Rare Books and Special Collections Digital Library
Not a member yet
439532 research outputs found
Sort by
Tim Sullivan Oral History
No full textTim Sullivan was a professor of political science at the American University in Cairo from 1973 to 1998, and served as Provost from 1998 to 2008. He recalls his youth and higher education in the American northwest, and his coming to teach at AUC. He describes his home department of Political Science (originally Economics, Political Science, and Mass Communication), including its faculty and academic program. A sketch of AUC students over the years is offered, including their backgrounds, academic caliber, political engagement, and career paths for political science graduates. He also tells about the development of AUC’s Model United Nations program, offering anecdotes. Sullivan provides a view of significant developments at the university in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, especially its expansion and evolving academic mission, covering the terms in office and personalities of presidents and Deans of the Faculties. He addresses the 1990s emergence of academic Schools at AUC and the first generation of their Deans, and developments in these schools and their leadership while he was Provost through the late 2000s. Individual departments and research centers are also discussed, with respect to performance, culture, and emergence of new units. He describes the contributions and styles of Presidents under whom he served as Provost (John Gerhart, acting President Tom Bartlett, and David Arnold), with a detailed and emotional recollection of his personal and professional relationship with Gerhart, whose cancer prematurely shortened his presidency and life. Faculty issues (tenure, differing employment conditions for Egyptians and foreign hires, etc.) are addressed, along with the faculty’s role in university governance, such as committees and the Senate, and his own involvement on the Trustees’ Century Committee. Sullivan discusses the planning and construction of AUC’s new campus in New Cairo, including his role and that of other leading administrators, and the impact of the move. He also speaks about how AUC was affected by and responded to events and trends in Egyptian society, like the 1973 War, increasing influence of conservative Islam (with implications for academic freedom in the 1990s), and intermittent political limitations (exemplified by Saad Eddin Ibrahim’s incarceration in the 2000s), and speaks more generally about the university’s role in Egypt
Magdi Sarhane, Paula Ezzat, Raed Baddar Oral History
No full textMagdi Sarhane, Raed Baddar, and Paula Ezzat were undergraduate students at the American University in Cairo, the three friends attending in years spanning 1973 to 1981. In a joint interview, the three discuss what led them to attend AUC, and the men discuss their initial study in the English Language Institute. They outline their academic experiences at AUC, from their majors (materials engineering for Baddar and Sarhane, political science and mass communication for Ezzat) to notable faculty in and out of their programs (charismatic like Nicholas Ciaccio of psychology, engaging in the classroom like Tim Sullivan of Political Science, or strict graders like Wedad Said of philosophy). They describe AUC’s campus, places they spent for academics (Science Building, Computer Center), and areas where students (sorted by their social groups) socialized. Aspects of student life covered include sports, student jobs, student government, fashion, male-female relationships, parties, trips, musical performances and events like the Talent Show, folklore troupe, and Miss AUC Contest, as well as volunteer efforts for the 1973 War
Security Council, 73rd Year: 8164th Meeting, Tuesday, 23 January 2018, New York
No full textThe Situation In The Middle East This Record Contains The Text Of Speeches Delivered In English And Of The Translation Of Speeches Delivered In Other Languages.United Nations S/PV.8164
Security Council
Seventy-third year
8164th meeting
Tuesday, 23 January 2018, 3 p.m.
New York
Provisional
President: Mr. Umarov. . (Kazakhstan)
Members: Bolivia (Plurinational State of). . Mr. Llorentty Solíz
China. . Mr. Shen Bo
Côte d’Ivoire. . Mr. Tanoh-Boutchoue
Equatorial Guinea. . Mr. Ndong Mba
Ethiopia. . Ms. Guadey
France. . Mr. Delattre
Kuwait. . Mr. Alotaibi
Netherlands. . Mr. Van Oosterom
Peru. . Mr. Tenya
Poland. . Ms. Wronecka
Russian Federation. . Mr. Nebenzia
Sweden . Mr. Skoog
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . Mr. Allen
United States of America. . Mrs. Haley
Agenda
The situation in the Middle East
This record contains the text of speeches delivered in English and of the translation of
speeches delivered in other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records
of the Security Council. Corrections should be submitted to the original languages only. They
should be incorporated in a copy of the record and sent under the signature of a member
of the delegation concerned to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service, room U-0506
([email protected]). Corrected records will be reissued electronically on the Official
Document System of the United Nations (http://documents.un.org).
18-01889 (E)
*1801889*
S/PV.8164 The situation in the Middle East 23/01/2018
2/11 18-01889
The meeting was called to order at 3.05 p.m.
Adoption of the agenda
The agenda was adopted.
The situation in the Middle East
The President: The Security Council will now
begin its consideration of the item on its agenda.
