Security Council meeting 5933

The President

I should like to inform the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Angola, Australia, Canada, Liberia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Sierra Leone, the United Republic of Tanzania and Zimbabwe in which they request to be invited to participate in the consideration of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the consideration of the item without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The President

I should like to inform the Council that I have received a letter from the Permanent Representative of South Africa, requesting that the Security Council extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to Mrs. Lila H. Ratsifandrihamanana, Permanent Observer of the African Union.

It is so decided.

I invite Mrs. Ratsifandrihamanana to take a seat at the Council table.

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Security Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations.

Members of the Council have before them document S/2008/447, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by Australia, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, France, Italy, Liberia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Sierra Leone, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America.

I wish to draw members' attention to document S/2008/452, which contains the text of a letter dated 10 July 2008 from the Permanent Observer of the African Union, transmitting the African Union resolution on Zimbabwe.

I shall now give the floor to the representative of Zimbabwe.

Mr. Chidyausiku (Zimbabwe)

Let me begin by reiterating the fact that Zimbabwe, a country at peace with itself and its neighbours, poses absolutely no threat to international peace and security and should therefore not be a focus of this Council. In view of that, the situation in Zimbabwe does not warrant the adoption of a Security Council resolution under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter.

Zimbabwe has been a victim of incessant meddling through several measures, including declared and undeclared economic sanctions, merely because the Government embarked upon a process of equitable distribution of land after the former colonial Power, under a Labour Party Government, reneged on its responsibilities stipulated in the Lancaster House Agreement of 1979.

Unfortunately, because of the decision we took, the British and their allies have used their media to viciously portray Zimbabwe as a lawless, disorderly and undemocratic country. We have been haunted in all forums, including the Commonwealth, the Human Rights Council, the General Assembly's Third Committee and now the Security Council. The root cause of the crisis, land ownership, is lost in the hype about so-called human rights violations, a subject far easier to sell for propaganda purposes. To us, the ferocity of the anti-Zimbabwe campaign and today's draft resolution underscore what is at stake -- our independence and future.

There have been adverse reports on inter-party violence that have been overdramatized in the media to justify the withdrawal of Mr. Tsvangirai from the presidential run-off poll. It is important for the Council also to note that only 10 per cent of the country may have witnessed some form of violence, while 90 per cent of the country has not been affected. The violence that unfortunately took place does not justify the submission of today's draft resolution before the Council. Let the international community not be gullible about the political machinations of the opposition in Zimbabwe. We would want to assure the Council that the cases of those people who have claimed to be victims of political violence will be investigated by the Government of Zimbabwe. Already, most of the culprits from both parties, including criminal gangs, have appeared before the courts and the law will take its course.

We are, however, astounded by some Western Powers that are pushing to add more sanctions on Zimbabwe following President Mugabe's re-election. Zimbabwe has been under sanctions enshrined in the United States' so-called Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, which instructs international financial institutions to block aid to Zimbabwe and to deny it debt cancellation. The European Union-imposed sanctions of 2002 have resulted in the economy's underperformance and have brought much suffering to the people of Zimbabwe.

There has been an eight-year blockade of balance-of-payments support and lines of credit, but the world is made to believe that President Mugabe's economic policies have precipitated the economic problems. Recently, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated that his Government was working on a new sanctions regime to suffocate the ZANU-PF Government and give birth to an MDC-T Government. In addition, we have heard the European Union and the United Kingdom promising millions to Zimbabwe in the event that a Government of their choice is in place, meaning that the current one is under sanction.

We reiterate that sanctions against Zimbabwe have put the economy under siege and are affecting the vulnerable groups and general population. Many of our people are moving into neighbouring countries and beyond in search of greener pastures. It is surprising that this movement of our people to neighbouring countries in search of economic opportunities due to the impact of sanctions is what this Council is expected to endorse as a threat to international peace and security. That would be the first time that the movement of a people seeking economic opportunities elsewhere is used as a basis for a sanctions resolution under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter.

