S/PV.9716 Security Council

The representative of the United Kingdom has asked for the floor.

We understand that an invitation is to be extended to Mali to participate under rule 37. We of course accept the ruling of the presidency on that, and we are happy to hear what Mali has to say. But just for the record, in case it is misinterpreted under the wording of rule 37, we do not accept the premise that Mali’s interests are especially affected by Western weapons transfers to Ukraine.

The representative of the Russian Federation has asked for the floor.

Perhaps the representative of the United Kingdom would like to explain in which way a whole herd of European Union countries’ interests are specifically affected when they are usually invited to participate under rule 37 in the meetings requested by the West. The interests of Mali are directly affected because the tentacles of Ukraine’s terrorism have already reached Africa, and Malian people have died. I would appreciate a clarification, Sir.

In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representative of Mali to participate in this meeting. In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite Mr. Adedeji Ebo, Director and Deputy to the High Representative of the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I give the floor to Mr. Ebo. Mr. Ebo: I provide this briefing on behalf of the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, Mrs. Izumi Nakamitsu. The Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine — launched on 24 February 2022 in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and of international law — continues to inflict large-scale suffering on the people of Ukraine. Regrettably, the security situation continues to deteriorate. The escalating attacks on Ukrainian regions have led to more civilian deaths and injuries as well as massive destruction of civilian infrastructure, including energy, health and education facilities. The Secretary-General remains greatly concerned by the worsening impact on civilians from the increased fighting in eastern Ukraine, as well as along the Ukrainian-Russian border, including in the Kursk and Belgorod regions of the Russian Federation. He urges all to act responsibly and ensure the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure. The continued and intensified attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure are unacceptable. All parties to any armed conflict have an obligation to protect civilians in armed conflict as well as to comply with applicable international law, including international humanitarian law. Let me say it clearly: directing an attack against civilians or civilian objects is prohibited. I also reiterate that the principles of distinction, proportionality and precautions in attack in international humanitarian law must be respected. All attacks contrary to those obligations must stop immediately. Turning now to the subject of this briefing, the provision of military assistance and transfers of arms and ammunition to the Armed Forces of Ukraine have continued. Information from various Governments regarding those transfers is accessible through open sources. The transfers have reportedly included heavy conventional weapons, such as battle tanks, armoured combat vehicles, combat aircraft, helicopters, large-calibre artillery systems, missile systems and uncrewed combat aerial vehicles, as well as remotely operated munitions and small arms and light weapons and their ammunition. There have also been reports of States transferring, or planning to transfer, weapons such as uncrewed aerial vehicles, ballistic missiles and ammunition to the Russian armed forces and that those weapons have been used in Ukraine. I reiterate that any transfer of weapons and ammunition must take place consistently with the applicable international legal framework including, of course, relevant Security Council resolutions. Reports related to the use of cluster munitions and widespread contamination with mines and explosive remnants of war in Ukraine are deeply concerning. Universal participation in and the full implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction, the Convention on Cluster Munitions and the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects must remain a priority. I appeal to all States to uphold their obligations under those treaties and to reaffirm their value and importance. To mitigate the human cost of weapons, States must exercise the utmost responsibility in their arms and ammunition transfers. Last week, representatives of States Parties convened in Geneva for the tenth Conference of States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty. They acknowledged the importance of universal adherence to and the effective implementation of the Treaty in advancing its purpose to contribute to international and regional peace, security and stability, reduce human suffering and promote cooperation, transparency and responsible action by States parties in the international trade in conventional arms. The transfer of weapons and ammunition into any armed conflict carries the risk of diversion and, by extension, raises serious escalation concerns. Measures to prevent and mitigate the risk of the diversion of weapons and ammunition are key for preventing further instability and insecurity in Ukraine, the region and beyond. Such efforts by all States involved in arms transfers will also be essential to post-conflict recovery. That requires supply-chain transparency and cooperation, as well as information exchange between importing, transit and exporting countries. Diversion risks exist at each stage of the life cycle of a weapon, including manufacture, before and during transfer, post-delivery storage in stockpiles and end use or disposal. Concrete counter-diversion measures include enhanced marking at the time of manufacture and import, record-keeping and tracing practices, comprehensive pre-transfer diversion risk assessments, end-user certificates  — including non-transfer clauses  — post-shipment verifications and diversion monitoring and analysis. States met in June to review the progress made in the implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects and its International Tracing Instrument. States adopted, by consensus, action-oriented measures for 2024–2030 in order to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons throughout their life cycle. All States should now implement those and other related commitments, including those in the Global Framework for Through-life Conventional Ammunition Management, as well as the obligations under all instruments to which they are a party, to prevent the diversion of arms and regulate the international arms trade. Since 24 February 2022, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has recorded 35,869 civilian casualties in Ukraine — 11,662 killed and 24,207 injured. According to OHCHR, regrettably, July was the deadliest month for civilians in Ukraine since October 2022, with at least 219 civilians killed and 1,018 injured. The use of armed uncrewed aerial vehicles and missiles by the Russian Federation continues to cause civilian deaths and injuries and damage to civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. There have also been reports of several cross- border strikes using missiles and uncrewed aerial vehicles by Ukraine inside the Russian Federation, with some, according to the Russian authorities, reportedly resulting in civilian casualties. Just as with any other weapons or weapons systems, armed uncrewed aerial vehicles and missiles must not be used in a manner inconsistent with international humanitarian law. All parties to an armed conflict should refrain from any actions that could endanger civilians, including by avoiding the use of explosive weapons in populated areas, and should ultimately aim to take combat out of urban areas altogether. I wish to reiterate the United Nations commitment to supporting all meaningful efforts to bring about a just and lasting peace in Ukraine in line with the Charter of the United Nations, international law and the relevant General Assembly resolutions. It is time to put an end to this conflict.

I thank Mr. Ebo for his briefing. I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements.