Mr. Nebenzia (Russian Federation) (spoke in
Russian): I should like at the outset to apologize to the
members of the Security Council and the Secretariat for
the fact that I ruined their siesta today.
We have requested the convening of an open meeting
of the Security Council because the issue that we intend
to raise is far too important for the discussion to be
held in closed consultations. We have nothing to hide.
When we discussed Syria in consultations yesterday,
many touched on the importance of establishing a new
structure to investigate instances of chemical-weapons
use in Syria to supplement the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons-United Nations
Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM), which fully
discredited itself. We have never forgotten this issue,
and we have consistently recalled in meetings our
readiness to continue consultations on this matter, as
noted by Minister Lavrov to the Secretary-General last
week. Yesterday, however, we were unable to rise to
that call. Today, upon instruction from our capital, it is
my honour to report the following.
Russia has consistently stressed the importance
of taking the most serious approach to the problem
of the manufacture and use of chemical weapons. We
are troubled by manifestations of chemical-weapons
terrorism in the Middle East, which are not limited
to Syrian territory. Unfortunately, the JIM, which no
longer exists, caused the collapse of the investigation,
which from a scientific and technical perspective
was an utter failure and became an instrument for
political manipulation. Members of the international
community and the Security Council were well aware
of the Russian specialists’ scrupulous analysis of the
conclusions of the JIM.
In an attempt to interpret certain elements of the
Russian approach, during consultations on 9 January
the United States delegation circulated the relevant
document. However, at no point in the document was
there even an attempt to approach the matter from a
professional standpoint. The so-called refutations of
our position do not stand up to any criticism. I invite
Council members to familiarize themselves with the
material supporting our position in the response that
we circulated yesterday as an official Security Council
document. Today, incidentally, senior representatives
of the United States Department of State made
further unfounded accusations alleging that Russia is
hindering international verification of the facts of the
use of chemical weapons in Syria. We have already
responded to that, and anyone who wants to can read
Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov’s comments
on the issue. No one has called more than we have for a
further investigation — a professional one rather than
a simulacrum — into the incidents involving the use of
chemical weapons in Syria, and at the moment we are
still trying to get the Organization for the Prohibition
of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to send its specialists to
Syria to see for themselves the stockpiles of chemical
weapons left by militants in liberated areas that the
Syrian Government has discovered.
By the way, during yesterday’s consultations,
following the reports of various recent incidents
involving the use of toxic substances in Syria, which have
yet to be verified, the representatives of the United States
and the United Kingdom — without a second’s pause
or any evidence, let alone an investigation — hastened
to declare them the work of what they refer to as the
Syrian “regime”. Now they are trying to drag Russia
into it too. Secretary of State Tillerson brought this up in
Paris today at the meeting of the so-called international
partnership of States against impunity for the use of
chemical weapons, basing his argument on an incident
that allegedly occurred yesterday in eastern Ghouta.
However, his statement was devoted almost exclusively
to Russia. By the way, does nobody find it strange that
this alleged incident, whose genuineness has yet to be
confirmed — as does the identity of its perpetrators, if
it is genuine — coincided very conveniently with the
meeting in Paris and the forthcoming Syrian national
dialogue conference in Sochi? An amazing coincidence.
Some States are persisting in their attempts to
push through an anti-Damascus verdict at the OPCW
at all costs, and thereby undermining that respected
organization’s authority. Others are seeking to scrape
together a narrow alliance of anti-impunity-ites through
non-legitimate formats.
In November of last year, Russia, working with
others of like mind, put together draft resolution
23/01/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8164
18-01889 3/11
S/2017/968, which would have ensured that the JIM’s
activities conformed to the the high international
standards of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which
guarantee a genuinely impartial and professional
investigation. The initiative was blocked by a
number of delegations at the time. We want to rise
above those differences and propose creating a new
international investigative body that could establish
the facts that the Security Council needs in order to
identify those who used toxic substances as weapons,
based on irreproachable, irrefutable information from
transparent, credible sources. It must be professional
and non-politicized. We have prepared a draft of such a
resolution and ask that the Secretariat circulate it. We
hope that Council members will study our initiative
with their capitals as soon as possible. We are ready for
substantive consultations.
Mrs. Haley (United States of America): Russia has
convened us with almost no notice, and then put forth a
proposal that it hopes will distract from the new French
initiative to hold accountable those who use chemical
weapons. Today, Russia is again doing what it does best
with regard to chemical weapons. It is running from the
facts. It has the audacity to lecture the Security Council
about how to stop the use of chemical weapons. I know
that I have said this before, but it is worth repeating. In
the past year, Russia exercised the right to veto three
times to kill the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons-United Nations Joint Investigative
Mechanism (JIM) in Syria. All by itself, Russia killed
the Mechanism, which we had specifically tasked
with identifying those responsible for using chemical
weapons in Syria. Russia should look in the mirror
before bringing us into the Security Council to talk
about chemical weapons.
