UN Security Council Open Debate

on General issues relating to Sanctions: Preventing their humanitarian and unintended consequences

[7 February 2022; 1000 hrs]

Statement by Ambassador T.S. Tirumurti

Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations

-----

At the outset, let me begin by congratulating the Russian Federation for their presidency of this month. We convey our full support for your Presidency. I commend Norway on a successful Presidency. I thank the Russian delegation for organizing this debate on an important topic such as sanctions and its humanitarian and unintended consequences.  I thank USG for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo and USG Humanitarian Affairs Martin Griffiths for their briefings. 

2. As per the UN Charter, maintenance of international peace and security is the primary responsibility of the Security Council, which has to act on behalf of all the UN Member States in the discharge of its duties. Emanating from this responsibility, the Council imposes measures under Article 41 of the UN Charter to maintain or restore international peace and security. These measures are required to be provisional in nature and not permanent. The Council has since been imposing non-military prohibitions and restrictions on member states. So far, the Council has established multiple sanctions regimes, including the ongoing 14. 

3. The sanction regimes have served well in our fight against terrorism, preventive diplomacy efforts, assisting member states in implementing peace agreements and against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. 

4. However, sanction regimes must not be an end in themselves. In their implementation, the sanction regimes must ensure that they have the intended impact and do not further exacerbate the suffering of the populations at the receiving end. As such, it is necessary to keep these regimes under constant review so that they keep pace with the changing situation on the ground. The sanction measures should be neutral in nature and should not become political instruments of the few powerful. 

5. Of late, the unintended consequences of sanction measures, including humanitarian consequences, are being increasingly emphasized by the member states and other stakeholders. UN Secretary General has reiterated more than once that sanctions have exacerbated suffering in countries confronting armed conflict. The Office of Humanitarian Affairs has also referred to these concerns. The unprecedented impact of the covid pandemic, has also added to the miseries of the population in countries faced with sanctions. There is therefore an urgent need to credibly address these concerns to ease the sufferings of the people. 

6. In this regard, my delegation would like to flag the following SIX observations: 

(i). One, sanctions should always be used as an instrument of last resort after having exhausted all other options, and in accordance with the provisions of the UN Charter and should not be violative of principles of international law. The Security Council should remain respectful of the regional approach adopted by countries and, in collaboration with regional organizations, address challenges related to peace and security, before considering issuance of such sanctions. 

(ii)      Two, there should be a clear end goal for such sanctions and they should not remain perpetually as mills around the necks of countries. As such, a clear time line and criteria for its phased withdrawal be ideally spelt out from the inception stage itself. 

(iii). Three, all efforts should be made to reduce the negative impact of such measures on the populations of the receiving State. In the context of the ongoing Covid19 pandemic, it becomes all the more important. It is also necessary to ensure that legitimate trade and economic activities of the concerned state and its regional partners are not impacted adversely. It is, therefore, important for the Security Council to fully consult all the key regional countries before considering any such measures because, more often than not the impact of sanctions is felt not just by the country but by its entire region. 

(iv). Four, regarding lifting of targeted measures, such as arms embargo and assets freeze, the Council needs to prescribe realistic and achievable benchmarks to encourage member states to take steps in the right direction.  We have seen that some of the benchmarks prescribed on conflict-ridden developing countries are even higher that what some developed countries have achieved. This is uncalled for.

(v). Five, it is imperative that sanctions do not impede legitimate humanitarian requirements. However, it is important to exercise due diligence while providing humanitarian carve outs, especially in cases where terrorism finds safe havens. There have been examples of terrorist groups taking full advantage of humanitarian carve outs, making mockery of sanction regimes, including that of 1267 Sanctions Committee. There have also been several cases of terrorist groups in our neighborhood, including those listed by this Council, re-branding themselves as humanitarian organizations to evade these sanctions. These terrorist organizations use the umbrella of the humanitarian space to raise funds, recruit fighters and even use human shields. Under the garb of the humanitarian cover provided by such exemptions, these terrorist groups continue to expand their terror activities in the region and beyond. Due diligence therefore is an absolute must.

(vi). Six, the sanctions committees continue to face significant challenges in overseeing the sanctions measures related to technical violations of the arms embargo, objections by humanitarian partners to the reporting requirement, questions about the working of the Panel of Experts, and in some cases, non-cooperation by member states. The Chairs of the Sanctions Committees need to play a more proactive role in addressing these challenges. For this, it is imperative that archaic and opaque working methods of Subsidiary Bodies of the Council need to be open, transparent and credible.  

7. In conclusion, Mr. President, it is our considered submission that sanctions regimes are simply a means to an end of the larger goal of maintaining international peace and security. They cannot become an end in themselves and therefore should not remain in perpetuity. We need to review the sanction regimes regularly and terminate them as soon as the objective is achieved. Towards that end, we need to set realistic and objective goals, and ensure civilians are protected from unintended consequences of sanctions measures. In this regard, we are ready to work constructively with all other members. The recommendations made by the Informal Working Group on General Issues of Sanctions in 2006 could be a good starting point for a renewed deliberations in the Council. 

I thank you Mr. President. 

-----