By attempting to coerce Zimbabwe into a certain form of behaviour through the force of sanctions and isolation, the West has actually created an aggrieved nation. The current sanctions against Zimbabwe are basically an expression of imperialist conquest and no amount of propaganda or denial can ever wish that away.

Political dialogue is ongoing between the contending parties in Zimbabwe. In fact, in his inauguration statement, President Mugabe reached out to the opposition and said that it was now imperative for the nation to look forward to the future with a sense of unity. He called on all political parties in Zimbabwe to enter into a comprehensive inter-party dialogue sooner rather than later in order to enhance unity and cooperation among Zimbabweans. He emphasized that such dialogue was important in resolving the socio-economic and political challenges currently prevailing in Zimbabwe. The President emphasized that the country has to move forward in unity, regardless of diverse political affiliations, united by a sense of common vision and destiny for a prosperous Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe fully welcomes the recent African Union resolution and would like to assure members that the people of Zimbabwe are willing to engage one another in an effort to resolve their problems. It is important to remember that reconciliation is not a new concept to Zimbabwe. When Zimbabwe obtained its independence in 1980, it was faced with a situation in which it had to mould a nation out of two liberation movements and the forces of Ian Smith's regime. As the Council is well aware, it performed the task extremely well and confounded many prophets of doom. In view of that, we are confident that, with the support of our neighbours, we will once again succeed in reconciling Zimbabweans.

In line with his mandate from the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and supported by the African Union, President Mbeki was in Zimbabwe over the weekend to consult with President Mugabe and the political parties in order to chart the way forward on the current situation in the country. We are of the view that any other separate initiatives on that matter would be counterproductive and serve to undermine the role of SADC and President Mbeki.

In view of the aforementioned, today's draft resolution is a clear abuse of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter as it seeks to impose sanctions on Zimbabwe under the pretext that the country is now a threat to international peace and security simply because the elections held did not yield a result favourable to the United Kingdom and its allies. Adopting the draft resolution would set a dangerous precedent and only serve to undermine the ongoing dialogue between the political parties, risk worsening the political and socio-economic situation in the country and affect other countries in the region.

Furthermore, it is, in our opinion, not the role of the Security Council to certify national elections of Member States, all the more so where they do not produce an outright winner. Zimbabweans have a right to choose their own leaders.

It is also important to point out that the seven African leaders who attended the G8 summit stated that sanctions were not the way forward to resolve the political impasse in the country. They expressed the view that Zimbabwe is not a threat to regional peace and security, and therefore the Security Council should yield to the mediation efforts of both SADC and the African Union. It follows therefore that the adoption of the draft resolution would be in disregard of Africa's own position.

Trying to impose a solution from outside would be unfair to Zimbabweans, to SADC and to the African Union. Zimbabwe's problems can be solved by Africans working together. It is our fervent hope that members of the Council will not support the draft resolution, which seeks to involve the Security Council in a purely bilateral dispute between Zimbabwe and the United Kingdom.

The President

It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it. Unless I hear any objection, I shall put the draft resolution to the vote now.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements before the voting.

Mr. Kumalo (South Africa)

Earlier this morning, a joint media statement by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) facilitator, the representative of the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) and the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) was issued in Pretoria. The statement reads:

"The talks between the Zimbabwean political parties consisting of ZANU-PF, MDC-Tsvangirai and MDC-Mutambara, chaired by the Government of South Africa as mandated by SADC, resumed in South Africa yesterday. The talks are aimed at finding solutions to the challenges in Zimbabwe."

As we meet this afternoon, the talks are continuing in South Africa as the Zimbabwe parties continue to seek a political solution to the challenges they face, complicated by the holding of an election that was preceded by violence and political intimidation that resulted in a process that was unfair and declared to be not transparent by the observers from SADC, the African Union and the Pan-African Parliament.