Earlier this week, we received yet another report
that the Al-Assad regime had used chlorine gas on its
own people. Dozens of civilians had to be treated for
suffocation. Syrian children were literally gasping for
breath as chlorine gas surrounded them. Of course, it
is no coincidence that this week’s chlorine-gas attack
reportedly happened in the exact place that the Al-Assad
regime is trying to take over militarily. We know that
it resorts to such brutal tactics when it wants to retake
territory, without any regard for innocent civilians, and
we know that Russia has looked the other way for years
while its Syrian friends use those despicable weapons
of war. Russia is complicit in the Al-Assad regime’s
atrocities. Will the representative of the Russian
Federation say anything at all today about the suffering
caused by Al-Assad’s barbaric tactics? Will it hold
Al-Assad to account? Of course not. It never does.
It is therefore fitting that Russia brought us here
on the same day that a new initiative on accountability
for chemical weapons has been introduced in Paris.
Today, France launched an international partnership
against impunity for chemical weapons. We strongly
support that effort and commend France for its
leadership. More than 25 like-minded countries have
come together to share and preserve information on
who has used chemical weapons and to make sure that
the perpetrators will be held accountable. Make no
mistake — the United States, together with the Council,
will continue to pursue those who have used chemical
weapons to ensure that they are held accountable for
their atrocities. Russia says that it has concerns about
this French initiative to share evidence of the use of
chemical weapons. That is no surprise. Russia opposed
the Joint Investigative Mechanism because it collected
facts about who used chemical weapons in Syria. Now
Russia is questioning the French effort to collect facts
on who used chemical weapons. What can we conclude?
To put it simply, when Russia does not like the facts,
it tries to distract the conversation. That is because the
facts come back over and over again to the truth that
Russia wants to hide, which is that the Al-Assad regime
continues to use chemical weapons against its own
people. Today, Russia once again threw around many
different accusations. Again, that is not surprising.
Russia often puts out misleading and unfounded claims
to confuse the conversation about chemical weapons. In
fact, this happens so often that we recently wrote to the
Security Council with a detailed assessment of Russia’s
misleading claims. The letter is public and available for
anyone to see. We encourage everyone to take a look at
it for themselves.
Here is the bottom line. The Security Council
gave the Joint Investigative Mechanism a mandate to
tell us who used chemical weapons in Syria. When
investigators found the Islamic State in Iraq and the
Sham to be responsible, Russia was fine. When the
investigators found that the Al-Assad regime had used
them, Russia tried to find any excuse to poke holes in
the investigation and threw up smoke to question the
findings. But hat is not how independent investigations
work. You do not get to question the findings when
they do not go your way. We are therefore not going
to accept any Russian proposal that undermines our
S/PV.8164 The situation in the Middle East 23/01/2018
4/11 18-01889
ability to get to the truth or that politicizes what must
be an independent and impartial investigation. If the
Russians want to work in good faith towards that goal,
we are ready to re-establish the JIM, with its original,
independent and impartial mandate, right now. But
anything less is unacceptable.
To be crystal clear: the United States supports
accountability for anyone who uses chemical weapons.
We agree with Russia that the Islamic State in Iraq
and the Sham must be held accountable for its use of
such weapons, as the Joint Investigative Mechanism
has found. But the difference between the United
States and Russia is that we believe that no one should
be let off the hook. Chemical weapons must never
be used. Russia can continue to talk for as long as it
wants about chemical weapons. It can bring it up in
the Security Council Chamber as often as it wants.
We welcome the debate. The United States and the
international community will not be fooled. We remain
steadfast in pursuing accountability for those who use
chemical weapons. We stand strong in doing all we
can to preserve the norm against their use. We remain
forever committed to preserving the truth about what
the Al-Assad regime has done in Syria and, sadly, what
it will likely continue to do.
Mr. Delattre (France) (spoke in French): We meet
today after receiving news about another chemical
attack in Syria — this time in Douma — which
resulted in more than 20 victims, including women
and children. Furthermore, the attack was penetrated
in a de-escalation zone. We are closely following all
available information. We expect that the international
investigative mechanism in place — in particular the
Fact-finding Mission — will shed light on the attack.
As we commemorate the one hundredth anniversary
this year of the end of the First World War, during
which chemical weapons produced on an industrial
scale were used for the first time in history, repeated
chemical-weapon attacks in Syria are an affront to
the human conscience and a violation of the most
fundamental norms of international law. The facts
prove that the scourge continues to exist. Last year
in Syria, on 4 April, more than 80 people, including
women and children, were killed by a powerful nerve
agent. Four years prior, 2,000 Syrian civilians were
gassed in Ghouta with sarin gas. The use of chemical
weapons was confirmed by the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
The OPCW-United Nations Joint Investigative
Mechanism (JIM) clearly determined that the Syrian
regime and Da’esh were responsible for those attacks.
