18 February 2025
Mr. President,
We welcome the personal participation of the Foreign Minister of China in today’s open debate. We welcome the participation of other ministers and other senior representatives.
We believe that the topic proposed by the Chinese Presidency is highly relevant. It provides us with a good opportunity to discuss through a geopolitical prism the root causes of the current profound crisis plaguing the contemporary international world order. We see today’s meeting as a kind of continuation of the discussion that took place in July 2024, when the Council under Russia’s presidency considered the issue of multilateral cooperation in building a more fair, democratic and sustainable world order.
80 years ago, on February 4, 1945, the Yalta Conference began. This landmark meeting set out the contours of the post-war world order, with the UN being the heart of it. In international legal dimension, the UN Charter – for the first time in history – stipulated the equality of all states, ridding the world of practices pursued by certain states to legitimize their claims to dominance. This breakthrough decision resulted in the process of decolonization, which brought freedom to numerous enslaved peoples. In addition, for all its strengths and weaknesses, which politicians and scholars continue to debate, the UN as a whole fulfilled its founding purpose – namely, it prevented a new global war.
However, today the world is closer than ever to a dangerous threshold and is teetering on the brink of a direct armed confrontation between nuclear powers. The West, acting through the “rule-based order” template, bypasses the UN when developing solutions on issues that are important to most countries, and subsequently portray these solutions as universal recipes imposing them on others. All this merely undermines the role of the UN and the rule of international law in governing international relations.
The practice of unilateral restrictive measures has become overly common – they are applied whenever proponents of forceful measures in world politics fail to push through the desired solution at the Security Council. An example of this is the situation in Iran: after the expiration of a number of restrictions under Resolution 2231 in October 2024, European countries did not take practical measures to lift the restrictions against Iran but rather extended them indefinitely at the national level.
Let us recall that the only body authorized to impose sanctions is the Security Council; any other measures are unlawful. However, sanctions by the Council itself are not “carved in stone”. As with any other instrument for maintaining international peace and security, the Council has a duty to proactively work to update sanctions measures, to adapt them to new realities and ensure their effective implementation. In this vein, it is obvious that the current restrictions against the DPRK do not contribute to normalizing the situation on the Korean peninsula and their major revision is long overdue.
Non-compliance with the UN Charter and the irresponsible approach to Security Council’s resolutions on the most acute international issues have become the “hallmark” of the West. From the poorly concealed revelations by many Western politicians and diplomats we see that the Council’s resolutions are meaningless for their capitals: with amazing regularity these countries fail to implement the resolutions or simply consider them non-binding.
What lies behind such actions is a keen desire to preserve the neocolonial system of exploitation that allows its ruling elites and financial-industrial capital to parasitically plunder the resources of developing countries. Russia has been undertaking efforts to advance anti-colonial and anti-neocolonial agendas at the UN, including through the adoption of a General Assembly thematic resolution in December 2024.
In the context of efforts to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, it is becoming increasingly clear who genuinely advocates a more fair, free and equitable world order, and who is living in the past, striving at any cost to make their geopolitical agendas a reality. Any State claiming to act as a mediator and proposing peace initiatives must first and foremost clearly understand what caused this conflict. The root causes of this conflict include the disregard for Russia’s legitimate interests in the area of security, the desire to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, and the failure by the Kiev regime (which came to power as a result of an unconstitutional coup) to respect the rights of the entire population of Ukraine and uphold its obligations, which are basically the obligations that any normal Government have to its citizen.
Alongside the achievement of the goals of the special military operation, Russia has been advocating the establishment of a system of indivisible and equal security in Eurasia, whereby all states will be able to safeguard their own security and will not attempt to ensure their security at the expense of the interests of others. The Russian President has put forwards an initiative on this matter, which is in line with the ideas and proposals of many countries located on our shared continent.
There is no doubt that a comprehensive approach to multilateralism is premised on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. Alongside the establishment of a multilateral world order with the centers of power shifting to the Global South, there is a growing need to adapt global governance institutions to modern days realities and, first and foremost, to reform the United Nations and the Security Council. We advocate greater representation at the Security Council of African, Asian and Latin American States. The unjustified domination at the Council of Western countries as successors of colonial powers should become a relic of the past.
