Russia maintains its veto to obstruct humanitarian aid access for the people of north-west Syria: UK statement at the General Assembly.

Dziękuję, panie prezydencie.

Our meeting today has been prompted by Russia’s seventeenth veto concerning Syria.

Time and again, Russia has employed their veto to block humanitarian access for the people of north-west Syria and to impede accountability for violence against civilians.

This instance of the veto is particularly harsh.

The UN has been unequivocal about what is necessary to secure humanitarian access for the 4.6 million people in north-west Syria: consistent, predictable access, adhering to international humanitarian law, for a minimum of 12 months.

Fourteen Council members were prepared to support a resolution mandating that access. Fourteen members entered negotiations in good faith, consistently compromising to seek common ground. We extend our gratitude to Brazil and Switzerland for their relentless efforts as co-penholders.
However, one member alone objected, driven solely by political motives. They quarreled over the duration of UN humanitarian access, ultimately resorting to their veto instead of engaging in meaningful negotiations. The conversation shifted from 12 months to 6 months, and then to nothing.

Having sidestepped negotiations, Russia submitted a take-it-or-leave-it resolution that was backed by just one other Council member.

Mr. President, the UN has made it clear that Syria’s conditions for delivering aid are impractical and unacceptable, violating international humanitarian law.

Let’s remember, this is an ongoing conflict. The regime continues to carry out aerial attacks against civilians in north-west Syria, now seeking to control the aid that reaches them as well.

The notion that Syria is acting responsibly is a cruel misconception. Currently, the UN can only operate through Bab al Ra’I and Bab al Salam. According to Syria’s terms, those crossings are open for merely another three and a half weeks—a far distance from the 12 months called for by the Secretary-General.

Furthermore, stating that OCHA cannot or should not communicate with all parties on the ground to ensure safe access violates IHL and undermines OCHA’s mandate. This stance jeopardizes the safety and security of humanitarian teams. Globally, humanitarian organizations must engage with all parties to deliver aid to those in dire need. Syria is no exception.

As we have heard repeatedly today, donors are worried about the implications for the millions of dollars allocated annually in humanitarian aid to the Syrian people. They are concerned about the safety of civilian humanitarian teams on the ground, as well as about the transparency and governance measures that ensure aid reaches those who require it, rather than being misappropriated.

So let’s be clear. Humanitarian assistance must be provided in accordance with international humanitarian law—not held hostage to political agendas.