France itself independently confirmed that the Syrian
regime was responsible for the attack perpetrated on
4 April. Since 2013, investigations have revealed more
than 100 allegations of the use of chemical weapons,
primarily in Syria but also in Iraq and Malaysia.
Chlorine gas, sarin, mustard gas and VX — all deadly
nerve agents — have returned to the forefront of the
international arena a century after the horrors of the
First World War. Gruesome images of the victims
of such weapons of terror, which we thought we had
long ago left behind, have also resurfaced. We cannot
allow the use of such loathsome weapons to become
commonplace. They destabilize entire regions and
threaten everyone’s security. They increase the risk
of chemical terrorism, which we all fear. They also
weaken the regime against chemical weapons as well
as the entire non-proliferation regime. They undermine
international law and call into question the outcome of
international forums that have been held for decades.
That is why we must take action. We owe it
to history; it is a responsibility we must shoulder
together. Those of us who claim to be committed to the
non-proliferation regime and helped to build it should
bear that in mind. Let us be clear: those who hamper our
efforts to combat impunity endorse de facto impunity
for the perpetrators of such chemical attacks. They
prevent us from deterring and bringing to justice those
who participated in chemical-weapon programmes and
those Governments and entities that give the orders
to carry out attacks. We therefore cannot turn a blind
eye and allow them to continue — and all the more
so, and I repeat this, given that the chemical-weapon
non-proliferation regime is the most developed and
successful of all international non-proliferation
regimes. Allowing it to be weakened without taking
action would be tantamount to accepting the erosion
of the entire non-proliferation regime on weapons of
mass destruction, which we built together, step by step,
over decades and which now serves as the backbone
of the international security architecture and one of
multilateralism’s main accomplishments.
France has therefore proposed the establishment of
a new international partnership to combat impunity for
the use of chemical weapons by anyone — State and
non-State actors alike. That partnership was launched
yesterday in Paris at a conference convened by the
23/01/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8164
18-01889 5/11
French Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Jean-Yves
Le Drian, at which representatives of 24 States were
in attendance to reiterate their willingness to work
together to counter the threat. I should like to mention
just a few of the partnership’s ambitious commitments.
They include the transfer and sharing of information,
when possible, about the perpetrators of attacks;
a commitment to impose national or international
sanctions against entities and individuals concerned;
assistance for building State capacity with regard to
designations and sanctions; and the publication of a
single, consolidated list of the names of individuals
involved in attacks. Criminals who claim responsibility
for developing and using such barbaric weapons must
know that they will not go unpunished. Once again,
this is about the future of the entire collective security
system. One should not be able to violate the most basic
norms without eventually facing the consequences.
Owing to obstruction on the part of certain
countries, we were unable to renew the JIM’s mandate
at the end of last year. Yesterday’s consultations on
Syria confirmed that an overwhelming majority of the
members of the Security Council do not agree with
the current impasse. In that regard, we take note of the
proposal made today by Russia. We will consider it in
the light of the principles I have just outlined.
The new partnership launched in Paris does not
aim to replace international instruments and the
investigative mechanism established by the United
Nations and the OPCW. Instead, it seeks to complement
and bolster that structure by making a new operational
instrument available to the multilateral system and the
international community. It will assist investigations
and help the international justice system in its work.
It is neither an anti-Syrian instrument nor an exclusive
club of countries. All countries can join this pragmatic
and open partnership by adhering to its statement of
principles. Through the partnership, they will show
their commitment to law, international stability,
justice and security in order to end impunity for the
perpetrators of chemical attacks and their accomplices.
We must therefore work through the partnership to
consolidate the regime prohibiting chemical weapons.
The cornerstone of the partnership was laid in Paris
and embodies our faith in effective and demanding
multilateralism. In an effort to take immediate action,
I can confirm that France has imposed asset-freezes
on networks involved in the proliferation of chemical
weapons in Syria.
In conclusion, I recall that there will be no justice
or sustainable peace in Syria without putting an end to
impunity. How can we continue to defend the regime and
reiterate its willingness to speak in good faith and seek
a political solution when that very same regime employs
barbaric weapons against its own people? There has
never been a larger gap between words and deeds. At
the United Nations in both Vienna and Geneva, I said
that we must work together to reach a political solution
in Syria. Implementing an inclusive political solution
as outlined in resolution 2254 (2015), which serves as
our guidepost now more than ever, will depend upon
a neutral environment in Syria guaranteed by the
regime’s clear commitment to credible constitutional
change and democratic elections. It is the only way to
permanently end the suffering of Syrians. We continue
to believe that we can, and must, bring the Security
Council together to proceed in that direction.