The global economy is also undergoing tectonic shifts. The share of the BRICS countries in global GDP (more than 37%) has surpassed that of the G7 countries (less than 30%). The reform of the global financial architecture needs to reflect these processes. Of paramount importance here is the prompt reform of the Bretton Woods Institutions and the WTO, whose work should reflect the real weight of non-Western centers of economic growth.
And what do we see in this sphere? Merely attempts by the OECD countries to stymie meaningful reforms and cling to the existing system, which allows for financial instruments to be used as weapons of mass destruction, furthering the fragmentation of the global economy. There is ongoing colonial practice of imposing ideological designs and political solutions, social and economic models, which are geared towards plundering sovereign States. Since the adoption of the Declaration on Decolonization in 1960, developed countries are estimated to have siphoned off resources amounting to $62 trillion from the Global South. Moreover, there has been unleashed an unprecedented campaign of imposing unilateral coercive measures on countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America. A grave blow to the global financial system is being dealt by the outright theft of sovereign assets and foreign currency reserves by Western countries. At the same time, there have been introduced restrictions on access to technology, which runs counter to genuine multilateralism and exacerbates inequalities, laying a slowly ticking time bomb and thwarting the prospects for achieving sustainable development goals.
We are witnessing growing mistrust of the financial system based on Western reserve currencies, and the emerging outflow of funds from securities and debt obligations of Western states and major banks. This facilitates the consolidation of regional ties and the formation of effective and secure multilateral foreign economic mechanisms, which have nothing to do with those existing mechanisms that are exploited by the West for the advancement of its parochial interests. This, among other things, implies the expansion of transactions in national currencies, the creation of independent payment systems and the establishment of industry-market chains to bypass the channels that have been blocked or compromised as a result of politically motivated restrictions.
Interregional and regional organizations, as well their partnerships – in our view – have the potential to become linchpins that govern a multipolar world order. This is precisely the approach that has been set out in President Vladimir Putin’s blueprint for a Greater Eurasian Partnership – which is the economic bedrock of our initiative for common indivisible security in Eurasia. Undoubtedly, an important role here lies with the BRICS, the SCO, as well as with the CIS, the EAEU, ASEAN and other associations.
An outstanding example of international regional cooperation is the work of UNRWA, which for decades has been providing assistance for Palestinians in the humanitarian aid, education, health care and social services in the OPT. UNRWA has been essentially doing everything that the occupying power (West Jerusalem) is obliged to do; but the occupying power is only engaged in waging unprecedented persecution of UNRWA.
The uninterrupted and robust operation of the Agency is the key to survival of millions of people in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Today, UNRWA is the sole remaining lifeline for the Gazans, and it has no alternative so far. It is our duty to protect the Agency’s mandate, so that the Agency could continue its unique work in assisting Palestinians both in the OPT and in neighboring Arab countries.
In this regard, we support the call by the UN Secretary-General and the UNRWA Commissioner-General for Israel to comply with its international legal obligations and to repeal the Knesset legislation banning UNRWA’s activities.
Clearly, the consolidation of multilateralism is largely driven by multiplying global challenges faced by humankind. These challenges are many and diverse – from health crises to unbridled infiltration of digital technologies into our lives, from climate change to the so-called “demographic transition”, which essentially, as some experts believe, means demographic suicide for a growing number of nations. The UN is designed to play a central coordinating role in developing adequate solutions involving all stakeholders; and depoliticized international scientific cooperation is meant to provide a compelling and long-term basis for the adoption of such decisions. When it comes specifically to the achievement of SDGs, major hopes have been pinned on the upcoming Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development, which is to be held in Spain in July.
Among other priorities, we would note the problem of the digital divide. We advocate establishing inter-State dialogue and stepping up the activity of specialized international organizations with a view to reducing the digital divide and assisting developing countries in crafting their national legislation and high-tech infrastructure for the digital economy.
Discussions on the above-mentioned issues need to be meaningful and should not descend into futile polemics, otherwise tangible results will be beyond reach. It is necessary to restore professional diplomacy, the culture of dialogue, the ability to listen and hear. We also need to preserve channels of crisis communication. There is a bedrock for this – it is the Charter of our Organization. If everyone, without exception, follows its spirit and letter, rather than interpreting it selectively for the advancement of their geopolitical interests, the United Nations will be able to resolve the current differences and find common ground on the majority of issues facing it.
I thank you.