S/PV.9786 Security Council

The representative of France has asked for the floor.

The situation in the Sudan is tragic. France fully supports the draft resolution (S/2024/826) proposed by the United Kingdom and thanks it for it. I believe that it is crucial that the draft resolution be adopted. As I speak, I have the impression that the conditions have not fully come together to that end. I therefore suggest that the Council now move to consultations in order to ensure that the draft resolution can be adopted.

In the light of the comments by the representative of France, I propose that we temporarily suspend the meeting to resolve the matter and that Council members reconvene in the Consultations Room for further discussion. There being no objections, it is so decided.

In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representative of the Sudan to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. Members of the Council have before them document S/2024/826, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by Sierra Leone and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 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 14 votes in favour, 1 against and no abstentions. The draft resolution has not been adopted, owing to the negative vote of a permanent member of the Council. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs of the United Kingdom. For over 18 months, Sudanese civilians have endured unimaginable violence. We have seen and heard the testimony  — atrocities driven by ethnic hatred; sexual violence, including mass rape; children abducted and recruited as soldiers in this horror; aid workers attacked; essential supplies blocked; and homes, schools and hospitals destroyed and looted. This suffering is a scar on the collective conscience, on a scale, frankly, that is hard to comprehend. In the face of that horror, the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone, working in partnership, sought to bring the Council together to address the humanitarian emergency and catastrophe to protect civilians, ensure aid access and call for a ceasefire. One country stood in the way of the Council speaking with one voice. One country is the blocker. One country is the enemy of peace. This Russian veto is a disgrace, and it shows to the world yet again Russia’s true colours. Shame on Putin for waging a war of aggression in Ukraine; shame on Putin for using his mercenaries to spread conflict and violence across the African continent; and shame on Putin for pretending to be a partner of the global South, while condemning black Africans to further killing, further rape and further starvation in a brutal war. I ask the Russian represented in all conscience, sitting there on his phone: How many more Sudanese have to be killed? How many more women have to be raped? How many more children have to go without food before Russia will act? Russia will have to explain itself to the entire United Nations membership now. While Britain doubles aid, Russia blocks aid access. While Britain works with our African partners, Russia vetoes their will. We submitted the draft resolution (S/2024/826) to show the Sudanese people and the world that they are not forgotten. This text would have called on parties to agree to humanitarian pauses to ensure the safe passage and get aid to where it is needed. It would have galvanized support for local groups that are taking unimaginable risks to protect their communities. And it would have increased pressure on the warring parties to agree to a ceasefire by supporting mediation efforts. Russia’s mean, nasty and cynical veto today sends a message to the warring parties that they can now act with impunity and that they could ignore their commitments and responsibilities to protect their own people. Let me be clear: I will not stop calling for more action to protect the people of the Sudan. I will not stop calling for more aid. I will not stop working with our partners in Africa and around the world to help. The United Kingdom will not forget the Sudan. I resume my functions as President of the Council. I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements.

We acknowledge the significance of co-penning this important draft resolution (S/2024/826) with the United Kingdom and commend the United Kingdom for the diligent and tireless efforts in the negotiations on the draft resolution, including to widely consult us as the co-penholder. However, Sierra Leone regrets that the draft resolution, on the protection of civilians in the Sudan, was not adopted, despite genuine efforts made to reach consensus among Member States. Sierra Leon co-penned the draft resolution not only to respond to the devastating situation for civilians in the Sudan, but also due to the parallels between the violence and international humanitarian law violations in the Sudan and our challenging experience during our civil conflict, particularly the devastating impacts on women and children. We recall the Security Council’s 1999 decision (resolution 1270 (1999)) to confer upon the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone the protection of civilians mandate in Sierra Leone, marking a turning point in our conflict and ultimately leading to the Lomé Peace Agreement. Let us be clear. The draft resolution did not mandate troop deployment in the Sudan, in line with the Secretary-General’s assessment. It, however, would have conveyed solidarity and established mechanisms to prevent further atrocities. Sierra Leone will continue to work with other Council members to achieve a product that protects civilians from the ongoing human rights violations in the Sudan. As a Member State and an elected member of the Council that has endured civil conflict, we were compelled by the moral imperative to advocate for civilians in the Sudan. We continue to call on all parties to cease hostilities, engage in dialogue and commit to a Sudanese-led inclusive political process, as emphasized by the Secretary-General. Finally, we reaffirm our support for the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for the Sudan and the African Union High Level Panel on the Sudan in advancing a lasting peace through inclusive dialogue.

