S/PV.8977 Security Council

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. Members of the Council have before them document S/2022/147, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by Mexico. 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 15 votes in favour. The draft resolution has been adopted unanimously as resolution 2622 (2022). I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of the Russian Federation. Russia is fully committed to the purposes and principles of resolution 1540 (2004), which we co-sponsored. We are interested in preserving its non-proliferation and preventive nature and in seeing its comprehensive implementation by all countries within their capacity to do so. We will do everything within our power to ensure that resolution 1540 (2004) remains a relevant non-proliferation instrument that complements sector-specific mechanisms in this field, such as the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention. With that in mind, and in the interest of maintaining consensus, we supported resolution 2622 (2022), submitted by Mexico, extending the mandate of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004) to the end of November this year. However, we continue to entertain serious concerns about this document and, more broadly, about how the work of the 1540 Committee has been undertaken in 2021 and 2022. We are concerned that the Council has had once again today to limit itself to a strictly technical rollover of the mandate of the 1540 Committee in the interest of ensuring that the comprehensive review of the resolution’s implementation can be concluded swiftly. We see no justification for such a restriction. It is important that we not merely tick a box stating that the review has been done, but undertake the review appropriately and allow substantive contributions to be made by key participants — for example, States, which bear the primary responsibility for implementing resolution 1540 (2004). If we fail to do so, the added value of the review process will be largely wasted. We on our side have no certainty that such a full and comprehensive review in the months to come, without artificial haste or detriment to the format. We have important doubts as to the proposed modalities focused on discussing the Committee’s specific problems and not on current issues in the context of non-proliferation. We have often said in the Committee that preparations for the review must be undertaken far more actively, and we called on the Chair to step up efforts to that end. Unfortunately, time was too tight in that respect, and in that context we proposed focusing on negotiating a long-term mandate for the Committee so that it would have the opportunity to work calmly on all the tasks before it and not be distracted by a technical rollover, and to carry out a full review at a later date. Our call went unheeded, however, and at the last moment we were essentially presented with a fait accompli of another technical rollover. I wish to propose a series of critical points for us to address with regard to future parameters for the Committee’s mandate. The principal point is that we must preserve the unique spirit of cooperation of resolution 1540 (2004), and not allow it to be eroded. That is necessary to ensure a positive attitude towards the resolution on the part of the international community. The 1540 Committee should not become an invigilator, controller or judge in that process. When drafting a new body for that subsidiary body, we should not allow it to be endowed with attributive functions, permitting it to interfere in the internal affairs of States. The role of the 1540 Committee, as we see it, is to continue monitoring the implementation of the resolution and to coordinate efforts to provide technical assistance to countries upon their request. We also believe that it is important for the future mandate to be based only on elements of previous specialized resolutions of the Security Council pertaining to the work of the Committee, which in practice have proven to be useful and relevant. I now resume my functions as President of the Security Council. I now give the floor to the other members of the Council who wish to make statements.

China supports the Security Council in extending the mandate of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004). We voted in favour of resolution 2622 (2022). We hope that the Committee will elaborate plans to advance its work in an orderly manner, including the comprehensive review of the status of the implementation of resolution 1540 (2004). The legitimate concerns of all parties should be accorded equal attention and properly addressed in that process.

As Chair of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004), we welcome the adoption of resolution 2622 (2022), since an extension of the Committee’s mandate will allow us to pursue the broad review of the implementation of resolution 1540 (2004) and to conclude it, despite the complexities created by the pandemic. We note the comments made with respect to the process of a technical renewal of the mandate. I nevertheless wish to place on record the fact that consultations were conducted in good faith and transparently and in response to all concerns expressed. The great majority of members expressed their preference for a technical renewal as the most viable way of undertaking the broad review mandated by resolution 1977 (2011). That will allow us to obtain the information necessary for new negotiations on a new, substantive resolution later this year. In conclusion, Mexico attaches particular importance to the 1540 Committee and recognizes its role in implementing a resolution designed to prevent non-State actors from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

In light of comments just made by the representative of the Russian Federation, I just want to make a few points for the record myself. First, the United States thanks Mexico for putting forward resolution 2622 (2022) to extend the mandate of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004) and its Group of Experts. We believe that this technical extension will allow the Committee and the Group of Experts to continue their important work. The 1540 Committee is a powerful tool to help prevent the most dangerous weapons from falling into the hands of non-State actors. We support the continued work of the Committee and look forward to completing the comprehensive review and substantive mandate renewal later this year. A meaningful, comprehensive review that brings together Member States and civil society — including international and regional organizations, industry and academia — is essential to ensuring that the 1540 Committee continues to meet the challenge of preventing non-State actors, including but not limited to terrorist groups, from acquiring or using weapons of mass destruction or related goods and know-how. In that regard, we welcome the opportunity to engage these stakeholders through open sessions held in whatever format may be most feasible. During the upcoming comprehensive review and mandate renewal, we will prioritize the full implementation of States’ obligations under resolution 1540 (2004) by striving to improve the functionality and credibility of the Committee, empowering its Group of Experts and enhancing its support to assistance- and outreach-related activities. In conclusion, I want to note that we support the ambitious but achievable timeline that the 1540 Committee Chair has proposed to complete the comprehensive review, and we look forward to working with other Council members to conduct a successful review that informs the mandate renewal later this year.

I just want to say very briefly that we strongly support resolution 2622 (2022). Resolution 1540 (2004) has been a critical part of the multilateral non-proliferation architecture since its adoption in 2004. The Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004) and its Group of Experts have reviewed more than 500 national implementation reports from 185 countries. We see it as vital that its work continue, and the United Kingdom therefore applauds Mexico’s efforts as Chair to secure an extension of the mandate.