We listened carefully to the information provided by Mr. Ebo. The day before yesterday, Western delegations gathered the members of the Security Council together in the Chamber for their ritual monthly briefing on Ukraine (see S/PV.9714). However, apart from simply ticking a box, their aim in doing so remains a mystery to us all. After all, we heard nothing new from them beyond the same worn-out anti-Russian clichés and fakes that we have already debunked repeatedly in this very Chamber. And from the statements of the Western colleagues, it could be concluded that they essentially gathered the members of the Council together to draw our attention to the thirty-third anniversary of Ukraine’s independence. In other words, their desire to keep the Ukrainian issue afloat on the Council’s agenda led the Council to waste a great deal of valuable time, which it could have otherwise spent on much more pressing issues of real concern to the world majority. Furthermore, the fact that, on that day, the Chamber was once again filled with European Union delegations speaking under rule 37, diligently repeating the same arguments that they received from Brussels, brought no added value whatsoever to the discussion and only reinforces the impression that we simply wasted our time. In that regard, it is appropriate to recall that, in March, our Western colleagues spared no effort to block the meeting requested by Russia on the twenty- fifth anniversary of the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia (see S/PV.9587). I recall that at that time they argued  — and the Permanent Representative of France was particularly impassioned about this — that it was not appropriate for the Council to commemorate any anniversaries. That is despite the fact that we did not ask to commemorate anything. The only thing we wanted was to remind everybody that the effects of NATO’s aggression in the Balkans are still being felt by the residents of the entire region, who are no safer for it. Therefore, we were once again faced with the same blatant double standards from our Western colleagues, which have now firmly become their calling card. I am sure that they are going to wave that card around today in an attempt to prove that it is our meeting that is a complete waste of time, despite it being devoted to a particularly important and topical issue, namely, the role of western arms supplies to the Kyiv regime as a factor impeding a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis. Members are all well aware that the hot phase of the Ukrainian crisis started two and a half years ago, when Russia had to start its special military operation in order to protect the inhabitants of Donbas and eradicate the threat from Ukraine. Today it is perfectly clear that that phase would not have started if our former Western partners had not pumpled Ukraine with weapons and prepared it for conflict with Russia, while hiding behind the Minsk agreements approved by the Security Council in resolution 2202 (2015) in 2015. Indeed, the Ukrainian crisis would not exist if Washington and its allies had not, in 2014, brought to power through an anti-constitutional coup a radical nationalist opposition group that immediately focused on eradicating everything from the country that links it to Russia, the Russian language and our shared culture and history. As a result, in the same year, the Kyiv regime started a war against the population living in the east and the south-east of the country. In February 2022, we went there to stop that war. Thus, the destructive role of the West in this ongoing Ukrainian tragedy is clear. The Ukrainian leadership, as we are all well aware today, had an excellent chance to find a dignified way out of this vicious and terrible cycle just a month after the beginning of the special military operation. Then, in Istanbul, necessary bilateral documents were initialled. However, a number of Western leaders, in particular former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, convinced President Zelenskyy to reject that agreement, promising him that, with the assistance of Western weapons, he would supposedly be able to inflict defeat on Russia and return the country back to its 1991 borders. Western countries’ insidious reasons for that are absolutely clear to us. It was not for nothing that Western countries spent so much effort in making Ukraine an anti-Russian entity that would be able to at least weaken our country, as they counted on. They simply could not allow the two brotherly Slavic peoples to reconcile so easily. That warped “divide and conquer” logic of the former colonial Powers is something that our African and Asian colleagues remember perfectly well. It is hard to fathom what the Ukrainians could have been thinking at that time. What we saw as a result was the frantic pumping of Western weapons into Ukraine. Ukraine was primarily supplied with old Soviet-made weapons, which had to be disposed of anyway. However, the Kyiv regime also received fairly modern Western equipment: tanks, armoured personnel carriers, artillery equipment, air- defence and multiple rocket-launch systems and most importantly, ammunition and long-range missiles. According to the data available on the Internet, as of February 2024, the overall volume of Western assistance to Ukraine amounted to €243 billion. At some point, Western countries started to conceal data on military assistance to Ukraine, but as of the end of 2023, NATO countries provided €98 billion in military assistance to Ukraine, while the European Union provided €27 billion in assistance, for a total of €125 billion, which is more than half of all the resources allocated to Ukraine. As we all recall, in the first half of 2024, the United States, with much wailing, nevertheless allocated a new military assistance package, to the tune of $61 billion, to the Kyiv regime. Given the smaller deliveries from other NATO countries, we can state confidently that in 2024, the overall amount of military assistance from the West to the Zelenskyy regime amounted to approximately €200 billion. I am talking about this in detail so that our colleagues from the global South fully understand that figure. We have said that the overall requirements of all humanitarian agencies in 2023 totalled $56.7 billion — four times less — and those humanitarian requirements were funded at only 38.3 per cent. I am not even talking about the fact that the United States, as the largest contributor to the United Nations budget, has yet to pay $1 billion, a paltry amount in comparison, to our Organization, causing its liquidity crisis. It is clear that assistance to Ukraine, military assistance in particular, is also a source of revenue for Western weapons manufacturers. As we all remember, American leaders themselves convinced Congress to approve the most recent aid package by arguing that it is actually a profitable business programme that will also create a lot of jobs in the United States. With regard to the Kyiv regime itself, after its failed “counter-offensive” in 2023, which we all remember well, it has completely exhausted its ammunition and is now fully dependent on Western handouts. And those handouts are still coming, although Ukraine has now become somewhat of a suitcase without a handle for the West. The United States and its satellites are still not prepared to give it up. And here, we come to the main conclusion: without Western arms supplies to Ukraine, it would have stopped fighting long ago, and that is something that many Western politicians from the “blooming garden”, including Mr. Borrell Fontelles himself, have admitted. Given that the aims of the special military operation did not include destroying Ukraine as a State, the senseless meat grinder would also have stopped, and the Ukrainian President, who is past his expiration date, would no longer have been able to throw new hundreds of thousands of his fellow citizens, who are desperately trying to avoid being sent to the front, into that bloodbath for the sake of preserving his power and pleasing the West by favouring its geopolitical interests. The fact that the Ukrainians do not want to fight is also clearly evidenced even by Ukrainian media. Men are hauled off the streets and sent to the front with little or no training, to certain death. Therefore, it is absolutely not surprising that desertion in the Ukrainian army has reached unprecedented levels. Since the beginning of the special military operation in Ukraine, more than 63,000 desertion cases have been initiated in Ukraine. According to the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, in the first six months of 2024 alone, approximately 30,000 cases have been opened, which is three times as many as in 2022. However, experts believe that the real statistic is actually two to three times higher. Make no mistake: today the bloody Ukrainian head honcho can make his people fight only through force and coercion and only thanks to the supply of Western weapons, Western intelligence and Western instructors and mercenaries. That is why the topic of today’s meeting is so important and pertinent. Today we will undoubtedly hear from our Western colleagues a lot of hackneyed statements about their determination to support Ukraine for as long as necessary because Ukraine is apparently fighting for its survival and is allegedly a victim of aggression. However — and this is awkward — in August, the head of the Ukrainian junta made a fatal mistake by pushing his troops across the border into a peaceful Russian region. As I said two days ago (see S/PV.9714), the world saw the images of the Ukrainian thugs bearing Nazi symbols looting and marauding, taking hostages and firing at women, children and the elderly. That image turned out to be so different from that of the innocent victim of someone’s aggression that the United States and its satellites have worked so hard to paint Ukraine as, that they are now seeking to disavow Zelenskyy’s Kursk adventure as quickly as possible. But the facts stubbornly speak for themselves: our Western colleagues are neck-deep in this adventure, and without their assistance and without Western weapons, the Ukrainian head honcho would not have dared to to do that. On 28 August, Frank Whitworth, director of the United States National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, admitted that the Ukrainian armed forces are using satellite images supplied by the United States in the attack on the Kursk region. And as the Ukrainian army itself can no longer do much, the Kursk adventure was, to a great extent, made possible by the large-scale involvement of western mercenaries. They are not even hiding that fact. That is unambiguosly announced on the social networks of the United States private military company Forward Observations Group. Incidentally, there are photos of the military positions of its mortar crews located in a children’s playground. Thus, our Western colleagues can see with their own eyes how the norms of international humanitarian law, which they discussed the other day in Geneva, are being flagrantly violated. In order to achieve their goals, our Western hypocrites stop at nothing. For example, on 12 August, a Rosseti repair unit was attacked in the Kursk region with chemical weapons typical of those of the United States and German armies. There were chemical weapons attacks also against some Russian military units on 21 August. To carry out those attacks, units of the 74th separate radiological and chemical protection regiment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were redeployed to the Kursk region. That is all happening with the knowledge of Washington, London and Brussels, as is also evidenced by the fact that we found manuals there that were used to train Ukrainian soldiers to fire chemical munitions using Western-made artillery systems. Furthermore, Kyiv received approximately 500 tons of triethanolamine, which is used to create toxic nitrogen mustard gas. In that regard, I would like to recall that Western moralists have long been sending depleted uranium shells and cluster munitions to Ukraine. Incidentally, information emerged the other day on how the United States is transfering cluster munitions to Ukraine. Those munitions are delivered through Germany, where they are stored, particularly in the town of Miesau. At the same time, Germany is known to publicly oppose the transfer of such munitions to Kyiv and is party to an international treaty that bans the use of such weapons. I spoke about the consequences of Zelenskyy’s Kursk adventure in detail two days ago (see S/PV.9714), and I will not dwell on it today. We see Abrams and Leopard tanks and high mobility artillery rocket systems and army tactical missile systems on fire, and the Russian army is advancing rapidly, liberating new regions of Donbas. Yesterday, Ukraine lost its first F-16. What else can the Kyiv regime do, while failing so spectacularly? The only thing left is to involve NATO, led by the United States, in a direct confrontation with Russia. Kyiv simply has no plan B. The easiest way to do that is to organize a large-scale provocation, like Bucha, and point the finger at Russia. In that connection, we recently warned of such a provocation in the form of a so-called dirty nuclear bomb being prepared by the Kyiv regime. However, that is a troublesome and rather complicated affair, and quite difficult to carry out without Western backers. Therefore, they had to choose another option — to get permission to strike far into Russian territory using Western missiles. So far, Washington and most other capitals have said they have not given such permission, as they realize all too well that that entails the risk of a large-scale escalation far beyond Ukraine, with all the implications a conflict with a nuclear Power may entail. But Zelenskyy will not stop. According to some reports, Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak and Defence Minister Rustem Umerov are in the United States now, holding meetings with United States Administration officials in an attempt to persuade them to lift restrictions on long-range strikes deep into Russian territory using United States weapons. Roughly speaking, the situation now is that the Ukrainian ringleader clearly opted for escalation rather than peace by attacking the Kursk region. The question remains whether the United States and its allies will also choose escalation for the sake of their Ukrainian “suitcase without a handle” or whether they will have the common sense not to cross that line. Much, by the way, will depend on the countries of the global South, which have become increasingly assertive in voicing their demands for peace. By unleashing his attack on the Kursk region, the head of the Kyiv regime deceived those countries. I hope that we will hear their assessments in that regard today in the Chamber. In conclusion, I would like to draw the Council’s attention to another topic related to Ukraine. On 20 August, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a draft law that would make all religious communities in Ukraine illegal if they are allegedly affiliated with any religious organizations in Russia. Courts will be able to reach a verdict based only on an opinion from a religious expert, which, amid the current witch-hunt, could be easily falsified. Nobody is even trying to hide that the law is aimed against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The goal is to eliminate the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and all its congregations or force them to join other religious organizations. Hundreds of monasteries and millions of Orthodox believers in Ukraine are about to become outlaws and may soon lose their property and their place of worship. The law that was adopted is in line neither with the Constitution of Ukraine nor with the rule of law. It is merely a political declaration intended to legalize the destruction of the religious community of the majority. That is an unprecedented and anti-democratic decision, condemned even by the Pope — who is unlikely to have pro-Russian sentiments. The law defines criteria that allow to establish that a certain group of people belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which means that those people must be politically persecuted. All that is already accompanied by the blatant harassment of clergy and believers, threats, blackmail, violence and mass beatings. Hundreds of criminal cases have been fabricated, resulting in many wrongful convictions on political grounds. A number of archpastors and pastors of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church have been arrested or imprisoned or have received unjust sentences. We have repeatedly talked about that in the Chamber. We managed then to halt the wave of repression, but the lack of a proper response to that sacrilege from the West emboldened the Ukrainian ringleader, and he went back to implementing his plans. We have no doubt that it is the moral duty of every human being, regardless of his or her faith, to prevent the massacre being prepared in Ukraine. Otherwise, the already difficult Ukrainian crisis would worsen, opening a new page in the bloody internal confrontation in that country. It is important for a person to believe in something at least. The leaders of the Kyiv regime, obviously, fail to meet that standard, and the greed and servility of the West, coupled with primordial Russophobia, have completely obscured their minds. We trust that our colleagues, who still have faith in their hearts and minds, will take a principled stand and say no to that madness.