We commend Sierra Leone and the United Kingdom, as the co-penholders, for leading the Security Council to promote the protection of civilians in the Sudan by responding to the Secretary- General’s recommendations. Japan voted in favour of the draft resolution (S/2024/826) because we are gravely concerned about the prolonged dire humanitarian and human rights situation in the Sudan. We believe that the Security Council must fulfil its responsibility and take action in response to the tragedy as soon as possible. Japan engaged in the negotiations constructively. We therefore regret that the Security Council was unable to adopt the draft resolution, due to the use of the veto by Russia despite the Council members’ active diplomacy. Japan supports and encourages the Secretary- General and his Personal Envoy for the Sudan, Mr. Lamamra, to further engage the parties to the conflict, as well as the African Union and other key stakeholders. Japan’s Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa recently visited the Sudan and urged General Al-Burhan for a ceasefire and an improvement in humanitarian access. Japan would also like to stress the promotion of the safety, security and freedom of movement of all humanitarian personnel and commodities. To that end, Japan calls on the parties to the conflict to ensure full, rapid, safe, unhindered and sustained humanitarian access, including cross-border and cross-line activities. As Japan’s current term on the Security Council nears its end, we encourage our fellow remaining and incoming Council members to further develop concrete steps for the protection of civilians in the Sudan. In conclusion, I reiterate Japan’s strong commitment to the people of the Sudan. Japan will not leave them behind, as a responsible Member State, which unwaveringly supports human security and dignity.

I now call on the Federal Councillor and Head of the Federal Department for Foreign Affairs of Switzerland.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone, as co-penholders, in their efforts during the negotiations and to the members of the Security Council for their commitment. Switzerland voted in favour of the draft resolution (S/2024/826) on the protection of civilians in the Sudan and regrets that it was not adopted due to a veto cast by a permanent member of the Security Council. Millions of Sudanese women and men are suffering from the horrors of a war that has no end in sight and is leaving the country in ruins. Hundreds of thousands of people are suffering because of the horrific atrocities being committed by the Rapid Support Forces in El Gezira and the indiscriminate aerial bombardments by the Sudanese Armed Forces. The reports of sexual violence are appalling, while hunger rages across the country and kills in silence. In the context of continuing ethnic violence, we often hear warnings of the risks of genocide. The heavy toll paid by the civilian population is beyond all comprehension. As Switzerland has repeatedly underscored, their protection is not a choice; it is an obligation. We once again call on all parties to immediately cease hostilities and respect their obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law, as well as the commitments they made in Jeddah. There is no military solution to this conflict. It is imperative that the belligerents silence their weapons and put the interests of the Sudanese people first. In that regard, let me reiterate our strong support for the Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy in his ongoing diplomatic efforts. We remain at his disposal for any support he may require. I would also like to reiterate that, as a member of the Council, despite today’s veto, we have a responsibility to continue to give our full attention to resolving this catastrophic conflict. The Sudanese people deserve to live in peace, security and dignity.

The Republic of Korea deeply regrets that the critical draft resolution (S/2024/826) on the protection of civilians in the Sudan did not receive the support it needed to be adopted due to a veto by the Russian Federation. We voted in favour of the draft resolution because of the urgent need to protect civilians in the Sudan. We express our appreciation to the co-penholders, the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone, for their leadership. The draft resolution presented today was intended to send a strong and unequivocal message from the Security Council to the parties to the conflict in the Sudan. An immediate nationwide cessation of the hostilities is the most effective way to protect civilians in the Sudan. Regrettably, the continued reluctance of the Sudanese parties to engage in negotiations towards a ceasefire agreement reflects a misguided conviction that military supremacy can be achieved. That persistent stance exacerbates the suffering of civilians and prolongs the conflict. Unfortunately, we do not have a new resolution to call the parties to the conflict back to the negotiation table, but we once again urge both parties to the conflict to work expeditiously towards a robust, transparent mechanism to ensure that their commitments translate into meaningful progress on the ground. Moreover, while we welcome the decision by the Sudanese authorities to keep the Adré crossing open, we call on all parties to the conflict to take further steps, including the lifting of time restrictions, to facilitate unimpeded and sustained humanitarian assistance. Despite the failure to adopt this draft resolution today, it is imperative that the Security Council continue its collective efforts to end the conflict in the Sudan and prioritize the protection of civilians. We reaffirm our commitment to supporting those critical endeavours.