South Africa was appointed as facilitator at the Extraordinary Summit of the Heads of State and Government of SADC, chaired by the Chairperson of the SADC the Organ on Politics, Defence and Security Cooperation, held in Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania on 28 and 29 March 2007. At that time, the Extraordinary Summit of SADC appealed for the lifting of all forms of sanctions against Zimbabwe.

The African Union Assembly of Heads of State and Government, meeting in its eleventh ordinary session held from 30 June to 1 July 2008 in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, expressed deep concern about the prevailing situation in Zimbabwe. However, when considering the matter of Zimbabwe, the African Union summit did not call for sanctions against that country. Instead, the African Union summit "appealed to States and all parties concerned to refrain from any action that may negatively impact on the climate for dialogue".

The summit also decided

"to encourage President Robert Mugabe and the leader of the MDC party, Mr. Morgan Tsvangirai, to honour their commitments to initiate dialogue with a view to promoting peace, stability, democracy and reconciliation of the Zimbabwe people".

The summit further

"expressed its appreciation to SADC, and its Organ on Politics, Defence and Security Cooperation, as well as the facilitator of the intra-Zimbabwe dialogue, His Excellency Thabo Mbeki, President of the Republic of South Africa, and His Excellency Jean Ping, Chairperson of the African Union Commission, for the ongoing work aimed at reconciling the political parties".

Accordingly, South Africa, as a member of both SADC and the African Union, is obliged to follow the decision of those regional bodies. For that reason, my delegation will vote against the draft resolution before us.

Nonetheless, we are encouraged by the commitment to dialogue by the Zimbabwe parties. That dialogue will lead to the improvement of the humanitarian and economic situation, thereby contributing to a better life for all Zimbabweans. The Security Council must give space for the African Union summit decision to be implemented.

Mr. Dabbashi (Libya)

Libya has been following very attentively and with great interest the devastating situation in Zimbabwe over the past few months. We are concerned about the ongoing tension between the Government and the opposition.

Through the African Union and in cooperation with its member States, we shall continue to endeavour to defuse the crisis in keeping with the decisions taken by the Union during its recently held eleventh summit at Sharm el-Sheikh.

As the Council is aware, the summit considered all aspects of the situation in Zimbabwe and recognized its complex nature. It also expressed its concern about the situation, as well as its appreciation for the efforts of South African President Mbeki and Mr. Jean Ping of the African Union to promote reconciliation between the political actors in Zimbabwe. The summit adopted a decision expressing the wish that Zimbabwe should resume dialogue and form a Government of national unity. We note that dialogue is now taking place under the aegis of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), represented by President Thabo Mbeki. We are pleased to note that the Zimbabwean parties resumed dialogue yesterday.

I would like to draw attention to the fact that the African Union decided to support the efforts of SADC and called for them to continue in order to help the people and leaders of Zimbabwe to resolve their problems. In that regard, the African Union has appealed to the parties concerned to avoid any action likely to have a negative impact on the climate of dialogue. The African Union has confirmed that the people of Zimbabwe are capable of resolving their problems if they are given the joint support of SADC, the African Union and the international community at large.

SADC and the African Union are supporting the people of Zimbabwe as they strive to preserve their territorial integrity and sovereignty. However, the draft resolution before us today does not serve those objectives. It is in conflict with Article 52 of the Charter of the United Nations, which pertains to regional arrangements, and specifically with paragraph 3 of that Article, which states that

"[t]he Security Council shall encourage the development of pacific settlement of local disputes through such regional arrangements or by such regional agencies either on the initiative of the States concerned or by reference from the Security Council."

The draft resolution before the Council is based on the assumption that the situation in Zimbabwe poses a threat to peace and security in the region. That assumption is undermined by the fact that the dispute is between Zimbabwean parties and that neighbouring countries affirm that the situation is in no way a threat to regional peace and security. That is why the situation in Zimbabwe does not fall within the purview of the Security Council's mandate. The draft resolution before us also constitutes a violation of Zimbabwe's sovereignty and interference in its internal affairs. That fact is underscored by the first paragraph of the draft resolution, which deliberately omits any reference to Zimbabwe's sovereignty. Security Council resolutions have always reaffirmed the Council's adherence to the principle of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States.