Mr. Allen (United Kingdom): When I heard today
that Russia had called for an urgent meeting on the use
of chemical weapons in Syria, I was glad that we could
return to an issue on which the Council has a duty to
ensure that those responsible are held to account. That
duty is even more pressing today, because yet another
heinous attack on civilians was reported yesterday to
the Council by the Secretariat. In that attack, in Douma,
in eastern Ghouta, at least 21 civilians were treated for
symptoms consistent with exposure to chlorine. That
followed another reported attack in eastern Ghouta on
13 January, affecting six people.
In 2016, the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons-United Nations Joint Investigative
Mechanism (JIM) found in three cases that the Syrian
regime had used chlorine gas to attack civilians. Last
year, it found that the regime had used sarin in Khan
Shaykhun. Now, as the regime is escalating its attacks
on eastern Ghouta in an attempt to force the besieged
opposition to surrender, we remain deeply concerned
about continuing reports of the use of chemical weapons
in Syria. In all of this, we should not forget that it was
the regime’s 2013 attack on eastern Ghouta, using
sarin, that led to the Council’s adoption of resolution
2118 (2013), which had the clear, unanimously endorsed
aim of disarming Syria’s chemical-weapon programme.
Throughout that process, Russia has claimed to be
acting as a leading Power, a guarantor. But when the
Al-Assad regime deliberately ignored its obligation to
stop using chemical weapons and continued to do so
with careless regard for human li
Security Council, 73rd Year : 8231st Meeting, Friday, 13 April 2018, New York
No full textThreats To International Peace And Security. The Situation In The Middle EastUnited Nations S/PV.8231
Security Council
Seventy-third year
8231st meeting
Friday, 13 April 2018, 10 a.m.
New York
Provisional
President: Mr. Meza-Cuadra . (Peru)
Members: Bolivia (Plurinational State of). . Mr. Llorentty Solíz
China. . Mr. Ma Zhaoxu
Côte d’Ivoire. . Mr. Tanoh-Boutchoue
Equatorial Guinea. . Mr. Ndong Mba
Ethiopia. . Mr. Alemu
France. . Mr. Delattre
Kazakhstan. . Mr. Umarov
Kuwait. . Mr. Alotaibi
Netherlands. . Mr. Van Oosterom
Poland. . Ms. Wronecka
Russian Federation. . Mr. Nebenzia
Sweden . Mr. Skoog
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . Ms. Pierce
United States of America. . Mrs. Haley
Agenda
Threats to international peace and security
The situation in the Middle East
This record contains the text of speeches delivered in English and of the translation of
speeches delivered in other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records
of the Security Council. Corrections should be submitted to the original languages only. They
should be incorporated in a copy of the record and sent under the signature of a member
of the delegation concerned to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service, room U-0506
([email protected]). Corrected records will be reissued electronically on the Official
Document System of the United Nations (http://documents.un.org).
18-10728 (E)
*1810728*
S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018
2/22 18-10728
The meeting was called to order at 10.05 a.m.
Adoption of the agenda
The agenda was adopted.
Threats to international peace and security
The situation in the Middle East
The President (spoke in Spanish): In accordance
with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of
procedure, I invite the representative of the Syrian
Arab Republic to participate in this meeting.
The Security Council will now begin its consideration
of the item on its agenda.
I wish to warmly welcome His Excellency
Secretary-General António Guterres, to whom I now
give the floor.
The Secretary-General: The situation in the
Middle East is in chaos to such an extent it has become
a threat to international peace and security. The region
is facing a true Gordian knot — different fault lines
crossing each other and creating a highly volatile
situation with risks of escalation, fragmentation
and division as far as the eye can see, with profound
regional and global ramifications. We see a multiplicity
of divides.
The first is the memory of the Cold War. But, to be
precise, it is more than a simple memory: the Cold War
is back with a vengeance — but with a difference. The
mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of
escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to
be present.
Secondly, there is the Palestinian-Israeli divide.
Thirdly, there is the Sunni-Shia divide, evident
from the Gulf to the Mediterranean. It is important to
note that apparent religious divides are normally the
result of political or geostrategic manipulation.
Finally, there is a wide range of different
factors — from opposing attitudes in relation to the role
of the Muslim Brotherhood or the status of the Kurds,
to the dramatic threats to communities that have been
living in the region for millenniums and are part of the
rich diversity of Middle Eastern societies.
Those numerous divisions are reflected in a
multiplicity of conflicts with different degrees of
interconnection, several of which are clearly linked to
the threat of global terrorism. Many forms of escalation
are possible.
