Thematic discussion on specific subjects and introduction and consideration of all draft resolutions and decisions submitted under agenda items (from 90 to 106) A/C.1/80/L.1, A/C.1/80/L.2, A/C.1/80/L.3, A/C.1/80/L.4, A/C.1/80/L.5, A/C.1/80/L.6, A/C.1/80/L.7, A/C.1/80/L.8, A/C.1/80/L.10 A/C.1/80/L.11, A/C.1/80/L.12, A/C.1/80/L.13, A/C.1/80/L.14, A/C.1/80/L.16, A/C.1/80/L.17, A/C.1/80/L.18, A/C.1/80/L.20, A/C.1/80/L.21, A/C.1/80/L.22, A/C.1/80/L.23, A/C.1/80/L.24, A/C.1/80/L.25 A/C.1/80/L.26, A/C.1/80/L.27, A/C.1/80/L.28, A/C.1/80/L.29, A/C.1/80/L.30, A/C.1/80/L.31, A/C.1/80/L.35, A/C.1/80/L.32, A/C.1/80/L.33, A/C.1/80/L.34, A/C.1/80/L.37, A/C.1/80/L.38, A/C.1/80/L.39, A/C.1/80/L.40, A/C.1/80/L.41, A/C.1/80/L.42 A/C.1/80/L.43, A/C.1/80/L.63
🇷🇺 Russian Federation, 🇵🇱 Poland, 🇱🇻 Latvia, 🇮🇱 Israel, 🇰🇵 Democratic People's Republic of Korea, 🇨🇦 Canada, 🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of Iran, 🇳🇿 New Zealand, 🇫🇷 France, 🇦🇺 Australia
Mr. Chair, we are compelled to take the floor in right of reply. This is in connection with the statements of certain delegations that are trying to distort the situation around the anti-personnel mine ban convention. For the second day in a row, we've heard something totally unmoored from reality. I mean statements from Western states that at any price are prep trying to shift responsibility in Russia to justify their own destructive decisions and their sidestepping responsibility for undermining the landmine convention. The departure from the convention of Russia's neighbors is a telling example of their arbitrary relationship toward their international legal commitments. These Western countries are propelled to shed inconvenient recon restrictions whenever they please. However, they haven't even deigned to seek cogent arguments to back up their own actions. They've they're just mechanically repeating the talking point that they are under some pressure, some military, supposed military pressure, coming from Russia. Now I'll turn to the statement of Ukraine about the convention. I want to underscore that there's an order of the Ukrainian president. It's number 441-2025 and dated the 29th of June. It specifically mentions Kiev's withdrawal from this convention. Such a decision, pursuant to this convention, cannot enter into force for a party to an armed conflict until that conflict ends. The suspension of the effect of the convention, and especially the suspension of certain of its provisions, was never mentioned from the very beginning. The effect of the convention for Ukraine can be deemed suspended only if there's no objection from the other parties to the convention. At any case, Kyiv's steps are destructive amid an ongoing armed conflict. And the obligations under the anti-personnel mine convention, however, weren't implemented by Kiev even before this decision. According to the requirements of the Convention, Ukraine should have destroyed all its stockpiles of anti-personnel mines back in 2010, with the exception of a minimal amount needed to develop mine detection methods or train specialists, but Kyiv never did this. The use by the Kiev regime of anti-personnel mines against civilians has been regularly documented by Russian law enforcement structures. Furthermore, the violations of the aforementioned convention have not been duly assessed by its parties. Instead, Ukraine was granted additional time to destroy its anti-personnel mines, which it has and is actively using. The situation around the convention, alas, merely confirms Russia's assessment about the weakness of this treaty regime. The convention has no means of leverage against countries that in one way or another shirk the implementation of their commitments. The acts of the Baltic states, Poland, Ukraine, and Finland fully fit into the general course of the West and its satellites, a course toward rewriting and undermining the international legal system in terms of arms control, disarmament, and non proliferation. They're asking for stricter and rigorous compliance of commitments by other countries, but these states see no need to consistently abide by these treaties' restrictions, and at the same time, they are shifting onto others the blame for the decisions that they have taken. That is, they're shifting the blame. In contrast to these aforementioned countries, the Russian Federation has continued in good faith to fully meet its commitments under additional Protocols 2 and Protocol 5 of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. As for the use of mines, from the very beginning of the special military uh operation, the Russian Federation's Armed Forces have acted in accordance with instructions on international humanitarian law for the armed forces of the Russian Federation. This document, Inter alia, sets out the chief requirements for the use of anti personnel mines in accordance with Additional Protocol 2 of the CCW. The results of national work on the mine threat are regularly reflected in Russian reporting on this convention, the CCW that is, and its additional Protocol 2 and Protocol 5. I thank you for your attention.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving me the floor. I'm exercising the right of reply to shed some light on the widely commented withdrawal from the antipersonal Mine Band Convention announced by Poland earlier this year, as well as to respond to several Russia's comments. Mr. Chair, let me state this clearly the withdrawal from the convention does not result in the immediate commencement of mines production. It does not reflect a change in values either. Poland is an ardent supporter of IHL norms. We remain deeply engaged in humanitarian demining worldwide. Our engineers have operated in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Kosovo, and most recently in Ukraine, wherein civilian areas, fields and roads have been indiscriminately mined by Russia. We are fully aware of the tragic consequences of uncontrolled landmine use, and we express our utmost regret that Russia's barbaric war of aggression, not a special operation, a barbaric war of aggression. Against Ukraine has forced us to withdraw from the Convention. Poland's decision is aimed at adapting our defense posture to real threats. Threats posed by Russia that has brought war back to Europe and is waging it against our neighbor, Ukraine. Mr. Chair, Russia has never been a party to the Ottawa Convention and has never limited itself by its provisions. In fact, to the