Imposing sanctions on Zimbabwe would hinder African efforts to resolve the crisis in the country through SADC. Sanctions would have serious consequences for the people of Zimbabwe and create a climate of tension that would in no way be conducive to finding a solution to the problem. Imposing sanctions now would be contrary to the international consensus that sanctions are a last resort to be used when all other means have been exhausted. That is especially relevant given that there is no justification whatever for imposing sanctions. We fear that one of the parties may regard the draft resolution as tacit support for it, which could embolden that party to increase its demands and to refuse to enter into or to continue dialogue to resolve the situation.

Libya, whose leadership has always worked to strengthen the African Union and has continuously endeavoured to resolve African conflicts in the context of African good offices, cannot endorse the draft resolution before the Council and will vote against it.

Mr. Kafando (Burkina Faso)

History, and in particular Africa's history, has accustomed us to situations in which a small spark has led to a great conflagration. History also teaches us that the most absurd and atrocious of wars are often born of events that we thought were easy to control. Let us therefore not deceive ourselves. We must consider the situation in Zimbabwe as a serious one. Whatever one may say, the worsening of the political and security situation in the country continues to be a potential danger and threat to peace in southern Africa.

The second round of presidential elections that took place on 27 June 2008 was marked by acts of intimidation and violence, thereby compromising the honesty of the balloting and the standing of democracy in both Zimbabwe and Africa. According to the 29 June 2008 statements by the Observer Missions of the Southern Africa Development Community, the Pan-African Parliament and the African Union, that election was not fair, free or credible and thus did not reflect the will of the Zimbabwean people.

The African Union, in keeping with its Constitutive Act, on 1 July 2008 expressed its concern about the loss of human lives and the ongoing violence in Zimbabwe. In order to prevent the conflict from spreading to the whole of the subregion and to foster a climate favourable to democracy, the African Union encouraged the Zimbabwean leaders to engage in dialogue so as to promote peace, stability, democracy and national reconciliation. As a member of the great African family, and faithful to its commitment to peace, Burkina Faso of course endorses that initiative.

However, Burkina Faso is also a member of the Security Council, and in that capacity it must shoulder its responsibilities regarding any situation that it regards as posing a threat to international peace and security. That is why, keeping in mind that the provisions of the draft resolution providing for an embargo on arms imports are designed to prevent a large-scale military conflict, Burkina Faso has decided to lend its support to the draft resolution. I would state clearly, that it is that provision of the draft resolution in particular that essentially explains our position.

We are also convinced that the adoption of the draft resolution would neither compromise nor undermine any moves under way at this stage to bring about a fair settlement to the crisis. On the contrary, we believe that, as a means of exerting pressure, it could help to encourage the Zimbabwean parties to agree as quickly as possible on a consensus political settlement.

Mr. Kleib (Indonesia)

Indonesia has been following the developments in Zimbabwe closely, and we wish to underline the significance of the negative reports of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the African Union and the Pan-African Parliament observers on the presidential run-off election held on 27 June 2008. Clearly, the conduct of elections has to be undertaken in a free and fair manner. We have been appalled by the political violence, intimidation and the loss of life that has occurred. We have also been concerned by reports of the prevailing dire humanitarian situation.

It is our hope that the people of Zimbabwe will be able to resolve the difficult situation they face in a peaceful and democratic manner and in accordance with Zimbabwe's own constitutional processes. The leaders of the country, in particular, are called upon to recognize the burden of responsibility on their shoulders and to leave no stone unturned in the quest to extricate Zimbabwe from its present predicament.