We see the wounds of the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict continuing to fester. The recent violence in
Gaza resulted in many needless deaths and injuries.
I repeat my call for an independent and transparent
investigation into those incidents. I also appeal to those
concerned to refrain from any act that could lead to
further casualties, in particular any measures that could
place civilians in harm’s way. That tragedy underlines
the urgency of revitalizing the peace process for a two-
State solution that will allow Palestinians and Israelis
to live side by side in peace in two democratic States
within secure and recognized borders. I reaffirm the
readiness of the United Nations to support those efforts.
In Yemen, we are witnessing the worst humanitarian
disaster in today’s world. There is only one pathway
to ending the Yemeni conflict and to addressing the
humanitarian crisis: a negotiated political settlement
through inclusive intra-Yemeni dialogue. My Special
Envoy, Martin Griffiths, is doing everything possible
to facilitate that political settlement. He will brief the
Council next week.
In Libya, I encourage all parties to continue to
work with my Special Representative, Ghassan Salamé,
as he engages in the political process with a broad range
of Libyan interlocutors across the country in order to
implement the United Nations action plan. It is high
time to end the Libyan conflict.
The case of Iraq demonstrates that progress is
possible with concerted local, regional and global
commitment. With the defeat of the Islamic State
in Iraq and the Levant, having overcome the risk of
fragmentation, the Government of Iraq must now
focus on reconstruction, reforms and reconciliation.
I hope that the upcoming elections will consolidate
that progress.
At the recent Paris and Rome conferences, the
international community reaffirmed its support for
Lebanon’s sovereignty, stability and State security
institutions. It is absolutely essential to prevent a new
Israel-Hizbullah conflict, which could inevitably result
in many more victims and much greater destruction
than the last war. I reiterate the critical importance to
act on key principles and commitments on Lebanon,
including the Security Council resolutions, such as
resolution 1701 (2006), and the policy of disassociation.
The dangers of the links to the Syrian conflict are
13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231
18-10728 3/22
evident in the recent confrontations between Iran and Israel in Syria.Syria today indeed represents the most serious threat to international peace and security. We see there confrontations and proxy wars, involving several national armies, a number of armed opposition groups, many national and international militia, foreign fighters from everywhere in the world and various terrorist organizations. From the beginning, we have witnessed systematic violations of international humanitarian law, international human rights law and international law, in general, in utter disregard for the letter and spirit of the Charter of the United Nations.For eight long years, the people of Syria have endured suffering upon suffering. I reiterate that there is no military solution to the conflict. The solution must be political through the Geneva intra-Syrian talks, as stipulated in resolution 2254 (2015), and in line with the consistent efforts of my Special Envoy, Staffan de Mistura. Syrians have lived through a litany of horrors: atrocity crimes, sieges, starvation, indiscriminate attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure, the use of chemical weapons, forced displacement, sexual violence, torture, detention and enforced disappearances. The list goes on.In a moment of hope, the Security Council adopted resolution 2401 (2018), demanding that all parties cease hostilities without delay for a durable humanitarian pause. Unfortunately, no such cessation of hostilities ever really took place. That is the bleak panorama of Syria today.In that panorama, I am outraged by the continued reports of the use of chemical weapons in Syria. I reiterate my strong condemnation of the use of chemical weapons by any party to the conflict under any circumstances. Their use is abhorrent and a clear violation of international law. The seriousness of the recent allegations requires a thorough investigation, using impartial, independent and professional expertise.In that regard, I reaffirm my full support for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and its Fact-finding Mission in undertaking the required investigation into those allegations. The mission should be granted full access, without any restrictions or impediments, to perform its activities. I take note that the Syrian Government has requested that and is committed to facilitating it. The first OPCW team is already in Syria; a second team is expected today or tomorrow.However, we need to go further. In a letter to the Council two days ago, I expressed, following the end of the mandate of the OPCW-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism,“my deep disappointment that the Security Council was unable to agree upon a dedicated mechanism to attribute responsibility for the use of chemical weapons in Syria”.I want to repeat today that the norms against chemical weapons must be upheld. As I wrote in the same letter:“[e]nsuring accountability for a confirmed use of chemical weapons is our responsibility, not least to the victims of such attacks. A lack of accountability emboldens those who would use such weapons by providing them with the reassurance of impunity. This, in turn, further weakens the norm proscribing the use of chemical weapons and the international disarmament and non-proliferation architecture as a whole. I urge all Member States to act responsibly in these dangerous circumstances;“I appeal to the Security Council to fulfil its duties and not to give up on efforts to agree upon a dedicated, impartial, objective and independent mechanism for attributing responsibility with regard to the use of chemical weapons. I stand ready to support such efforts.”The increasing tensions and the inability to reach a compromise in the establishment of an accountability mechanism threaten to lead to a full-blown military escalation. In my contacts with the members of the Security Council, particularly the permanent members, I have reiterated my deep concerns about the risks of the current impasse and stressed the need to prevent the situation from spiralling out of control.That is exactly the risk that we face today — that things spiral out of control. It is our common duty to stop it.The President (spoke in Spanish): I thank the Secretary-General for his valuable briefing.I shall now give the floor to those Council members who wish to make statements.S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018