My gratitude goes to Mr. Ebo for his briefing. Despite having a Council meeting on the situation in Ukraine less than 48 hours ago (see S/PV.9714), deeply concerning hostile attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, including energy, continue unabated. They include the large-scale Russian attacks this week in which hundreds of missiles and drones rained down across Ukraine, in one of the largest bombing campaigns over the last 30 months of that senseless war of aggression. This week’s spasm of violence against civilians is not an anomaly. July was the deadliest month for civilians in Ukraine since October 2022, with at least 219 civilians killed that month alone. Yet again, Ukraine was plunged into eerie darkness as tens of thousands were forced into makeshift underground shelters, taking cover from multiple waves of deadly, indiscriminate fire. We once again urge Russia to end the war by withdrawing its troops from the territories of Ukraine, as affirmed by multiple General Assembly resolutions. Indiscriminate attacks against civilians and civilian objects, including energy infrastructure, are clear violations of international humanitarian law and must be condemned unequivocally. We also reiterate our consistent position that Ukraine is defending its people and territories in line with the Charter of the United Nations and international law, alongside the international community’s assistance. For that reason, we are of the view that today’s meeting on the issue of weapons transfers to Ukraine is irrelevant. My delegation again underlines that arms transfers between Russia and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which are flagrant violations of Security Council resolutions, continue to endanger civilians and prolong that brutal war. That must be resolutely condemned and, in fact, should be the focus of today’s Security Council meeting. We also note with great concern the Ukrainian authorities’ announcement that North Korea’s ballistic missiles were recently used again by Russia to strike Ukraine. We strongly urge Russia and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea once again to abide by the relevant Security Council resolutions. In conclusion, the Republic of Korea is committed to aligning itself with the ideals of the Charter of the United Nations and justice. We will continue to stand with Ukraine and its people until they secure a just and lasting peace on their land.