The people of Zimbabwe deserve international support in that endeavour. Indonesia wishes to acknowledge and reaffirm its support for the pivotal role being played in promoting political reconciliation among the political parties by SADC, by the facilitator of the intra-Zimbabwe dialogue, His Excellency Thabo Mbeki, President of South Africa, and by the African Union. Indeed, the recent African Union summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, was unequivocal in its support for dialogue and reconciliation. We commend also the continued mediation efforts by the Secretary-General.

The Security Council, in synergy with such regional efforts, must also support the people of Zimbabwe in tackling the challenges before them. The promotion of peace, stability, reconciliation and democracy should guide our endeavours. In that, we cannot emphasize enough the importance of the Council working together with SADC and the African Union.

We wish also to emphasize the need for Council unity and a sense of common purpose in addressing this issue. The Security Council has proved able to speak with one voice through its presidential statement of 23 June 2008 (S/PRST/2008/23). It is preferable from our point of view that all Council decisions on the matter should be placed in the same spirit. That we must nurture and sustain.

We therefore deeply regret that the time allocated to discussing the draft resolution has not been sufficient and that flexibility has not yet been fully exercised enabling all members of the Council to fully engage in trying to reach a compromise on this matter.

In our view, any Security Council action must pass two key tests. First, it must serve to promote dialogue and reconciliation in Zimbabwe. In other words, it must provide encouragement and incentives to the political leaders of the country to set aside their differences and place the interests of the nation above anything else. Secondly, it must be in synergy with, and build on, regional efforts to address the issue.

In short, the Security Council must exert a positive influence. It should contribute to establishing sufficient space and the necessary conducive atmosphere to allow dialogue to take place and to succeed. Its members are required to diligently ensure that the measures the Council is contemplating would, in fact, promote solutions. At this juncture, my delegation has doubts whether the measures contained in the draft resolution would promote dialogue among the parties concerned.

In that regard, we are of the view that applying sanctions at this particular stage will not encourage all parties to the conflict to promote dialogue among themselves. Invoking sanctions will also jeopardize ongoing mediation efforts by regional organizations and neighbouring countries.

For those pertinent reasons my delegation will abstain in the vote on the draft resolution. In doing so, our delegation is also looking to the future, for there is a need to maintain the prospect of a united Security Council in addressing this matter in synergy with the regional efforts.

The President

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Viet Nam.

Viet Nam shares the deep concern about the current instability, violence and political impasse in Zimbabwe, which are having an adverse impact on the lives of the people of Zimbabwe. We support the mediation efforts by the African Union (AU), the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and South African President Thabo Mbeki in implementation of the resolution adopted recently at the AU summit in Sharm el-Sheik, with a view to enabling the parties concerned in Zimbabwe to reach a mutually acceptable solution in the spirit of putting the interests of the people of Zimbabwe above all, thereby contributing to the restoration and consolidation of peace, security and stability not only in Zimbabwe but also throughout the region. We are pleased to note that with the good offices led by South African President Thabo Mbeki, the parties concerned in Zimbabwe are engaging in dialogue and negotiations towards that end.

While sharing the concerns about the current situation in Zimbabwe, Viet Nam is of the view that the situation prevailing there does not constitute a threat to regional or international peace and security. That view is shared not only by regional countries, especially the neighbours of Zimbabwe, but also by a great majority of the States Members of the United Nations.

Therefore, Viet Nam holds that the situation in Zimbabwe at present is not within the mandated purview of the Security Council. Moreover, subjecting Zimbabwe to Chapter VII sanctions for the present situation is of serious concern, because the proposed sanction measures not only would fail to facilitate efforts to find a solution to the situation in Zimbabwe, especially those made by the AU and SADC, but also would set a dangerous precedent for intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign States and would run counter to the fundamental principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. For those reasons, Viet Nam cannot support the draft resolution.

I now resume my functions as President of the Security Council.

I now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/2008/447.

The President

The result of the voting is as follows: 9 votes in favour, 5 against and 1 abstention. The draft resolution has not been adopted owing to the negative vote of a permanent member of the Council.