Malta thanks the co-penholders, the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone, for their extensive efforts on this draft resolution (S/2024/826). Malta deeply regrets that it was vetoed when it enjoyed the support of all other Security Council members. Malta voted in favour of this text, which requested the development of a compliance mechanism to facilitate the implementation of the commitments of the Jeddah Declaration of Commitment to Protect the Civilians of Sudan. The draft resolution reflected the Council’s persistent call since the onset of the violence in the Sudan for the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to immediately cease hostilities and for the two sides to honour and fully implement their commitments to protect civilians. We further demand that the RSF to immediately halt its attacks against civilians, particularly in Darfur, El Gezira and Sennar states. The continued assault by the RSF on El Fasher must stop. We also remind all Member States of their obligations under the sanctions regime established pursuant to resolution 1591 (2005). The draft resolution would have sent a strong message to the parties to urgently comply with their obligations under international law and ensure that civilians, civilian objects and humanitarian and medical personnel are not targeted. Women and girls continue to face deplorable levels of sexual and gender-based violence, while children continue to be the victims of violence and abuse. The perpetrators of such crimes and violations must be held accountable through transparent and independent accountability mechanisms. We also call on all parties to sustain the passage of humanitarian aid through all available cross-line and cross-border routes. In that regard, we welcome the recent decision by the Sudanese authorities to renew a three-month extension of the Adré border crossing. In conclusion, we will continue to support Personal Envoy Lamamra and encourage him to continue his coordination with the African Union and other partners. We remind all stakeholders of the indispensable role that women play at all levels and stages of dialogue and decision-making. Their work in advancing civilian protection needs and political mediation deserves our continued support.

Slovenia voted in favour of the draft resolution (S/2024/826). We extend our gratitude to Sierra Leone and the United Kingdom for the leadership on it. Our position on the alarming and still deteriorating situation in the Sudan has been consistent and clear. We have listened intently to the voices raised in the Chamber emphasizing the imperative not to let the people of the Sudan suffer in silence. Today’s vote reflects Slovenia’s commitment to addressing that urgent call. We firmly believe that the Security Council bears a responsibility to respond to the Sudanese people’s desperate pleas for protection, especially women and children. We profoundly regret that the veto was cast. The crisis in the Sudan demands not only the unwavering attention of the Council but, more critically, decisive and united action. This is not a matter of choice, but of responsibility. While the complexities of the situation are acknowledged, they must not be used as justification for inaction. Rather, they should drive us to act with greater urgency and determination for the Sudanese people. In our earlier statements, we recognized and commended the mediation efforts of regional and international actors. Today we reiterate our call for the Council to exhibit the same collective resolve. The relentless violence that the Sudanese people, in particular women and girls, are facing every day, and the widespread destruction and human suffering across the Sudan, compounded by ongoing clashes and, according to reports, ethnically targeted violations and abuses, are beyond comprehension. The humanitarian crisis continues to worsen, tragically marked by the world’s most severe, acute food insecurity crisis, a declared famine in Zamzam and fears of famine risks in other regions. That demands a more robust and sustained response. Multiple reports, including those from the Independent Fact-Finding Mission, detail widespread human rights violations. The horrifying accounts of sexual and gender-based violence, including conflict- related sexual violence, underscore the dire need for accountability. With limited monitoring mechanisms in place, we fear that the true extent of those crimes risks remaining in the shadows. Silence is not an option in the face of such egregious violations. The atrocities must not go unpunished, and justice must be pursued. Without justice, sustainable peace cannot be achieved. Parties to the conflict must respect international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Safe, rapid and unhindered access to humanitarian aid is essential across all parts of the Sudan. Access to food, water, healthcare and medical supplies must not only be ensured but also sustained and expanded. Slovenia remains unwavering in its commitment to supporting the people of the Sudan and advancing peace, security and justice throughout the country.