4/22 18-10728
Mr. Nebenzia (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We are greatful to the Secretary-General for his briefing. His participation, his assessments and his authoritative words about the situation that has developed are very significant. We agree with him that there are many wounds in the Middle East. However, most important, currently the deepest wound is the situation in Syria, insofar as any negative repercussions would have major global implications.Two days ago, news of a threat by the United States to launch missile strikes against the Syrian Arab Republic ricocheted around the world. The Russian Federation was also warned to prepare for strikes. Let me point out that our military is in Syria at the invitation of its legitimate Government in order to combat international terrorism. We continue to see dangerous military preparations for an illegal act of force against a sovereign State in violation of the norms of international law. It is not just the use of force but even the threat of it that flies in the face of the Charter of the United Nations, and that is precisely what we are seeing in the most recent statements and actions of Washington and its allies. The bellicose rhetoric is being ratcheted up at every level, including at the very top. Additional forces and assets of the United States military and its allies are bearing down on the Syrian coast. It feels as though Washington is singlemindedly heading towards unleashing a military scenario against Syria. That cannot be permitted. Such developments would be fraught with terrible consequences for global security, especially considering that a Russian military contingent is deployed in Syria.There are also those who have been observing these risky preparations with tacit approval, declaring that they understand Washington’s motives or engaging in direct incitement, thereby becoming potential accomplices in an act of reckless military adventurism. There are people in the Security Council who love to talk about preventive diplomacy. Right now, for some reason, they are nowhere to be seen or heard. The guilty parties have been speedily identified not just before any investigation has been conducted but even before it has been established whether the incident in question took place at all, but evidently they must still be punished. Someone will have to answer for these unfortunate developments and for the previous interventions that have engulfed many countries in years of crisis with untold casualties.Witness the recent experience of Iraq and Libya, which, among other things, shows that the attitude of America’s leaders to the Security Council is largely one of convenience. They need it as cover for their Iraqi test tubes and Libyan no-fly zones. What they are presenting us with now is another virtual test tube, and an empty one. The reckless behaviour of the United States as it tramples on international law and State sovereignty is unworthy of its status as a permanent member of the Security Council, which presupposes the highest possible degree of responsibility and certainly not a right to sabre rattling, a right that is unknown in international law.Why does the United States continue to torture the Middle East, provoking one conflict after another and pitting the States of the region against one another? Who will benefit from a potential strike against the Syrian military, which is taking the brunt of the fight against terrorism and achieving major victories in it? We know for sure that the ringleaders of the Syrian armed groups were given orders to launch an offensive after a possible military action. Is this latest wave of chaos really being unleashed just for that?The excuse is the alleged use of toxic substances in the Syrian town of Douma on 7 April, for which there has been no reliable confirmation. Our specialists found no trace of the use of toxic substances. The residents of Douma know of no such attack. All the evidence of the alleged attack has been provided by anti-Government forces for whom this development is in their interests. We have good reason — indeed, we have information — leading us to believe that what took place was a provocation with the participation of various countries’ intelligence services. We have been issuing warnings about this for a long time. It is a repeat of the Khan Shaykhun scenario in April of last year.The Syrian Government, for which this is clearly the last thing it needs, has said that it was not involved and has sent a request for an immediate inspection by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) of the location of the alleged incident. It has offered security guarantees jointly with the Russian military. The mission is already getting started on its work in Syria and we hope that it will be able to conduct a truly independent and impartial investigation.Only the Security Council has the authority at the international level to decide what measures to take and against whom in connection with the use of chemical 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231
18-10728 5/22