I shall now call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements following the voting.

Sir John Sawers (United Kingdom)

Deputy Secretary-General Migiro told the Security Council three days ago (see S/PV.5929) that the situation in Zimbabwe was a challenge to the world, and today the Security Council has failed to rise to that challenge. Ms. Migiro said that this was a moment of truth for democracy in Africa. The Security Council has failed to shoulder its responsibility to do what it can to prevent a national tragedy deepening and spreading its effects across Southern Africa.

I would like to be very clear about the draft resolution we have just voted on, a draft resolution sponsored by a range of countries, including African countries. It has been widely misrepresented by some members of the Council and by the representative of Zimbabwe just now. This draft resolution did not represent a new judgement by the Security Council on the recent elections in Zimbabwe. The Council unanimously made that judgement on 23 June through its presidential statement (S/PRST/2008/23). Our collective assessment was that free and fair elections were impossible under the prevailing conditions of a campaign of violence against the political opposition and the denial of the opposition's right to campaign freely. Regrettably, that proved to be the case when President Mugabe went ahead anyway. Local and regional observers, and many African leaders, made clear that the outcome was not free and fair and could not be considered legitimate. We also agreed on 23 June that the results of the 29 March elections must be respected.

Secondly, the draft resolution was not an attempt to undermine ongoing mediations efforts; precisely the opposite. The draft resolution would have required the Government of Zimbabwe to engage with those efforts, and it would have put some countervailing pressure on the ruling regime to balance the appalling pressure and intimidation that they continue to exert on the political opposition. We have supported President Mbeki's mediation efforts, but we have to be realistic: those efforts have so far come to naught. The only one who has benefited to date is Mr. Mugabe.

Thirdly, this draft resolution was not a foray into the internal affairs of an African country. The Security Council has often determined -- for example, in Sierra Leone, Sudan and Somalia -- that political instability and violence in one country has consequences for wider peace and stability, requiring the Council to act. That remains true in Zimbabwe today. The African Union has already acknowledged, in its resolution of 1 July, the risk that the conflict in Zimbabwe may spread across the subregion.

We should reflect on the opportunities we have lost today.

We have missed the opportunity to impose a legal obligation on Mr. Mugabe's Government to end the violence and intimidation which have scarred Zimbabwe and made normal politics impossible and which are destabilizing the region. The millions of refugees -- a quarter of Zimbabwe's population -- constitute a stark demonstration of this.

We have missed the opportunity to strengthen the mediation efforts, giving them the full weight of the international community by the addition of a United Nations envoy. We look to the Secretary-General to appoint such an envoy anyway, on his own authority.

We have missed the opportunity to back up South Africa's mediation efforts with something more than words. That is why the draft resolution included carefully targeted sanctions aimed at those who have brought about the current crisis, with a clear message that they would be lifted once an inclusive political settlement is reached.

And finally, we have lost an opportunity to impose an arms embargo. The last thing Zimbabwe needs now is more arms. We hope that Government and civil society in Southern Africa will continue to ensure that arms do not get through to the Mugabe Government.

This draft resolution only failed because it has been vetoed by the Russian Federation and China. Russia's action is, frankly, inexplicable. Only three days ago, the meeting of Group of Eight leaders, which of course includes President Medvedev of Russia, adopted a statement on Zimbabwe that recommended the appointment of a United Nations special envoy and went on to say, "We will take further steps, inter alia introducing financial and other measures against those individuals responsible for violence".

The draft resolution that Russia and China have just vetoed was precisely to implement those two decisions. We view their decision as deeply damaging to the long-term interests of Zimbabwe's people. It has in our view harmed the prospects for bringing to an early end the violence and the oppression in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe faces not only a political crisis. It also faces a grave humanitarian crisis for which the Government of Zimbabwe bears full responsibility. The Zimbabwean authorities have ignored every single appeal for the restrictions on humanitarian supplies to be lifted. Again, the Council failed today by vetoing this draft resolution to require Mr. Mugabe's Government to allow humanitarian aid to be delivered.

