📋 Tender Overview
Meeting this afternoon to examine two draft resolutions relating to the renewal of the sanctions regime applicable to Mali, one submitted by France and the United Arab Emirates, the other by the Russian Federation, the Security Council failed to find common ground, despite consultations during the session. Both texts were rejected, the first due to the Russian veto, the second due to lack of sufficient votes.
The draft resolution presented by France and the United Arab Emirates proposed to renew for one year, until August 31, 2024, the sanctions provided for in resolution 2374 (2017) , in particular the travel bans and the freezing of assets, and to extend until September 30, 2024 the mandate of the Group of Experts responsible for monitoring the implementation of these measures.
This same draft resolution also proposed to the Council to review the mandate of the Group of Experts and to decide, by August 31, 2024 at the latest, on a further extension. He added that the Council would stand ready to reconsider the continuation of the measures set out in resolution 2374 (2017) , “including modifying, suspending or lifting such measures, as appropriate at any time”.
The competing text, submitted by the Russian Federation, also proposed to renew the sanctions concerning Mali until August 31, 2024, but “for a final period of 12 months”. He also called for the dissolution, “with immediate effect”, of the Group of Experts created by resolution 2374 (2017) .
At the start of this heated session, a procedural battle pitted the representative of the Russian Federation against his counterpart from the United States, in his capacity as President of the Council this month. The first called for consultations to be held to “progress on the issue on the agenda”, while the second intended to move directly to the vote on the Franco-UAE draft resolution. Following a long exchange, during which China and Mozambique, on behalf of the A3, took a position in favor of the Russian Federation, the session was suspended to allow consultations.
After this suspension, the Franco-Emirati text was put to the vote and rejected by one vote against, that of the Russian Federation, one abstention – China – and 13 votes for. The Russian draft resolution was then rejected in turn, receiving only one vote in favour, that of the Russian Federation, one against – Japan – and 13 abstentions.
The United Arab Emirates and France, penholders for the first text, regretted the outcome of this vote, recalling the efforts made during the negotiations to achieve a balanced text. In presenting this project, we focused on Mali's request, argued the Emirati delegation, for whom Bamako's concerns had been taken into account, making it possible to review the sanctions in force at any time. France, for its part, welcomed the unanimous support of the African members of the Council, before criticizing the Russian Federation for having presented a draft resolution which had not been the subject of prior discussions, "on a such an important subject and at such a critical moment for Mali", while MINUSMA is withdrawing.
The Russian Federation justified its recourse to the veto by considering, on the contrary, that the Franco-Emirati draft resolution did not take Mali's concerns into account. On the other hand, she argued that her own text proposed to maintain the sanctions regime for a year to "try to take advantage of its potential" and thus better implement the 2015 peace agreement. "But the sanctions must serve to respond to this problem rather than being exploited as a tool of external pressure", she added, judging on the other hand that the potential of the Group of Experts had been "exhausted for a long time" and that it was time to terminate its activities.
In contrast, the United States declared that it saw the Group of Experts as an "essential source of information on Mali" and the only UN mechanism capable of monitoring the human rights situation in this country and making update on the implementation of the peace agreement. According to the American delegation, the Russian Federation, by attempting to terminate the Group of Experts, sought to avoid the publication of “uncomfortable” information on the actions of the Wagner group in Mali.?
Like the United States, the United Kingdom spoke out against the lifting of sanctions, "while the security situation in Mali is deteriorating", while China considered that these measures "do not constitute an end in self” and that the Security Council should not resort to it indefinitely without taking into account the situation of the countries concerned. And the Chinese delegation recalls that the sanctions were imposed in 2017 at the request of the Malian Government in order to support the implementation of the ceasefire and the peace agreement.
Through the voice of Mozambique, the A3 for their part regretted that it was not possible to extend the sanctions regime "against those who obstruct the implementation of the Agreement for Peace and Reconciliation in Mali.” With the withdrawal of MINUSMA, maintaining these measures would have helped to mitigate their negative effects, they stressed, joined on this point by Albania and Switzerland.