First and foremost, I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for the excellent demonstration of British neo-colonialism and snobbery, which is how your speech today can rightly be described. It is obvious to anyone who has listened to your neurotic and pathos-laden speech why your country is rapidly losing influence and respect in the world. The Russian Federation voted against the draft resolution (S/2024/826) on the Sudan prepared by the British and Sierra Leonean delegations. We agree with all our colleagues in the Security Council that the conflict in the Sudan requires a swift resolution. It is also clear that the only way to achieve that is for the warring parties to conclude a ceasefire agreement. We see it as the task of the Security Council to help them in that endeavour. That, however, must be done consistently and openly and not by imposing on the Sudanese, through decisions of the Council, the opinions of individual members, which are permeated with their post-colonial ideas about future arrangements for the country. And certainly, the Council must not play into the former metropolis’s desire to score points vis-à-vis the Sudanese diaspora in Great Britain. The main problem with the British draft resolution is that it is based on a false understanding about who is responsible for protecting the civilian population of the Sudan and for controlling and securing the Sudan’s borders, and about who takes decisions about inviting foreign forces into Sudanese territory and with whom, ultimately, United Nations should officials deal in order to solve problems and plan assistance. We have no doubt that that role must be played exclusively by the Government of the Sudan, but the British authors are clearly trying to deny the Sudan that right. Throughout the drafting process, they went to great lengths to remove references to the legitimate authorities of the Sudan from the key points. Their position is absurd and unacceptable, not least in the light of the fact that the Government of the Sudan represents its country in international organizations, exercises control over the main processes in the State and distributes humanitarian assistance — and the fact that the Sudanese themselves are seeking refuge and protection in Government- controlled regions. That position is nothing short of an attempt to afford themselves an opportunity to interfere in the Sudan’s affairs and engage in further political and social engineering, as was the case in the spring of 2023, when it was attempts to push through decisions that did not enjoy the support of the country’s population that laid the groundwork for the tragedy that unfolded in the Sudan. Our Western colleagues’ plans are also revealed by the fact that the earlier calls by the Security Council for the Rapid Support Forces to end the siege of El Fasher and other towns have been replaced in our proposed text with new distorted language that suggests that the rebels should refrain from attacking only civilians. In essence, therefore, the draft resolution is inviting us to encourage the continuation of the ongoing hostilities. I wish to assure Council members that my country will not hesitate to continue using its veto to prevent such calamitous events afflicting our African brothers. Furthermore, we categorically reject the idea that the draft resolution proposes using external mechanisms for accountability for acts of violence. Bodies such as the International Criminal Court have themselves been completely ineffective in relation to the Sudan and other situations. We are convinced that the administration of justice should remain the exclusive and indivisible prerogative of the Government of the Sudan. Last time, the Security Council requested a report from the Secretary-General with recommendations on the protection of civilians in the Sudan. The report (S/2024/759) clearly states that the conditions are not ripe for the deployment of an international force in the country. We should like to add that that is indeed true: there is no ceasefire agreement and no understanding of where in the country and for what purposes that force would be deployed. Moreover, the request for such a presence must come exclusively from the current Sudanese leadership. In the long term, we do not rule anything out, but we believe that if we embark on such efforts now, despite the views the Sudanese authorities, no good will come of it. Ill-conceived peacekeeping efforts undertaken while the internal conflict is raging — a conflict that is extensive in its geographic reach — could prove catastrophic. Should such an eventuality could come to pass, it would ultimately undermine the Sudan’s confidence in the United Nations, which was significantly undermined by the inconsistent activities of the now defunct United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan. We also strongly disagree with the narrative that the authors are promoting about the dire humanitarian situation and their deliberate disregard for the views of, and data from, the relevant Sudanese agencies. United Nations humanitarian agencies and their partners in the West should heed the guiding humanitarian principles of the United Nations, including those pertaining to the depoliticized nature of any assistance. It is unacceptable to call on the Sudan open all borders to humanitarian access, but not make use of all crossing points for the delivery of aid. Port Sudan is not simply imposing restrictions, it is warning of the threat of cross-border supplies of weapons to the rebels. Instead of demanding transparent borders, it might perhaps be worth addressing the reasons for such Sudanese concerns. We believe that it is fundamentally important that any humanitarian measures be agreed exclusively with the central authorities of the Sudan. In fact, Washington and London are continuing to toy with the issue for their own ends and, through illegal unilateral sanctions, are hindering the efforts of the country’s leadership to provide assistance to the population. We urge Council Members to take a sober look at what is happening in relation to the Sudan in the Security Council. Without constructive and engaged interaction between each Member of the Security Council and the Government of the Sudan, and without a genuine desire to help the Sudanese overcome difficulties, any decisions taken by the Council are doomed to failure. We would urge Council members to avoid the tactic of upping the ante. The Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy, Mr. Lamamra, is pursuing his efforts, and we must afford him the time and political space to speak to all those who have influence on a settlement — be they internal or external players. Lastly, it is important to do away with double standards, which are particularly egregious in the case of the Sudan. The very countries that in relation to the Sudan are clamouring for the need for a ceasefire and demanding that both sides end the violence and shield civilians from it, are giving Israel carte blanche to continue escalating in Gaza in disregard of the blatant violations of international humanitarian law by the Israeli army. They are, moreover, upholding Israel’s right to self-defence and the protection of its citizens, but when it comes to the Sudan, they deny its Government that same right and lay all ills at the Sudanese army’s door. We urge them to finally abandon that neo-colonial thinking and not to try to contrive chaos in countries that are pursuing independent policies so that they can fish in troubled waters.

