plus, on the deployment of the regional protection force, which must guarantee peace and stability in South Sudan, in strict respect for its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. In that regard, we would like to assure the Transitional Government of South Sudan that Angola will adopt an active stance in order to ensure that the provisions of the resolution are correctly implemented and that the Government is an integral part at all stages of the resolution’s implementation. Finally, the resolution contains an annex imposing a new sanctions regime. Our view is that the imposition of sanctions by the Security Council on a Member State should be preceded by serious consultations on the issue, which in fact did not happen. In due course, when appropriate, we shall revisit the issue.

Uruguay voted in favour of resolution 2304 (2016), aware of the grave humanitarian, human rights and security situation resulting from the profound political crisis in South Sudan, for which the country’s main political and military leaders are responsible. Violations of human rights in South Sudan are of major concern to Uruguay, due not only to their gravity but also to the systematic way in which they are being committed by members of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) and the SPLA in Opposition. In the provisions of the resolution adopted today, the Council has taken into account the views of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and the African Union, as well as their request for the mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) to be adapted to the current situation in South Sudan. Uruguay stresses the importance of ongoing consultations with the Government of South Sudan and the countries of the region to ensure the timely and full implementation of the resolution. To that end, we hope to count on the cooperation of the Government of South Sudan and the States members of IGAD. We reiterate once again that the primary responsibility for protecting civilians lies with the authorities of the State in question. That having been said, it is important in this critical situation for the Government of South Sudan to end its obstructionist activities and those that violate the status-of-forces agreement, and to enable UNMISS to fulfil its principal mandate to protect civilians.

Egypt abstained in the voting on resolution 2304 (2016), extending the mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), in view of our reservations concerning the growing tendency of the Council to overstep the established principles governing United Nations peacekeeping operations. A few weeks ago, the Council adopted resolution 2303 (2016), on the deployment of a police component to Burundi, without the consent of the Government of the host country. Following that adoption, the Government of Burundi issued a statement rejecting the resolution. The consent of any Government to deployment is a practical and logistical necessity, as well as a legal one, and yet, in the context of the conflict in South Sudan, the Council has adopted a resolution that disregards the position of the Transitional Government of National Unity on the issue of deploying a regional protection force. It also ignores the statement issued by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) on 5 August with regard to coordination with the Government on issues relating to the size, weaponry, mandate and timing for the deployment of the force. The drafters of the resolution took the agreement in principle of the Government of South Sudan as a justification to define the detailed of the work of the protection force on the territory of South Sudan without direct consultations with that Government. It even contains the threat of imposing further measures should the Government fail to comply with its provisions, amounting to a virtual act of extortion. The resolution also prejudges the decisions of the regional Chiefs of Staff in their upcoming consultations, which embody the agreement in principle of the Transitional Government of National Unity of South Sudan. It is inconceivable that this Government should not be party to a detailed agreement on the deployment of a force that is to operate on its territory. We stress here today, as we have done repeatedly in the past, our full support for the work of UNMISS and our utmost appreciation for its tireless efforts to protect civilians, which require the Mission to be able to perform its duties. Will the Security Council bear the responsibility for the safety and security of those forces? Do troop-contributing countries agree to dispatch their forces to a country before agreement has been reached and consultations have been conducted with its Government? We highly value the actions of IGAD and the African Union to bring peace to South Sudan. We support their keen interest in putting an end to the suffering of the people of South Sudan. IGAD members have courageously upheld their responsibilities with regard to the suffering of their brothers and sisters there. We would have liked to see an agreement on the detailed operational steps adopted by the Security Council in close consultation with the Government of South Sudan before the Council approved the deployment of the regional protection force. Our delegation participated in the consultations on the resolution constructively and in good faith. We attempted until the very last moment to reach a compromise on the text that could ensure the agreement of all parties and unite the Council with a view to a unanimous adoption of the resolution. However, and regrettably, our last-ditch attempts were not fruitful. Egypt will not take a superior position with regard to its brothers in South Sudan. However, in view of our geographical proximity and common history, we fully grasp the untold suffering of all citizens there — women, children, the elderly and everyone else — and the absolute necessity of putting an end to such suffering immediately. We are making bilateral, regional and international efforts to give our brothers in South Sudan a fair opportunity to enjoy a dignified life and a future of peace and stability. The civilians in South Sudan have suffered immeasurably, but the question remains: How can we achieve that common objective? We continue to believe that the Council must exercise further care and wisdom in dealing with the situation in South Sudan. Utmost caution is needed to avoid adopting approaches that may undermine the political process or throw the country and the entire region into an uncontrollable cycle of violence. The suffering of our brothers in South Sudan can be ended only through the common efforts of the Security Council and the African Union to give momentum to the political efforts, support the monitoring and assessment efforts, and assist all parties in complying with the provisions of the peace agreement with a view to building confidence, realizing sustainable national reconciliation and dealing with the root causes of the conflict. Any other measures will be only temporary in nature and will soon fall short.