I too begin by thanking Mr. Ebo for his briefing. It is unfortunate that the Russian Federation continues to request repeated meetings on this topic in an attempt to distract the international community’s focus with a narrative that distorts reality. Malta continues to condemn the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine. We reiterate Ukraine’s inherent right to defend itself as enshrined in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations and to rely on its allies in doing so. Just this week, the Russian Federation continued to intensify its missile and drone attacks in a number of Ukrainian regions. Those attacks included the complete destruction of a hotel in Kryvyi Rih, drone attacks in Zaporizhzhya and a large attack with missiles and drones on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. For months, Ukraine’s electricity grid has faced repeated Russian missile and drone attacks resulting in the destruction of approximately half of the country’s generating capacity. The continued and intensified attacks affecting civilians and civilian infrastructure are deeply concerning. Malta reiterates the need to adhere to international humanitarian law. The principles of proportionality and distinction, as well as the special protections afforded to children, must be adhered to at all times in order to reduce the risk of harm to civilians. Regrettably, the humanitarian situation continues to deteriorate. According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), more than 14.6 million people require some form of humanitarian assistance. We take this opportunity to also thank OCHA and other humanitarian actors who responded immediately after the massive attacks on Ukraine that were conducted this week. Malta is equally concerned about recent reports related to the use of cluster munitions and widespread contamination with mines and explosive remnants of war. Protecting the people of Ukraine and ensuring recovery from the devastation caused by Russia’s war requires that demining happen without delay. We stress once again the need for full accountability for all crimes committed by Russia in Ukraine. We also support the ongoing work of the International Criminal Court and the Register of Damage for Ukraine. In conclusion, Malta reiterates that there is only one path to a comprehensive, just and lasting peace and an end to the suffering inflicted on Ukrainians. That is for Russia to immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all its troops and military equipment from the entire territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. Until that day comes, Ukraine has the right to defend itself against the aggression, as well as protect its very existence as an independent and sovereign country.

I wish to thank Director Ebo for his briefing. Let me make a couple of points on behalf of my delegation. First, weapons transfers to conflict areas are an important topic for my country, and it is important that the Security Council address them in the framework of conflict prevention and with a view to protecting civilians. An inadequately controlled supply of arms to parties to armed conflict has the potential to facilitate violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. At the same time, it can hamper the delivery of life-saving humanitarian aid. However, it strikes us that we are approaching the discussions on weapons transfers pertaining to the war in Ukraine from the wrong end. Weapons transfers to Ukraine are not happening in a vacuum; they support the legitimate self-defence efforts of a sovereign country. Secondly, Slovenia rejects aggression in absolute terms. We will not stand idly by while a whole sovereign country is being reduced to rubble by its larger neighbour; while civilians are being killed, maimed and arbitrarily detained; and while ballistic missiles and drones are hitting children’s hospitals and critical energy infrastructure. We deplore any attempt to undermine the right to self-defence. Every country has a right to defend itself, in line with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, and also has a right to procure the means to do so, in line with international law. Slovenia will do its part and will keep supporting Ukraine until there is no aggressor on its soil.

I thank Mr. Ebo for his briefing. Since calling this meeting and accusing the West of escalation, Russia has bombarded cities across 15 regions of sovereign Ukraine  — more than half of the country  — using hundreds of drones, cruise missiles, hypersonic ballistic missiles, glide bombs and more, some of which were procured from Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, in violation of Security Council resolutions. Moscow’s intent is to terrorize the civilian population in Ukraine into submission. The most recent attacks have caused widespread blackouts, cutting off access for ordinary people to power, heating and water. Representatives should imagine that happening to their country Direct attacks on civilian infrastructure constitute a war crime. Ukraine has a right to defend itself, under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, against Russia’s attacks. That does not preclude its right to project force into Russian territory, so long as any action complies with international law. Russia cannot step up the war from its own soil, while increasing attacks on civilian infrastructure, and expect Ukraine not to seek to remove the source of the threat. We will continue to provide Ukraine with the capabilities it needs to defend its people. Neither the United Kingdom nor its partners seek direct confrontation with Russia, nor a wider escalation of tensions. Let me be clear. There is only one aggressor here. It was Russia that willingly and deliberately tore into the security of Europe by illegally invading a sovereign country. It was Russia that unilaterally sought to annex a neighbour’s land, against every principle the international system and all of us here rely upon. It was Russia that chose to use hypersonic missiles and other advanced weaponry against civilians and their infrastructure. And it was Russia, at the start of the war, that chose to illegally seize the largest nuclear power plant in Europe at Zaporizhzhya, even recklessly installed military equipment in the turbine hall and on reactor roofs. Russian disinformation and threats and false accusations will not deter the United Kingdom or its allies from their steadfast support for Ukraine, including providing it with the capabilities it needs to defend its people. We remain committed to securing a just and lasting peace for Ukraine and for Europe, in line with the Charter of the United Nations.

I would like to thank Mr. Ebo for his briefing. Russia claims to be concerned about the risk of escalation in Ukraine, and yet it holds all the cards to prevent such a scenario. All it has to do is cease its aggression and withdraw from the internationally recognized territory of Ukraine. With these repeated meetings, Russia would have us believe that support for Ukraine is fuelling the escalation. No one is fooled. The support from the international community frustrates Russia because it stands in the way of Russia’s plans and prevents it from annexing the territory of a sovereign State; changing its borders by force, in violation of the Charter of the United Nations; dictating its foreign and defence policy; hitting civilian infrastructure and depriving a population of water, gas and electricity. Russia has shown that it understands only the balance of power. Last Tuesday, the Russian representative referred to the so-called “peace proposal” put forward by President Putin in June, which sets Ukraine’s total surrender and its abandonment of its sovereignty and territorial integrity as conditions for talks. France will continue to provide Ukraine the military support it needs to protect its airspace, land and population, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter. Russia is attacking Ukraine in the border regions from military sites behind the Russian border. The Ukrainians must be able to adapt to strike the sites from which Russia is carrying out its aggression. It must be able to neutralize the military targets directly involved in the operations against it. That is Ukraine exercising its right to self-defence, which is not limited to Ukrainian territory. Ukraine’s fight to defend the purposes and principles of the Charter is supported by the overwhelming majority of the Members of the United Nations. Russia, on the other hand, obtains its arms, ballistic missiles and munitions from North Korea, unscrupulously undermining the international non-proliferation regime that guarantees our collective security. To cover up its violations of the Council’s resolutions, Russia did not hesitate to get rid of an inconvenient witness, the Panel of Experts of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1718 (2006), thus depriving the States Members of the United Nations of an essential source of information on the implementation of sanctions against North Korea. Russia chose to acquire armed drones from Iran, in violation of resolution 2231 (2015). If Iran were to transfer ballistic missiles to Russia, we are ready to respond rapidly and in a coordinated fashion, including by taking further far-reaching measures. France urges all States to refrain from supplying Russia with dual-use goods and components that could feed its war of aggression. There is no other way to get Russia to stop its war than to give resolute military support to Ukraine. The surrender of the aggressee cannot be a condition for peace negotiations. In any case, it will never be the basis for a just and lasting peace that upholds international law, which is the only way to restore enduring regional security and stability.