Ecuador voted in favour of draft resolution S/2024/826, which reaffirmed the urgent need to respect international humanitarian law and to protect civilians as a vital and unavoidable responsibility of the parties to the conflict. I deeply regret the fact that the draft resolution was not adopted owing to a veto by a permanent member of the Security Council. It must be stressed that the vetoed draft resolution is based on principles of international law and the peaceful settlement of disputes, which are the only way to address the serious crisis affecting the country. Ecuador thanks the delegations of the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone for their leadership as co-penholders of the text. Had the resolution been adopted, it would have guaranteed access to humanitarian assistance and promoted a national ceasefire — fundamental elements for progress towards peace and stability. Food insecurity and famine, declared in several regions of the Sudan, are realities that should not be politicized. Although the draft resolution did not explicitly mention those facts, we are convinced that its adoption would have facilitated the arrival of humanitarian assistance to those most in need, in particular women and children. The draft resolution also contained a reference to the role of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1591 (2005), concerning the Sudan, whose work is key to ensuring accountability and preventing impunity for those who commit human rights violations and traffic weapons in the region. Ecuador reaffirms its support for the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for the Sudan. I also underscore that until the end of its mandate in 2024, Ecuador, as an elected member, will continue to support all regional and multilateral efforts in favour of sustainable peace.

More than 19 months into the protracted conflict in the Sudan, civilians have continued to be caught in the crossfire with increasing casualties and the humanitarian situation has become increasingly dire, which is profoundly worrisome. China supports the realization of an immediate ceasefire and de-escalation to protect civilians, and therefore, voted in favour of draft resolution S/2024/826. It should be noted that the constructive proposals made by some members during consultations were not fully adopted and that the legitimate concerns of the countries concerned were not given sufficient attention. We regret that the Council failed to speak with one voice. We call on all parties to the conflict in the Sudan to put the interests of the people and the country above all else, cease all hostilities and genuinely fulfil the commitments made in the Jeddah Declaration, including the protection of civilians. China supports the efforts of the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for the Sudan, Mr. Lamamra, to strengthen coordination with the African Union and other regional organizations and to continue his good offices. We stress that any action taken by the Security Council must respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the Sudan and must be based on thorough consultations with the Government of the Sudan and other relevant parties, and that the imposition of external solutions will only complicate the situation and will not help bring about an end to the war, nor will it serve the goal of protecting civilians.