The Council has just adopted resolution 2304 (2016), which renews and modifies the mandate of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS). The situation in South Sudan is one of the most serious that we are aware of at the present time. Violations of human rights and international humanitarian law are being committed on an almost unparalleled scale. Breaches of basic protection of civilians at imminent risk of a resumption of hostilities leave no choice but to react immediately. The resolution just adopted takes up the recommendations of the countries of the region, represented by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and endorsed by the African Union. That is a critical point for France and an example of cooperation between the competent regional organization, the African Union and the Security Council. The ongoing commitment and unity of the region will be decisive in settling the crisis. However, the resolution that has just been adopted, while necessary, is only an immediate response to controlling the situation. In that respect, France has two comments to make. First, the regional protection force and its 4,000 troops, who have just joined the 12,000 troops already deployed, can only help to create the conditions for a cessation of hostilities and a resumption of the political dialogue. We pay tribute to the troop-contributing countries and their Blue Helmets. They will need the support of each and every one of us. However, this force is not a lasting response to the crisis and that is why France expects the authorities of South Sudan to fully cooperate with UNMISS and all the parties in finding a peaceful path to the crisis. My second comment is that the resolution, as decisive as it may be, should have gone all the way by imposing an immediate arms embargo. That was what France wanted, given the gravity of the abuses. Had the embargo been imposed earlier, South Sudan would not have undergone this deterioration. The embargo could have been imposed immediately, as was pointed out, with a view to a cessation of hostilities and also to better preserve the security of the peacekeepers whom we are deploying. France will continue to call for the swift imposition of the embargo. The Council’s unity and the inclusiveness of our discussion are crucial to the success of our action, given the seriousness of the crisis. The resolution is now ours. Although France regrets the absence of the embargo, France will provide all its support to the full implementation of this text, which is now ours.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Malaysia. I wish to first thank the United States and all Council members for their constructive engagement throughout the difficult negotiations on resolution 2304 (2016), which was just adopted. While Council members may have divergent views and shades of opinions, the adoption of this important resolution demonstrates the Council’s resolve to address the multifaceted challenges faced by South Sudan. We were gratified by the early and promising successes, such as the conclusions of the agreement for conflict resolution in South Sudan and the subsequent establishment of the Transitional Government of National Unity of South Sudan. It is however unfortunate and troubling that the recent progress was not sustained and has been rolled back, which further imperils South Sudan’s path to peace, security and prosperity. In that respect, we call on the leaders of South Sudan to urgently prioritize the welfare, safety and security of all the people of South Sudan, regardless of their ethnicity or political affiliations. The population has suffered too long and too much from violence and conflict. It is with that in mind that Malaysia associates itself with resolution 2304 (2016), as it believes that the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), working in close cooperation and coordination with the Transitional Government of National Unity of South Sudan, will henceforth be better equipped to continue playing a pivotal and effective role in ensuring the safety and security of the people of South Sudan. We believe that it is in the interest of all that the necessary enabling environment conducive to the resumption of dialogue be established. Therefore, Malaysia’s support for resolution 2304 (2016) is grounded in our principled position on the need to resolve conflicts through peaceful means, as well as our firm commitment and support for United Nations peacekeeping operations as a tool for the maintenance of international peace and security. In supporting the resolution, we have paid considerable attention to the views and requests from the regional partners, including those of the African Union and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. We commend their leadership role and the solidarity shown by these regional partners to immediate dialogue and to work together with the Transitional Government to restore peace in South Sudan. Five years ago, South Sudan made history by becoming the youngest member of the United Nations. It was a remarkable achievement made possible by the unwavering belief of the South Sudanese people in peaceful negotiations over conflict and adversity. Our interest and desire are to see that the same spirit will again prevail among the South Sudanese leaders and that they will master the courage and will to reject violence and conflict and recommit themselves to peaceful negotiations. Finally, while we recognize that serious attempts have been made to address the concerns of Council members, we should not lose sight of the fact that the adoption of this resolution marks an important step forward in our collective endeavour to adopt a more proactive approach to addressing the worsening situation that the Secretary-General has described in his letter of 10 August. I now resume my functions as President of the Security Council. I give the floor to the representative of South Sudan.

Since this is the first time I am speaking to the Council under your presidency, Sir, I would like to congratulate you on your leadership of the Council this month and pledge our full cooperation. I would also like to acknowledge the role of your predecessor in leading the Council last month. The Government of South Sudan has officially expressed its position and given its response in writing on the mandate adopted today, and therefore there is not much more to be said other than yo reiterate some important points. I would particularly like to express my Government’s rejection of the just adopted resolution 2304 (2016), as it does not take into account or even consider the points of view of South Sudan. It is unfortunate that the Council chose to take this route. The Government of South Sudan accepted in good faith, in principal, the deployment of the protection force, as stated at the second Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Plus Summit on 5 August in an IGAD communiqué. It is important to underline that South Sudan does not object to the entire resolution on the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, but only to the new elements of the protection force and the pre-empting of the meeting between the Government of South Sudan and the Regional Chief of Defence Staff, as stated in the IGAD communiqué, is meant to give room for discussions on the modalities of the implementation of the protection force. The communiqué clearly outlines the fact that the modalities of the force, including its composition, mandate, armament, deployment, timing and funding, shall be agreed upon by the Transitional Government of National Unity and the troop-contributing countries. It is also unfortunate that the resolution contains an annex on an arms embargo, given that it is a peacekeeping resolution. The adoption of the resolution goes against a basic principle of United Nations peacekeeping operations, which is the consent of the main parties to the conflict, and against the Charter of the United Nations, which urges Members to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of other States. The consent of South Sudan to the mandate and operational modalities of the protection force outlined in the resolution would have been important, as it would have given the force all the necessary freedoms to carry out the outlined mandated tasks. Finally, I would like to thank all the Council members that respected the concerns of South Sudan and engaged with South Sudan with the aim of reaching a text that would have been acceptable to my Government.