At the outset, I would like to thank Mr. Ebo for his briefing. Two and a half years have passed since the beginning of the crisis in Ukraine. As we meet once again today, no peaceful solution seems to be on track. The situation on the ground is even worsening daily on both sides of the border, with more casualties and more suffering among civilians. Algeria reiterates its deep concern about the continued confrontation and once again calls on the parties to exert restraint, preserve lives and prevent further escalation. In that regard, I would like to make three points today. First, we reiterate our deep concern about the use of increasingly lethal and destructive weapons and ammunition in conflict zones in Ukrainian and Russian territories. An influx of arms to conflict zones can lead only to greater loss of life and prolonged suffering for civilians. It also inevitably increases tensions and dashes hopes of reaching a peaceful solution. Secondly, it is critical for the parties to respect their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law. Targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure is unacceptable under any circumstances and is prohibited by international humanitarian law. We therefore reiterate our call to abandon the logic of confrontation and to prioritize the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure. Alleviating the suffering of civilians should be the top priority for all parties. Finally, a real opportunity should be given to holding an inclusive and constructive dialogue, and there is no room for polarization. Diplomacy must assume a leading role by pooling all efforts in order to reach a peaceful settlement to the dispute. In conclusion, it is our firm conviction that a just and lasting peace, on the basis of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, that also takes into account the legitimate security concerns of all parties is the only key to resolving the conflict.

I thank Mr. Ebo, Director of the Office for Disarmament Affairs for his briefing. As we all know, Russia started this war by invading Ukraine in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations. Russia’s alleged concern that United Nations Member States are helping Ukraine defend itself is nothing short of absurd. If Russia would like to have a discussion on the risks resulting from weapons transfers, then let us have a real one. As Russia deploys chemical weapons on the battlefield and continues to kill civilians and destroy Ukrainian critical infrastructure, Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and China are providing Russia with the material support it needs to wage its war of choice. First, I would like to talk about Iran, the world’s leading State sponsor of terrorism. Iran is fuelling Russia’s aggression with direct military support, providing lethal weapons, which the Kremlin is using with devastating effect against Ukrainian civilians and infrastructure. Just a few days ago, on the anniversary of Ukraine’s independence from the Soviet Union, Russia reportedly used approximately 100 Shahed uncrewed aerial vehicle systems (UAVs) and glide bombs in a major attack targeting critical infrastructure throughout Ukraine, including the electricity grid, power plants and natural gas facilities. Russia procures or produces these UAVs thanks to its partnership with Iran. We remain seriously concerned about the consequences of Iran potentially transferring ballistic missiles and related technology to Russia. If Iran were to move forward with the transfer of ballistic missiles to Russia, it would represent a dramatic escalation and a serious risk to international peace and security. Iran’s support for Russia’s war of aggression threatens European security and illustrates how Iran’s destabilizing influence reaches beyond the Middle East and around the world. Then there are the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s arms transfers. In its attacks this past weekend, Russia fired at least six possible North Korean-supplied ballistic missiles. Since late December 2023, Russia has fired upwards of 65 North Korean-supplied ballistic missiles on Ukraine. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has unlawfully transferred dozens of ballistic missiles and more than 16,500 containers of munitions and munitions-related materiel to Russia, prolonging the suffering of the Ukrainian people. Russia’s procurement of ballistic missiles from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea violates the United Nations arms embargo on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that Russia itself supported in the Council. Moscow’s military cooperation with Pyongyang is cynical and dangerous. The Kremlin shields the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea from United Nations scrutiny of its unlawful nuclear and ballistic missile development programmes in exchange for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s material support to Russia’s war of choice. By doing so, Russia undermines the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of non-proliferation, the importance of which Russia used to recognize. Let me also address the significant support Russia receives from China and the two countries’ so-called no-limits strategic partnership, which props up Russia’s defence industrial base and enables it to continue an illegal war against Ukraine. China is exporting to Russia nitrocellulose, machine tools, microelectronics, optics, and uncrewed aerial vehicle and cruise-missile technology that Russia deploys in its attacks against civilians and Ukraine’s infrastructure. We have seen a massive build-up of Russia’s weaponry over the last year and a half, including tanks, missiles and munitions, all fuelled by China’s dual-use imports. China cannot have it both ways: it cannot claim to be for peace and want better relations with Europe while at the same time fuelling the most significant threat to European security since the end of the cold war. If the Russian Federation were serious about international peace and security, rather than wasting our time in this venue with bad faith arguments and counter-accusations steeped in disinformation, the Kremlin would have agreed to participate in Ukraine’s second peace summit earlier this year. I would also like to point out the falsehood in Russia’s narrative that “Western” countries support Ukraine. In fact, countries that stand with the democratically elected Government of Ukraine in defence of the Charter of the United Nations principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity represent all geographical regions of the globe, not just Western countries. The United States will continue to stand with those countries. We will continue to call for justice for the victims of the Kremlin’s war of aggression and accountability for those responsible. And we will continue to call out those who enable Russia in its brutal war of aggression against the people of Ukraine. And finally, I would just like to add a response to a comment that was made by the representative of the Russian Federation. Russia  — as we have all heard, many, many, many times  — claims that the West is trying to weaken Russia. The West is not weakening Russia. However, through its use of chemical weapons, its war of aggression against Ukraine, its use of Wagner forces to terrorize Africans, its nuclear sabre-rattling, its interference in democratic elections around the globe and its support for terror groups in the Middle East, Russia is doing an excellent job of that all by itself.