I thank the delegations of Sierra Leone and the United Kingdom for their efforts in pushing forward draft resolution S/2024/826. It is shocking that Russia has vetoed an effort to save lives — though perhaps it should not be. It claims it is because of Sudanese sovereignty, but the Sudan supports the draft resolution. For months, Russia has obstructed and obfuscated, standing in the way of Council action to address the catastrophic situation in the Sudan and playing both sides of the conflict to advance its own political objectives, at the expense of Sudanese lives. Today the Council would have come together to call for a comprehensive, nationwide ceasefire; for increased protection of civilians; and removal of obstructions to the unhindered flow of humanitarian aid across the Sudan. Russia claims it is for and with Africans, but voted against a draft resolution supported by Africans, for Africans. We would have demanded that the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) cease attacks in El Fasher, Gezira and elsewhere in the Sudan and called for both the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces to be held accountable for their commitments in the Jeddah Declaration. It is unconscionable that Russia would callously and cynically stand in the way of demanding those actions to save lives in the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. And we do not need to be lectured by Russia on hypocrisy  — a hypocrisy that it exhibits every day in Ukraine, where Ukrainian sovereignty is not being respected and civilian facilities are being attacked daily. We are watching the situation closely and will continue to call out abuses and those who facilitate them, including, clearly, Russia. The Council must and should take action. We must continue to amplify the voices of Sudanese people, who are calling for peace and prosperity, democracy and justice. And Russia cannot stand in the way of that.

Mozambique wishes to thank the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone, the penholders, for their initiative in submitting this important draft resolution on the protection of civilians in the Sudan (S/2024/826). We voted in favour of the draft resolution. The significance of the text cannot be overstated, given the urgent need to safeguard the lives and well-being of civilians amid the escalation of violence in the country. Recent reports of horrific attacks against civilians, including mass food poisoning in Gezira state, and the worsening humanitarian situation have further stressed the sense of urgency for a swift response to protect civilians [inaudible]. The collaborative efforts of nations in addressing such critical issues are therefore vital for the promotion of an immediate ceasefire, peace and stability. We recall in that connection the report of the Secretary-General on the recommendations for the protection of civilians in the Sudan (S/2024/759). We fully agree with his assessment of what is feasible and what is not at this point in time. We are of the view that the Secretary-General’s report constitutes a good basis to guide the Security Council’s continued discussion on concrete and realistic measures to support efforts to protect civilians in the country. The text we have just acted upon underscores our collective concern about the safety and security of the Sudanese people. It advances the need for a compliance mechanism to facilitate the implementation of the Jeddah Declaration commitments. We consider that parties to the conflict are duty- bound to take necessary measures to minimize the impact of the conflict on civilians, particularly women and children. Mozambique remains convinced that the most sustainable approach to protect civilians in the Sudan is to end the conflict. There is no military solution to humanitarian problems. In the present case, coordinated efforts are needed to persuade the parties to commit to a ceasefire and engage in meaningful negotiations for a definitive cessation of hostilities. Coordination between different mechanisms  — both regional and international — is fundamental considering the multiplicity of peace initiatives on the Sudan. The effectiveness of those initiatives hinges on how well they are coordinated and integrated. In that connection, we wish to express our strong support for the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General, Mr. Ramtane Lamamra, for his excellent work for peace in the Sudan. Mozambique reiterates its support for the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Sudan. We stand ready to continue to constructively engage with the members of the Security Council towards the peace, stability and prosperity of the Sudan and its people.

France deplores the fact that the Security Council was unable to adopt the draft resolution (S/2024/826) due to the veto cast by the Russian Federation without any convincing justification. The draft resolution proposed by the United Kingdom and Sierra Leone, which I commend, would have established a ceasefire. The situation in the Sudan is disastrous, and it was urgent that the Council demand such a ceasefire. In this situation, as in others, the humanitarian crisis can be resolved only if the guns are silenced. Fourteen members of the Security Council supported the text, as did the Sudan. France hopes that the Council will be able to fully assume its responsibilities as soon as possible and put such a ceasefire in place. We also express our support for the efforts of the Personal Envoy for the Sudan, Mr. Lamamra.