contrary, Russia employs landmines extensively, particularly in Ukraine. But what is most disgraceful is that these facts do not prevent Russia from lecturing Ukraine on the matters of rightful or humanitarian behavior in a conflict. Well, it is yet another example of Russia's cynicism and hypocrisy. Mr Chair, Poland cannot remain the only state in the region that voluntarily abandons defensive tools while facing an aggressor who uses them without any restraint. We simply cannot afford to be the victim of our own chivalry. While landmines remain an option of last resort for Poland, really the last resort, to be employed only in the event of invasion, the honors is still on us to protect our borders and guarantee the safety of our people. And the recent events in NATO's airspace, illegally orchestrated by Russia, have proven that we are right to be both wary and worried. Mr. Chair, finally, on the military support Ukraine needs, I would like to highlight one issue and one issue only. The one and only reason why Ukraine is in such desperate need of help is the brutal war initiated and waged by Russia. Let's not confuse the cause with the effect. If Russia had not invaded Ukraine, we would all be living in a more secure and peaceful world now. And surely, we would not be providing such amounts of political and practical support to Ukraine. You may ask why. Because Kiev would not be forced to defend itself against Russia's insatiable appetite for the territories of its neighbors. We stand with Ukraine, who is bravely facing the illegal Russian aggression, and we are proud of it. Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor.
Thank you, Chair. My delegation too wishes to respond to the statements concerning the Anti-Personal Mind Band Convention. Latvia acceded to the convention in two thousand and five and for the past uh twenty years has fully complied with its provisions. Our decision to withdraw taken after careful consideration must be understood in a broader context. It reflects the fundamentally change security environment in Europe and in our region. As several delegations have already noted, this decision comes in response to Russia's full scale military aggression against Ukraine, which constitutes a grave violation of international law, including international humanitarian law. Latvia would also like to express its appreciation to countries that have voiced their understanding of the reasoning for difficult decisions. The steps we have taken to safeguard our sovereignty and territorial integrity are being pursued in a transparent manner and in full compliance with our international obligations. Latvia will continue to uphold these obligations, including international humanitarian law, while addressing our national security needs. At the same time, Latvia remains committed to supporting humanitarian mine action, both in word and in deed. We contribute financially to UN Mine Action Service en masse. And are actively engaged in demining projects in Ukraine and beyond. I thank you.
Thank you, Chair. Following the statement we heard from the representative of Iran, once again, the delegate of the Aetola regime sits here and distorts reality, hoping the speed of his words would blur our ability to see daylight. Beautiful words on international law, commitments, and international obligations. While in the real world, outside this room, this regime of terror is the number one global proliferator. Heavy arms, UAVs, missiles, you name it, from Lebanon to Yemen, from Iraq to Syria, and way beyond. The Iranian arms are causing death and suffering. All these are to be found in endless reports, including by the UN. I invite, just an example, to read the Security Council Pan of Experts' reports on Yemen to understand how Iran is impacting another Middle East country. Perhaps the Iranian delegate should read it too, to be enlightened by what his regime is up to. But, Chair, what can you expect from a country that launched almost 600 ballistic missiles at Israeli cities in a desperate attempt to save its military nuclear program? Over the course of the twelve-day operation Rising Line, which Israel launched to stop Iran's nuclear and ballistic programs, Iran aimed at Israeli hospitals, schools, and mosques. Thirty-three innocent civilians were killed, women, children, and elderly in Iran's intended and lethal attacks. This is the regime the delegate here so proudly preaches for. This is a regime that will be vicious against anyone trying to stop its deadly plans. Be it other countries. or be it innocent Iranians seeking freedom from oppression. We must and we will hold Iran accountable. I thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation is also taking the floor in response to the allegations of Ukraine, who groundlessly slandered the legal cooperation between DPRK and Russian Federation. As stated before several times, the DPRK Russia cooperation is for ensuring the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security interests of the states, as well as peace and stability in the region. It is a legitimate exercise of DPRK's sovereign rights, fully conforming to the Article 4 of the Treaty on Comprehensive. Strategic partnership between DPRK and Russia, which requires each of the parties to provide military and other assistance if an armed attack occurs against the other. DPRK will remain committed to the treaty and comprehensive strategic partnership between the DPRK and Russia and make joint efforts to seek international peace and security. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Further to the statements delivered by the Russian Federation in respect to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Convention and Ukraine, Canada would like to note the following. Russia's ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine, in violation of the UN Charter and its international humanitarian law, and its large scale use of anti personnel landmines has resulted in many civilian casualties and contamination of vast areas of arable land to the detriment of the world's food supply. We call on Russia to immediately cease its hostilities, withdraw its forces from Ukraine's internationally recognized territory, and pay reparations for the damage caused, including by landmines. Instead of deflecting from its own outrageous behavior by criticizing Ukraine, Russia should put an end to its use of anti personal landmines, join the APMBC, and implement that treaty. I thank you.