Many times during our discussions of this issue, Council members have said that the people of Zimbabwe must be allowed to find their own way forward. Of course, they must; that is what they tried to do when they voted on 29 March. We must respect the outcome of the elections on that day. If we are not to see more violence, more economic chaos, more refugees and a greater threat to regional peace and stability, then we, the international community, have to do what we can to create the conditions for a real political process that some chance of success. At present, such a process does not exist.

With the vetoing of this draft resolution, we now need to look for a new way forward. We will discuss this with our partners in Europe and with our friends in the African Union and across the world. The people of Zimbabwe need to be given hope that there is an end in sight to their suffering. The Security Council today has failed to offer them that hope.

Mr. Churkin (Russia)

I wish first of all to respond to the irresponsible and factually inaccurate statement made by the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom, who took it upon himself to interpret the Russian position with reference to a decision of the Group of Eight (G-8). I would recall something that anyone who read that decision should know: not coincidentally, it makes no reference to the actions of the Security Council. The Russian Federation based its action on today's draft resolution precisely on the position formulated by the G-8, and of which every member of that group should be perfectly aware.

I should now like to set out the reasoning behind our vote on the draft text that was before us today. The result of the vote on that draft resolution, on sanctions against Zimbabwe, was largely predictable and was due to a number of circumstances. In the positions of a number of Council members, we have of late seen an increasingly obvious attempt to take the Council beyond its Charter prerogatives and beyond the maintenance of international peace and security. We believe such practices to be illegitimate and dangerous and apt to lead to a realignment of the entire United Nations system. The Russian Federation intends to continue to counter such trends, so that all States without exception will firmly comply with the Charter of the Organization.

We are firmly convinced that the problems of Zimbabwe cannot be resolved by artificially elevating them to the level of a threat to international peace and security. The Council's application in this instance of enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter is unjustified and excessive. Moreover, the draft resolution represents nothing but an attempt by the Council to interfere in the internal affairs of States, contrary to the Charter.

The draft ignores important realities. The negotiating process in Zimbabwe has begun; dialogue has been launched between the representatives of the Government and the opposition and is proceeding apace. In that context, a broad range of problems in the inter-Zimbabwean settlement, including the formation of a Government of national unity, is under consideration. In that respect, we note the mediation efforts of President Mbeki of South Africa and President Santos of Angola, which are opening a window for realistic opportunities to overcome the internal conflict in Zimbabwe.

The sponsors of the draft resolution have not considered the opinions of the States of the region, which reject its sanctions philosophy and are calling for the search for a political solution to be continued. Indeed, the draft ignores the consensual decision of the African Union appealing to States to refrain from any act that could have a negative impact on advancing the dialogue between the Zimbabwean parties. The adoption of a resolution could lead to a realignment of the regional situation and deepen existing problems. That is why the sponsors have been warned against such action by countries of the region that are involved in the search for a solution to the inter-Zimbabwean conflict.

On the basis of all those factors, the Russian Federation voted against the draft resolution.

In ignoring the voices of the skeptical and those who disagree with them, the sponsors unfortunately squandered a genuine opportunity to coordinate a Council response to events in Zimbabwe that would truly have promoted the success of the political dialogue in a country friendly to Russia and, subsequently, a way out of the current profound crisis.

However, the fact that the draft resolution was not adopted hardly means that the grave situation in Zimbabwe is beyond the purview of international attention. The Russian Federation calls on the authorities of that country and the opposition to pursue constructive dialogue in order to develop a formula for a political settlement as soon as possible. Harare must understand that there is no alternative.

Mr. Ripert (France)

A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe9' in position 2199: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg010-bk01-pa01">On 23 June, the Securi... after so many years of misery and suffering.</p>', 2199, 2200, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 2200
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg010-bk01-pa01">On 23 June, the Securi... after so many years of misery and suffering.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 2199