I thank Mr. Ebo, Deputy to the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, for his briefing. As a global community, we are bound by a body of rules and principles that we have undertaken to observe. They include the Charter of the United Nations — which lays down the principles for living in peace and good neighbourliness and enshrines the prohibition of the use of force, the right to self-defence and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States — and the Geneva Conventions, which seek to mitigate the horrors of war by establishing minimum humanitarian standards to be followed in armed conflict. Two days ago, we met to discuss the political and security situation in Ukraine (see S/PV.9714). We underscore that the gravity of the current situation, the heightened tensions and the suffering of the Ukrainian population, as well as that of the Russian population for that matter, are a direct result of Russia’s military aggression. We condemn that military aggression and object to any attempt at shirking that responsibility. Allow me to also point out that Ukraine is entitled to ensure its security and defend its territorial integrity and sovereignty. In the light of the continuing hostilities, two key messages come to the fore: First, it is imperative to bring the protracted war to an end. Secondly, it is unacceptable that civilians continue to pay the price for it. From the outset, we have called on Russia to end its military aggression and withdraw its troops from Ukrainian territory. It is alarming that, despite those repeated calls by the overwhelming majority of the General Assembly and by the International Court of Justice, the military aggression continues, compounded by arms and ammunition transfers to Russia from third parties in clear contravention of the obligations arising from the Council’s resolutions. I repeat that States must live up to and abide by the obligations incumbent upon them under international arms control instruments. As to the protection of civilians, Switzerland expresses its profound concern and sorrow at the many lives lost, the many wounded and the immense suffering — wherever it occurs — caused by the military aggression. Our position in that regard is firmly rooted in international humanitarian and human rights law. We remind all parties to the conflict to put the protection of civilians and of those no longer participating in the hostilities first. As one of the signatories to the Geneva Convention said in his address in 1949, we now know that war never resolves the problems that gave rise to it and is invariably followed by long years of suffering by the vanquished and that, in the eyes of the victors, the outcome is never commensurate with the harm it begets. I must underline that it is our collective responsibility to ensure that the principles to which we committed ourselves are upheld so as to chart a course to a more peaceful and a fairer world, including in Ukraine.

I thank Director Ebo for the briefing. I am wondering how many times Russia will continue to repeat the same rhetoric. It consistently propagates the claim that Ukraine’s defence efforts, along with the international community’s support for those efforts, threaten international peace and security. However, Russia did not call for this Security Council meeting on its own initiative. Instead, it requests such meetings out of spite whenever someone else requests them. This behaviour mocks the Security Council. Russia speaks of peace and de-escalation while simultaneously conducting large scale air raids, including on Kyiv. Today’s meeting represents another instance of such mockery, yet it comes as no surprise. Russia’s hypocrisy is nothing new. Violations of the Charter of the United Nations, disregard for international humanitarian law and breaches of Security Council resolutions persist. Russia has also procured missiles from North Korea in violation of the relevant Council resolutions and refused to renew the mandate of the Panel of Experts, which had played a crucial role in monitoring the implementation of the resolutions. Russia employs any means necessary to continue its illegal actions. Despite being a permanent member of the Security Council, entrusted with the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and stability, Russia abuses its position, using the Council as a platform for disinformation. Today it is deliberately confusing the victim and the aggressor, falsely suggesting that efforts to defend against an unprovoked war of aggression are the cause of prolonged conflict and delayed peace. That stance is entirely unacceptable. However, no matter how much Russia tries to mislead the world, no reasonable person would believe its narrative, and we are united in affirming that its aggression against Ukraine constitutes nothing but a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter — nothing more, nothing less. Upholding the international order based on the Charter remains of utmost importance for every country in the world, yet Russia clearly does not share that belief. Russia may believe there is no way out but to continue its reckless attempts to distort the facts. However, I would like to say to my Russian colleagues, there is a way out: withdraw immediately to the internationally recognized border of Ukraine. That is the action required to achieve peace now. They should end their sophistry in the Security Council, abide by international law, respect the sovereignty of other countries and stop their war of aggression.

I thank Mr. Adedeji Ebo, Director and Deputy to the High Representative of the Office for Disarmament Affairs, for his briefing. Ecuador has maintained a clear position on this issue. In that vein, we support the recommendations put forward once again by the Deputy High Representative on the measures necessary to mitigate the risks arising from the increasing influx of arms and ammunition. Ecuador reiterates the importance of the transfer of arms and ammunition being carried out strictly within the applicable international legal framework and in full compliance with the relevant Security Council resolutions. Ecuador recognizes that the introduction of weapons and ammunition into conflict zones might contribute to escalation and creates risks that persist beyond the cessation of hostilities. We therefore consider it essential to take effective measures to mitigate the risk of the diversion, illicit trafficking and misuse of arms and ammunition, in order to prevent further instability and insecurity in Ukraine and the region, including during the post-conflict recovery phase. Ecuador is particularly concerned that, as hostilities intensify and the battlefield expands, the window is closing for dialogue and negotiation. The indiscriminate use of weapons in urban areas, attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure and the proliferation of munitions such as anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions are clear examples of how violence is wreaking irreparable havoc on the civilian population, something that Ecuador cannot fail to reject. It is imperative that the parties to the conflict reconsider their actions and make a genuine political commitment to end this war. History has shown that no conflict has been resolved sustainably by military means. The world cannot afford a conflict of greater proportions. My delegation reiterates its call for an end to the violence, an end to the illegal occupation and the resumption of dialogue and diplomacy, which will make it possible to restore peace, within the framework of respect for the territorial integrity and political independence of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. In conclusion, Ecuador recognizes the sovereign right of States to self-defence, which must be strictly framed by the provisions of Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.

I thank Director Adedeji Ebo for his briefing. The war in Ukraine continues to be a matter of the utmost concern, with recent developments serving to highlight the gravity and escalating nature of this conflict and the urgent need for international attention. The persistent cycle of reciprocal aggression has been a constant feature since the war’s inception. It reflects a dangerous spiral that threatens broader international peace and stability. The protracted war in Ukraine, marked by a relentless arms race, serves as a stark reminder of the fragile balance, which could swiftly deteriorate into a wider European conflagration. We observe with great apprehension that each announcement of major weapons supplies is met with threats of further escalation, propelling us towards critical thresholds, or red lines, including the involvement of nuclear Powers and the drawing of additional countries into the conflict. It is imperative to acknowledge that violence begets violence, and arms transfers inevitably trigger further arms transfers and military alliances, creating a perilous cycle. What began as a localized, bilateral conflict is now dangerously morphing into a multilateral conflagration, pulling in actors both near and far from the battlefield. We should recognize that such an expansion poses a severe threat to global stability. We have consistently warned that the pursuit of strategic advantage and favourable concessions before engaging in dialogue, which is the permeating logic in this conflict, will likely lead to further escalation rather than de-escalation. To prevent this war from becoming entrenched and to avert a protracted stalemate, we urgently call for, first, adherence to strict arms controls in line with applicable international arms trade frameworks; secondly, a recommitment to diplomatic engagement and de-escalation efforts, focusing on avenues for negotiation and conflict resolution, including direct dialogue between the primary belligerents, with the support of international stakeholders acceptable to both; and thirdly, the implementation of confidence-building measures to reduce direct confrontations between the warring parties, creating the necessary space for diplomatic efforts to take root and prevent the conflict from reaching a point of no return. Ultimately, the decision to escalate or expand this conflict depends on the parties involved. Nevertheless, it is crucial to emphasize the importance of diplomacy, dialogue and adherence to international law in resolving disputes. In that regard, the international community, including the Security Council, as well as influential leaders play a vital role in facilitating peaceful resolutions and preventing further escalation. The stakes are too high, and the consequences of inaction too severe, to allow this conflict to persist unchecked. In conclusion, Mozambique, reiterates its appeal for a negotiated political solution as the only viable path to end this conflict and lay the foundation for lasting and sustainable peace between the two neighbouring countries.

