Questo sito utilizza cookie tecnici, analytics e di terze parti.
Proseguendo nella navigazione accetti l'utilizzo dei cookie.

Preferenze cookies

Consiglio di Sicurezza – Dibattito sull’adozione di risoluzione in materia di armi chimiche

Spiegazioni di Voto pronunciate dall’Ambasciatore Sebastiano Cardi, Rappresentante Permanente dell’Italia presso le Nazioni Unite, al Dibattito in Consiglio di Sicurezza sull’adozione di risoluzione su “Accountability for Chemical Weapons Attacks in Syria“ —

Having co-sponsored the Resolution, Italy regrets that the Council was unable to adopt the draft resolution submitted by France, the UK and the US. We thank these delegations for their efforts.

Of course, we had hoped that the unity of the Council would be preserved in support of this resolution and my delegation has worked in this direction during negotiations and consultations. This initiative was about ensuring a meaningful follow-up to the reports of an impartial instrument that this very Council has created, supported and renewed unanimously, therefore clearly backing its methodology, its professionalism and its impartiality.

Looking ahead, we are encouraged to see that the Joint Investigative Mechanism is about to resume its activities. We remain strongly committed to supporting it and to upholding the findings of its future investigations.

Italy voted in favor of this resolution for three main reasons.

First of all, in light of our long-standing position on non-proliferation issues which must be kept separated by other political circumstances.

We strongly condemn the use of any chemical weapons or toxic chemicals anywhere, by anyone and under any circumstances, by State actors and non-State actors. Today more than ever we must uphold the values and principles of the international non-proliferation regime and avoid its weakening that would encourage anyone to use chemical weapons.

Second, to shore up credibility and deterrence of the JIM.

We keep supporting the work of the JIM and its staff, that we commend for its dedication and professionalism. It is an essential instrument to attribute responsibility for these heinous attacks.

This Council had created the JIM as it felt the need to see the responsibility of CW attacks attributed to those behind these horrific acts. In its reports, the JIM has done just what the Council had asked it to do, abiding by the standards that the SC had set out: to identify to the greatest extent feasible those who were perpetrators of CW attacks. This resolution was meant to ensure a meaningful follow-up to the JIM’s work.

Third and final reason we voted in favour: accountability. Just identifying which party was responsible is not enough à those who have planned, ordered and executed the attacks must face consequences.

This Council has a shared responsibility to uphold the work of the JIM and ensure a meaningful follow-up holding accountable who is responsible for the use of chemical weapons.

Thank you