We wish to thank the United Kingdom for its efforts during the negotiations process on a draft resolution that we finally supported (S/2024/826). As the conflict in the Sudan reaches an unprecedented level of violence and tension, the protection of civilians must be our top priority. In that regard, we welcome the decision of the Government of the Sudan to accept the reopening of the Adré border crossing, as well as the agreement between the Government of the Sudan and other Sudanese actors to allow a humanitarian air operation in South Kordofan. Our hope is to see more humanitarian assistance reaching those populations in need following that commendable decision. Our support for the draft resolution emanates from our deep belief that the Security Council must fulfil its part in providing the right responses to protect civilians in the Sudan in accordance with the provisions of international humanitarian law and international law. That response, however, must remain guided by full respect for the Sudan’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. It is very clear that we are not at ease with the proposition to place the internationally recognized Government of the Sudan and the Rapid Support Forces on an equal footing. There is also a need to adopt a progressive and wise approach to our responses by taking into account the real conditions on the ground, as described by the Secretary-General. Taking into account the views of the Government of the Sudan, we reiterate our call for a strong and public condemnation of foreign interference in the Sudan and for full respect for the established sanctions regime and arms embargo by all Member States. Despite the fact that the Council did not reach an agreement to adopt the draft resolution today, Algeria will continue to lend its support to the efforts deployed by the Secretary-General and his Personal Envoy to bring all the Sudanese parties to the negotiating table. We conclude by yet again calling on the Sudanese parties to finally agree, without further delay, on a ceasefire.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Sudan.