I wish to thank Mr. Adedeji Ebo for his briefing. As the crisis in Ukraine continues unabated, large quantities of weapons and ammunition are flowing into the battlefield in more variety and scope and with greater lethality and destructive power, leading to growing risks of losses and the proliferation of weapons. Such a situation is deeply worrisome. There are no simple solutions to complex issues. Increased weapon supplies to the battlefield will cause only more harm and will not bring about sustained peace. The continued advocation of bloc confrontations will only further exacerbate the crisis and make the road to peace even rockier. China believes that the important thing to do now is to adhere to the three principles of no expansion of the battlefield, no escalation in the fighting and no  provocation  by any party, so as to de-escalate the situation as soon as possible. We call on the parties to the conflict to demonstrate political will, meet each other halfway, reach a ceasefire and an end to fighting and start peace talks at an early date. To that end, we call on the international community to create favourable conditions and provide practical assistance. All the parties concerned should accord priority to peace and humanitarian concerns by devoting their resources and energy to diplomatic efforts for a ceasefire and an end to the fighting. China’s position on the issue of Ukraine is consistent and clear, that is, to promote peace talks and a political settlement. We will continue to uphold an objective and impartial position, maintain close communication with all the parties, promote broader consensus in the international community and make unremitting efforts for an early political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. I wish to respond to what was just said by the representative of the United States. China did not create the Ukraine crisis, and neither is it a party to it. China has not provided weapons to any party to the conflict, and China has always strictly controlled our dual-use items. Chinese enterprises carry out their normal economic and trade cooperation with countries around the world, including Russia and Ukraine, in accordance with the rules of the World Trade Organization and market principles. They are reasonable, legitimate and beyond reproach. As a matter of fact, the United States also maintains trade and economic relations with Russia. The most urgent task for the international community right now is to promote a ceasefire to stop the war and realize peace. China has been speaking out for peace and calling for all efforts to that end. However, the United States has not only turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to China’s efforts to promote peace, but it has continued to spread lies in the Security Council and to smear China on the issue of Ukraine, which China firmly opposes and absolutely will not accept. Our advice to the United States is that, if it truly wants to put an end to the war, it should make efforts together with the countries concerned, including China, instead of shirking its responsibilities and creating confrontations.

I thank Director Ebo for the briefing and recognize the presence of the Permanent Representative of Mali at today’s meeting. Guyana joins fellow Council members in expressing grave concern about the devastating impacts of the ongoing conflict and the dire humanitarian situation that has arisen in Ukraine as a result of the hostilities. The rising civilian death toll and the continued targeting of civilian objects point to an almost wilful disregard for the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law, principles that underline the responsibility of any party to an armed conflict to behave in a manner consistent with military necessity, humanity and proportionality. Guyana condemns all attacks targeting civilians and civilian objects. We demand that the parties comply fully with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law. We also call for safe and unhindered humanitarian access to all populations in need, including in the occupied regions. Two days ago, we heard from Assistant Secretary- General Jenča (see S/PV.9714) that July was the deadliest month for civilians in two and a half years of armed conflict in Ukraine. According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, over 11,000 civilians have been killed, including 639 children. Over 24,000 people have been injured, including over 1,500 children. Most civilian casualties were caused either using explosive weapons with wide area effects in populated areas or mines and explosive remnants of war. Yet we continue to receive reports of the transfer, or planned transfer, of weapons with the capacity to inflict even deadlier and more indiscriminate damage. Guyana shares Mr. Ebo’s concern about the risk of the diversion of weapons and ammunition transferred to the conflict area. As stated many times in this Chamber, the supply of weapons and ammunition into any armed conflict can escalate or prolong the violence and increase the risk of their diversion. Guyana and other countries in the Latin American and Caribbean region know only too well about the deadly impact of the diversion of weapons, especially small arms and light weapons and their ammunition. They account for the majority of homicides in our countries and play a central role in all aspects of transnational organized crime, leading to profound socioeconomic impact and human cost. In other regions, that challenge may be even greater. Guyana therefore continues to urge due caution in ensuring that all transfers are transparent and within the international legal framework and include provisions for controls to prevent their irregular transfer. We also echo the call for all involved to comply fully with the provisions of international disarmament instruments and to ensure that weapons and ammunition transfers do not violate those instruments or Security Council resolutions. Moreover, we maintain that the only effective means of preventing any further escalation or instability in Ukraine and the broader region is to end this war and to end it through peaceful means. We therefore call upon the Russian Federation to withdraw its military forces from the internationally recognized territory of Ukraine, and we urge the parties to commit to a political and diplomatic process towards ending the conflict.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Sierra Leone. I thank Mr. Adedeji Ebo for his briefing. I acknowledge the presence of the representative of Mali at this meeting. We take note of the call by the Russian Federation to discuss the risks of spiralling escalation resulting from the increasing weapons transfers by the Western countries to Ukraine. At the outset, Sierra Leone reiterates its principled position that all transfers of weapons in conflict situations should occur within the applicable international legal framework and the relevant Security Council resolutions and include pre-transfer risk assessments and end-user verification to prevent the diversion of arms and ammunition. Sierra Leone is of the view that the conflict in Ukraine has been experiencing a dramatic escalation since March of this year. While the increase in the intensity of conflict in the east and south-east of Ukraine since the start of the conflict is a vertical escalation, the opening of a new front in the Kharkiv region, to the north-east, in May 2024 marked the beginning of a horizontal escalation. The counter-offensive launched by Ukraine since 6 August in the Kursk region in Russia continues to increase that horizontal escalation. The consequences of that escalation have been devastating, with an intensification of missile and drone strikes causing increased civilian deaths, injuries and displacements. In addition, energy infrastructure and other civilian infrastructure, including schools and hospitals, have been destroyed, with reports of more than 900 schools, hospitals, churches and other institutions being damaged or destroyed as of June. It is important to note that, given that we have commemorated the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Geneva Conventions, it is worth recalling that those sites are protected under the Geneva Conventions. Against that backdrop, and with no seeming end to the conflict in sight, Sierra Leone stresses that the conflict evinces a vicious cycle with the risk of escalation likely to persist. In that regard, Sierra Leone is deeply concerned about the security and humanitarian situation in Ukraine, which continues to deteriorate at an alarming rate. According to a protection of civilians update report released on 9 August by the Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine, it is recorded that 35,160 civilian casualties, including 11,520 deaths, have occurred since the conflict began on 24 February 2022. The report highlights that, in July alone, at least 219 civilians were killed and 1,018 injured in Ukraine, making it the deadliest month for civilians since October 2022. According to the report, the high casualty count in July is a continuation of a trend of increasing civilian casualties since March 2024. The alarming civilian casualty figures and the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine due to the escalation serves to underscore the urgent need for all parties to the conflict to prioritize the protection of civilians and refrain from further escalation and the pursuit of the option of winning the war on the battlefield at all costs. Dialogue and diplomacy should be the primary tools employed to de-escalate tensions and pave the way for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. The international community, including the Council, must remain steadfast in its commitment to supporting the pursuit of a just and sustainable peace in Ukraine. Sierra Leone once more calls for good-faith diplomatic efforts in pursuit of a peaceful resolution involving the parties to the conflict. Meaningful steps must be taken towards immediate de-escalation and a cessation of the hostilities. We urge the parties to the conflict to engage constructively, including on their legitimate concerns, to find a political and diplomatic solution as envisaged in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations. In conclusion, Sierra Leone calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities and genuine diplomatic efforts to achieve a peaceful and lasting resolution to the conflict, while taking into account the legitimate concerns of the parties involved. I now resume my functions as President of the Council. The representative of the United States has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

I will be brief. I will just say, as I have said many times in this Chamber, that I will continue to call out those countries, including China, that provide support to Russia’s industrial base. I will cease those calls when that support terminates.