for the second intervention. I see Boazim Gaspe. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're compelled once more to avail ourselves of the right of reply. The reason is that we want to respond to attempts coming from the delegations of Poland, Latvia, and Canada to deceive the international community. The logic presented by these delegations doesn't stand up to any scrutiny, and it is absolutely uh it doesn't hold any water and it doesn't reflect reality. The Russian Federation is acting in accordance. With with international law in our special military operation in Ukraine, and that includes in accordance with IHL, and that continues to the conventional weapons used, including anti-personnel mines. Turning now to the delegations of these countries, they once more are trying to justify an alleged threat emanating from Russia, which doesn't actually exist in reality for these countries. Their destructive actions in ramping up their military budgets, modernizing their conventional weapons, and Using this category of weapons for their own aggressive goals. The Russian Federation again wishes to repeat and emphasize that this logic of shifting the blame onto someone else is a telling example of a bad faith relationship to their international legal commitments. As soon as it became inconvenient for these countries, To remain within the international legal regime of the anti-personnel mind ban convention, without trying to find any cogent arguments, they uh withdrew from the convention. And then as a smokescreen, they used a supposed threat coming from Russia. I want to repeat something. There is no Russian threat for these countries in existence. All of this is uh uh imaginary. And the Russian Federation is a responsible partner in international relations and fully abides by international law. That includes international humanitarian law. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I took the floor not to dignify the baseless and outrageous accusations made by the representative of the Israeli regime, all of which I categorically reject and condemn. Such accusations, which have regrettably become a recurring pattern of distraction and deliberate distortion, don't merit a detailed response. This persistent practice of misinformation seeks to obscure the Israeli regime's own record of systematic aggression, occupation, and atrocity, the very realities that continue to unfold in our region. But given that the representative of the Israeli regime has persistently sought to falsely portray resistance groups and others as terrorists in an attempt to justify its own crime. Crimes, genocide, and aggression in Gaza and across our region, I wish to clarify who the real terrorist is. Terrorists are those who over the past two years have killed and injured more than 200,000 innocent people in Gaza, including women and children. Terrorists are those who have killed people who are simply waiting in line for food and humanitarian aid. Terrorists are those whose warmongering officials have openly threatened Iran and Gaza with the use of nuclear weapons. Terrorists are those for whom the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants, including the Israeli regime's Prime Minister and the former Defense Minister, for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Gaza. Terrorists are those who have turned Gaza into a wasteland of rubble and human remains. Where survivors, men and women, children and elderly struggle to survive amid disease, hunger, and despair. Terrorists are those whose bombs have spared no one, not journalists, students, scholars, doctors, nurses, babies, or even humanitarian workers, including United Nations staffs. Terrorists are those who in just twelve days have killed over 1,000 innocent people in Iran, including women and children. Injured more than 3,000 and attacked key infrastructures, including peaceful nuclear facilities operating under the full IAEA safeguards. If we were to continue, this blacklist of crimes would be endless. So stop spreading lies. Stop pre r reversing the rules of victim and aggressor. And most importantly, stop your crimes against our region. I thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Chair. Further to our conventional weapons cluster statement delivered yesterday, New Zealand wishes to make clear the following points. It has been three years since Russia commenced its illegal, full scale invasion of Ukraine. New Zealand has consistently denounced that invasion, a grave breach of international law, including the UN Charter. New Zealand remains committed to upholding the Charter and international law, including the core rules and norms that underpin international peace and security. Ukraine is the victim of an illegal act of aggression by Russia. We are gravely concerned by Russia's dissemination of millions of antipersonnel mines and other ordnance, contaminating vast swathes of Ukraine's territory and the humanitarian, environmental, and economic catastrophe this is causing. We call on Russia to immediately cease its aggression and withdraw its forces from Ukraine's internationally recognized territory. We further call on Russia to cease the production and use of antipersonnel mines, to join the Mine Ban Treaty and implement its provisions in full. I thank you.