I thank you, Madam President, for presiding over this meeting. Allow me to briefly present our point of view on the Sudan’s position in the context of this important meeting. Achieving peace during multi-party wars, such as the war in the Sudan, requires the adoption of a truthful and complete narrative. The narrative currently adopted — namely, that this is a war between two parties — is one of the reasons that we have not reached an agreement on defining the conflict. We must take into account the specificities of the conflict and the State’s options for peacebuilding. The more understanding of the contribution of the national State to peacemaking, the better chance to shorten the way to achieving peace and stopping conflicts. The Charter of the United Nations provides for State’s unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity and for stopping aggression against it. That has not smoothly happened in the war of aggression against the Sudan. There has been coordinated and immense pressure and coercion to weaken the State, as a result of the choices made by international actors overseeing the international order, which is very much collapsing. That order must be re-established in accordance with the Secretary-General’s New Agenda for Peace. The Council is still hesitant to name the aggressors, despite knowing who they are. We did not know that secret efforts were made to stop arms shipments to the militia and the mercenaries. Those shipments increased a lot after the Sudan opened the Adré border crossing, which was extended pursuant to certain conditions by the State to enable it to oversee operations through the crossing to facilitate humanitarian work. That expanded regional intervention and aggravated the war, even when the militia deliberately attacked civilians, carried out massacres and forcibly displaced people. It took the Council 18 months to condemn those atrocities, although they were condemned by certain Council members in their national positions, for which we thank them. The issues of standing with the people of the Sudan, stopping the aggression and ceasing the war require not remaining neutral or passive. Through their national stances, certain States reject dealing with bloodthirsty terrorists; they do their utmost to eliminate terrorist groups but, under the pretext of impartiality, they coerce the Sudanese Government to accept peace with foreign mercenaries, which would enable them to become political actors in the future and launch another aggression as per a brutal plot that the Sudanese know all too well — a plot to gradually fragment the Sudan and conclude deceitful peace agreements. There are those who insist on making the Sudanese people dependent on humanitarian relief. The Sudan has fertile land and sufficient agricultural capacity to bridge the global food gap, let alone feed the Sudanese people, who have been deceived many times by certain international actors. The needs of the Sudan have been exploited to encroach upon its sovereignty. Some foreign relief organizations, whose members now amount to more than 19,000, as I mentioned in a previous statement, are now demanding to enter the Sudan from any direction by simply notifying the authorities. For the Council to regain its vital role in maintaining international peace and security, it must engage with the choices made by peoples, especially in Africa, which aspires to be free of restrictions and to be able to contribute peacefully and positively to international peace. The Sudan has been languishing under United Nations restrictions since 2004. That position needs to be reconsidered. Those systematic restrictions diminish the role of the Sudan, constrict its ambitions and prevent most of its people from contributing to peacebuilding and democracy based on national ownership. Therefore, I call upon the Council to support the national plan to protect civilians that will be submitted to the Council. The plan is in itself a national road map to end the war. The Government and the people of the Sudan are looking forward to the Council adopting a positive stance, and they call upon major countries to take a stand against the terrorists, mercenaries and militia that have been systematically destroying the Sudan, as mentioned, for 18 months. Tolerating those groups, after they have caused bloodshed in the Sudan, amounts to blatant complicity with them. We called for the condemnation of the militia’s atrocities and for them to be designated as a terrorist group. However, those calls were rejected, obviously giving the militia a pretext to continue perpetrating their atrocities. We stand against any international or United Nations intervention under the pretext of achieving peace in accordance with outdated models that rely on hard power. We can contribute to the preparation of a plan for sustainable peace and to protect civilians based on soft power and the people’s own will. The Sudan is waging an existential battle in which the choices are limited. Either the Sudan remains free, independent and united, or it vanishes. The experience of the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in the Sudan as a political Mission ended with the outbreak of the war and the escalation of the conflict that the Mission was established to address. That was the result of a complicated transition that was supposed to be a smooth one. Therefore, we believe in national ownership. For peace to be consolidated, it must first be built by the people themselves. Peacebuilding cannot be based on a formula imposed from above that provokes the anger of the people, or on donors that want to re-engineer the Sudan according to their whims — even choosing who would rule the country. The Sudan will resist any foreign intervention to fragment the country and strengthen the militia and the mercenaries in order to prevent the Sudanese army from winning, while maintaining the country’s territorial integrity and resisting the mercenaries and the militia. Video recordings that have been circulated online have exposed their diabolic and exclusionary agenda. They feel pleased when they perpetrate gradual genocide against the people of the Sudan to serve the agendas of regional and international actors that sponsor them. Under that narrative, those international actors destroy the abilities of the army by imposing an arms embargo on it, while arms are supplied to the militia, even by some members of the Council, as we have seen in a recent report published by Amnesty International. The Charter of the United Nations, which entered into force on 24 October 1945, ensures the sovereignty of States, equal sovereignty among States, the legal personality of States and their independence and territorial integrity. Some parties violate all of that, which is inconsistent with the paragraphs on sovereignty included in the preambles of Council resolutions. We call on the Council to stand with the Sudanese State, to halt the aggression that threatens peace and security and that has killed Sudanese people, aggression sponsored by the United Arab Emirates. We call for diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict, not turn it into an international tutelage promoted by certain actors to serve their own interests, which has nothing to do with achieving peace and stopping the war. The Council must have the political will to prevent the United Arab Emirates and its regional affiliates from sending new generations of arms to the militia. The Council must condemn armed gangs and terrorists coming from the Sahel and neighbouring countries, in violation of the Charter, to perpetuate atrocities in the Sudan, displace its people and bring in others, in broad daylight, to occupy the homes of Sudanese residents. They are even using artificial intelligence against the territorial integrity of the Sudan. In his New Agenda for Peace, the Secretary- General stressed the need to uphold the Charter as conflict and terrorism are on the rise. He called for non-interference and for adopting regional initiatives to resolve conflicts. He called on States to refrain from hegemonic ambitions against neighbouring States. He also called for preventive diplomacy, addressed the increasing role of armed groups within States and referred to increasing terrorist activities in Africa. In conclusion, I thank the Council and all those who cooperate with the Sudan to achieve peace. We are ready to cooperate with the Council to stop this war, to condemn the militia, which is as a terrorist one, to stop the flow of arms across the borders and to respect the sovereignty of the Sudan through the implementation of its plan to protect civilians.