weapons in Syria. Russia will continue to work diligently and systematically to de-escalate the recent tensions in international relations. We proposed adopting a brief resolution in support of the OPCW inspection mission in Douma that the United States, Britain and France irresponsibly blocked, thereby demonstrating their lack of interest in an investigation. The only thing they care about is overthrowing the Syrian Government and, more broadly, deterring the Russian Federation. This has been clearly visible in other international and domestic political events built on unfounded hoaxes and conspiracy theories that always centre around the Russian Federation.What is the United States trying to achieve? After many years of internecine strife in Syria, significant areas of the country have been stabilized. The political process is reviving and indicators of national reconciliation are emerging. The terrorists have been dealt a significant blow. We have never denied that the United States has also made a certain contribution to achieving that shared goal, but it has always kept certain types of terrorists in reserve for its fight against the so-called regime and for advancing its geopolitical priorities in the region.My British colleague is always asking me what Russia is doing to implement resolution 2401 (2018). My answer is that my country is practically the only one that is doing anything about it. Over the course of the Astana process, peace has been restored in more than 2,500 towns and villages. That does not mean that they have become victims of the regime, as the United States calls it, merely that with the help of Russia and other guarantors they have established normal relations with the central authorities in Damascus. With the support of the United Nations, the Syrian National Dialogue Congress was held successfully in Sochi. How many towns and villages has the United States brought peace to? How many groups has it persuaded to join the ceasefire agreements?In order to break the deadlock in the situation in eastern Ghouta after the adoption of resolution 2401 (2018), complex negotiations were conducted with the leaders of armed groups, with Russian assistance. The militias and their family members were safely evacuated from the district, and civilians were finally given the opportunity to shake off years of terror. Film of their genuine joy exists, but the Western media is not showing it. The United States does not care about the fate of the prisoners of the militias in eastern Ghouta who had been supporters of the Syrian Government. When they were bargaining with the Syrian authorities to exchange prisoners, the militias claimed that they were holding between 2,000 and 4,000 people. Now it turns out that there are far fewer. People died from harsh treatment and hard labour digging huge tunnels for their torturers.Some members have grieved to see their bearded pilgrims setting off for Syria on free tourist tickets. They lost no opportunity to shriek from every street corner about the plight of the hundreds of thousands of people in besieged eastern Ghouta. Now those people need help in rebuilding normal lives, but these Council members have already lost interest because the area is under Government control. Now there will have to be unpleasant discussions about the blockade of Fo’ah and Kefraya. When was the last time a humanitarian convoy was there? When was the last time Council members even asked about it? Someone must answer for the coalition’s destruction of Raqqa.These are dangerous developments, with far-reaching ramifications for global security. In this instance, responsibility lies entirely with the United States and its allies. It is a pity that Old Europe continues to lose face. We call on the leaders of these States to immediately reconsider, return to the international legal fold and not to lead the world to the dangerous brink. We urgently need to find a peaceful way out through a collective effort. The Russian Federation is ready to cooperate equitably with all partners and to solve the problems that may arise through dialogue. We will continue to focus on finding a peaceful settlement to the conflict in Syria based on established international law. We will continue to work actively to that end, and we call on all our partners to do the same.Mrs. Haley (United States of America): I started to listen to my Russian friend so as to respond to him, but instead I am truly in awe of his ability to say what he said with a straight face.Today’s meeting of the Security Council has been convened under truly strange circumstances. The Russian Federation has asked us to discuss what it calls unilateral threats related to Syria. What is strange is that Russia is ignoring the real threat to international peace and security that has brought us all here. It is ignoring its own unilateral responsibility for all of it. What we should discuss today is the use of deadly chemical weapons to murder innocent Syrian S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018
6/22 18-10728
civilians. That is one of the most blatant and grotesque violations of international law in the world today. It is a violation of all standards of morality. It violates the long-standing international consensus that chemical weapons represent a unique evil. Chlorine, mustard gas and other chemical weapons killed 90,000 people and injured more than 1 million during the First World War. In the history Canada in the Great World War, the Canadian soldier A.T. Hunter described it this way.“The gas cloud gathered itself like a wave and ponderously lapped over into the trenches. Then passive curiosity turned to active torment — a burning sensation in the head, red-hot needles in the lungs, the throat seized by a strangler. Many fell and died on the spot. The others, gasping, stumbling with faces contorted, hands widely gesticulating and uttering hoarse cries of pain, fled madly through the villages and farms and through the city itself, carrying panic to the remnants of the civilian population and filling the roads with fugitives of both sexes and all ages”.Chemical weapons did not produce the most casualties in the First World War, but they were the most feared. In the
Transcripts Of Joint Press Stakeout By Un Special Envoy For Syria, Staan De Mistura, During His Visit In Moscow
No full textTranscripts Of Joint Press Stakeout By Un Special Envoy For Syria, Staan De Mistura, During His Visit In Mosco
Statement By The Un Resident And Humanitarian Coordinator And Un Representatives In Syria On The Impact Of The Compounded Humanitarian Crisis In Syria
No full textStatement By The Un Resident And Humanitarian Coordinator And Un Representatives In Syria On The Impact Of The Compounded Humanitarian Crisis In Syri
Un Commission Of Inquiry On Syria Condemns Upsurge In Violence In The Idlib Governorate And Eastern Ghouta: Syrian Arab Republic
No full textUn Commission Of Inquiry On Syria Condemns Upsurge In Violence In The Idlib Governorate And Eastern Ghouta: Syrian Arab Republi