Thank you, Chair. Chair, France wishes to exercise its right of reply due to various statements made by the Russian Federation. I'm going to be brief, but I need to put things in the right place. In this situation, there certainly is in a country that is the aggressor and a country that is the victim. I think the international community sees clearly the situation. The recent withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention by certain member states of the European Union is the responsibility of Russia, which returned war to the European continent. We, regrettably, have become used to Russia's rhetoric, which seeks to reverse the responsibility. Russia is not a party to the Ottawa Convention. It systematically violates international humanitarian law in its war of aggression against Ukraine. This includes, through the wide-scale indiscriminate use of anti-personnel mines which are used against civilians. I thank you, Mr. Chair.
Still no. No, yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I didn't plan the second intervention, but I feel obliged to clarify one issue raised by the Russian Federation. Poland would gladly spend its taxpayers' money somewhere else, not on armament, not on extreme protection of our borders. The snuggets we cannot. Mr. Chair, a few weeks ago uh An unprecedented number of drones, and it was orchestrated by Russia, entered Polish airspace, NATO's airspace. One of these drones landed 30 kilometers from my hometown in Poland. If this is not a threat, then I don't know what is and what would constitute it. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Australia wishes to add its voice to those who have spoken in response to Russia's statements. Australia has been clear that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a grave breach of international law, including the UN Charter. Ukraine is the victim here, and we ask Russia to cease deflecting from its own unlawful behavior by criticizing Ukraine. Russia should put an end to its use and production of anti personnel landmines, and it should join the APBMBC. Australia calls on Russia to immediately end its war and adhere fully to its obligations under international law, including in relation to protection of civilians and treatment of prisoners of war. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, we repudiate all of the baseless and groundless accusations that we've heard about these outer space activities of the Russian Federation. The activities of our country in the exploration and use of outer space are carried out in accordance with international obligations, exclusively for peaceful purposes, and they do not threaten the activities of other states in outer space. Russia strictly complies with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which is the centerpiece of international space law, and we also strictly comply with other agreements in this area. Article 4 of the treaty Clearly bans launching into orb uh the Earth orbit any object with nuclear weapons or other WMDs, and it bans the installation or deployment of such weapons in outer space in any other way. Russia has unstintingly complied with this provision. No con confirmation is required by the treaty, by the outer space treaty, including in the Security Council. Furthermore, any attempts to directly or indirectly rewrite this treaty or other instruments of outer space law is superfluous. The ludicrous conjecture that we've heard is fully unhitched from reality and is part of a propaganda campaign seeking to discredit the outer space activities of Russia and its initiative to prevent an arms race in outer space. Our country for many years has substantially contributed to preserving outer space free from weapons of any type. And we've made a significant role in preventing it from transforming into yet another arena for tensions and armed confrontation. It was Russia that tirelessly proposed that member states adopt nationally and internationally a legal commitment not to deploy weapons of any type in outer space and also to refrain from the use of threat of force against outer space objects or using outer space objects. We want to see a comprehensive ban on outer space-based strike weapons intended to strike uh outer space uh objects. We would recall our proposal to UN member states to join an international initiative slash political obligation to refrain from the first placement of weapons in outer space. The list of participants of this initiative is growing. It is now close to 40. It calls for the promotion, or rather, it's intended to promote international peace, equal and indivisible security for everyone, and uh to enhance predictability and sustainability of the activities of space and the peaceful exploration and use of outer space to preserve outer space as the common heritage of all humankind. Unfortunately, these goals are far from being shared by all countries. We've seen a growing risk of transforming outer space into a platform for aggression and war. A number of Western countries are openly charting a course toward deployment of weapons in outer space and using outer space in order to carry out combat and to ensure their domination and supremacy. There are large-scale programs to develop weapon systems that are designed to use force or threaten the use of force in outer space, from outer space, or against outer space. As a result of this, substantial risks are being created for the long-term sustainability of peaceful outer space activities and also for the socioeconomic processes in uh on the earth which determine the well being of people, primarily in developing countries. This policy merits strong condemnation by the international community and calls for measures to be taken to stop it. Thank you.
Verbatim from the transcript. A reply is identified from its own words, the Chair's grant, or its place in the right-of-reply sequence; delegations and addressees follow the transcript's attribution.