The representative of China has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

The statement by the United States representative was repetitive and had nothing new in it. On the question of Ukraine, we would like to advise the United States to make concrete efforts to promote peace talks and defuse the conflict, rather than speaking loftily. We hope the United States representative will cease this useless blame game in the Chamber and stop barking up the wrong tree.

The representative of the Russian Federation has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

Since our American colleague keeps posing the question about who is threatening world peace and decides to accuse various States, I would just like to counsel him to look more often in the mirror he most likely has at home, and then he will get a clear answer to his question.

The representative of the United States has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

I will be equally brief regarding the remarks just made by the representative of the Russian Federation. I would simply point out that he just reinforced all the points I made in my earlier statement. I have nothing more to say.

I now give the floor to the representative of Mali.

I am pleased, on the eve of the end of Sierra Leone’s presidency of the Security Council, to express to you, Sir, and to the rest of your delegation my hearty congratulations on your outstanding work during the month of August. Mali asked to participate in this meeting mainly to share its major concerns about the implications and consequences of the flow of weapons into Ukraine on countries and peoples far from the front line between Russia and Ukraine. As members know, since the outbreak of the crisis between Russia and Ukraine, the Government of Mali has adopted a position of neutrality. However, we are increasingly concerned to see that the crisis is gradually being transferred to regions far from the front, as we saw last July in Mali, and therefore in the Sahel, and even in Africa. Indeed, the spokesperson of Ukraine’s military intelligence agency and the Ambassador of Ukraine to Senegal publicly and plainly confessed their country’s involvement in the cowardly, treacherous and barbaric attacks on 24, 25 and 26 July by terrorist groups that caused the deaths of elements of the Malian Defence and Security Forces in Tinzawatène, Mali, including significant material damage. Worse yet, those senior Ukrainian officials have publicly announced other “results” to come. That is worrisome to us. The Government of Mali reiterates its strong condemnation of Ukraine’s presumed support for terrorist formations in Mali, the Sahel and Africa as a whole. We have decided to break diplomatic relations between Mali and Ukraine. Mali calls on the Security Council to assume its responsibilities in the face of this deliberate choice by Ukraine, in order to prevent such subversive acts that threaten the stability of the Sahel and even the African continent. In view of this unfortunate precedent that I have just condemned, the Government of Mali expresses its deep concern about the issue of the supply of weapons to Ukraine, as it is now established that a large portion of those weapons supplied to Ukraine is fuelling terrorism and crime in the Sahel, with the risk of further destabilizing our countries and aggravating the suffering of our populations, already tested by several years of conflicts with dramatic consequences. We therefore call on the countries supplying weapons to Ukraine to ensure that those weapons do not fall into the hands of terrorist and extremist groups in the Sahel and Africa. For its part, Mali does not want to become a theatre of covetousness or battle between Powers. I would like to take this opportunity to respond to the Ambassador of Algeria who, during the round table on the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Geneva Conventions on the law of war held on 26 August in Switzerland, saw fit to declare that he had “learned that a drone has carried out a strike in northern Mali, killing about 20 civilians. Those who pressed the controller of that drone are not accountable to anyone for those strikes”. In response, I would like to express my great surprise at seeing a diplomat make such a serious and unfounded assertion, based on mere allegations in the press. By breezily peddling that unverified press information, he relays terrorist propaganda in our region. For my part, I would like to remind my Algerian colleague that the Malian Defence and Security Forces are professional forces waging a relentless fight against terrorist groups, in strict compliance with human rights and international humanitarian law, in order to liberate our territory and protect populations and property. What is the reality? On 25 August the Malian Defence and Security Forces conducted offensive reconnaissance operations that spotted pick-up vehicles loaded with war material, carefully guarded at a facility in the locality of Tinzaouatène, north-east of Kidal. After careful surveillance, the Malian Defence and Security Forces carried out a series of strikes, which destroyed those terrorist targets and neutralized about 20 armed men. As the Ambassador of Algeria, my dear brother Amar, will note, it was indeed terrorists that Mali’s forces neutralized on 25 August, not civilians. I therefore invite him to adopt a more constructive and respectful attitude towards Mali and its people, in accordance with the centuries-old relations of good- neighbourliness, fraternity, friendship and cooperation that have always existed between Mali and Algeria.

The representative of Algeria has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

To quickly respond to the statement by the Permanent Representative of Mali, first of all, there was a reference to a statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Algeria in Geneva in the context of a meeting on the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law. The Ambassador’s intervention was very clear in its context. However, there is a need now to repeat and clarify to the representative of Mali the content of that statement and its purposes. This clarification covers the past, present and future. As everyone knows, history attests to the role of Algeria with regard to its neighbours and brothers in Mali, namely, that there was never a time when my country intended any harm to the State of Mali. We emphasize the need to distinguish between terrorist acts and acts of legitimate resistance. It was a very clear statement that no one must doubt the international definition of terrorism. Algeria’s efforts and experience in counter- terrorism are well-known: under no circumstance has Algeria played a role in encouraging terrorism. Also, to quickly respond to the statement by the representative of Mali, I stress that Algeria has always pursued — and continues to pursue — what serves the interests of the people of Mali and all components of the neighbour State of Mali. Time will reveal if what the neighbours in the State of Mali believe is true. We do not intervene in Mali’s decision-making or choices. Suffice it to say that time will address everything that has been mentioned today.

Before adjourning the meeting, as this is the last scheduled meeting of the Council for the month of August, I would like to express the sincere appreciation of the delegation of Sierra Leone to the members of the Council and to the secretariat of the Council for all the support they have given us. Indeed, it has been a busy month and one in which we rallied to consensus on several important issues within our purview. We could not have done it alone and without the hard work, support and the positive contributions of every delegation and the representatives of the Secretariat, including the technical support team, interpreters, conference service officers, verbatim reporters and security staff. As we end our presidency, I know I speak on behalf of the Council in wishing the delegation of Slovenia good luck in the month of September.