Continued Military Assistance to Ukraine, Weapons, Ammunition Transfers to Russian Federation Risk Conflict’s Escalation, Senior Official Warns Security Council
Amid the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation, defensive military assistance to Kyiv has continued while weapons and ammunition have been reportedly transferred to the Russian Federation Armed Forces, a top United Nations disarmament official told the Security Council today, stressing that such actions risk escalating the conflict.
“The supply of weapons and ammunition into any armed conflict raises significant concerns about the potential escalation of violence,” said Izumi Nakamitsu, High Representative for Disarmament Affairs. Warning against risks of weaponry falling into wrong hands, she called for measures, comprehensive pre-transfer diversion risk assessments, end-user certificates and post-shipment verifications, among others.
She also urged all Member States to participate in the UN Register of Conventional Arms, which captures around 90 per cent of global arms flows and can help in tracking the influx of weapons in conflict zones while drawing attention to the established arms-control instruments — such as the Arms Trade Treaty. “The world cannot afford for this senseless war to continue,” she stressed, appealing to all Member States to “make every effort for peace”.
George Szamuely, a journalist, also briefed the Council, stressing that the ongoing war would not have happened if the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) had embraced the Kremlin’s draft proposals on 17 December 2021 outlining a new security architecture for Europe. “At the heart of Russia’s proposals was a commitment by NATO to no further expansion, and in particular to no NATO membership for Ukraine,” he said. “There was nothing at all unreasonable about these demands, nothing there that could not have been addressed with a little deft diplomacy.”
He went on to say that, following the illegal and violent overthrow of the elected Government in Kyiv on 22 February 2014, NATO supported the new rulers, providing weaponry and training to Ukraine’s armed forces. Moreover, since February 2022, NATO countries have continued pouring weaponry into Ukraine, including, among others, shoulder-fired man-portable air defence systems, anti-ship missiles, armoured personnel carriers, long-range cruise missiles and cluster munitions.
In the ensuing debate, many speakers called on the Kremlin to end its invasion. Some underscored the right of self-defence enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations while others called for a peaceful settlement of the conflict through diplomacy. Several delegations pointed to the futility of having repeated meetings on “the arms supply by the West”, requested by the Russian Federation.
On that, the United Kingdom’s representative said that Moscow is again misusing this Council to obfuscate its responsibility for atrocities in Ukraine, pin blame on the West and hide its own failures. “Let us call this meeting out for the farce that it is,” she declared.
Echoing that, the delegate of the United States added that this is the fifth meeting requested by Moscow on this topic in six months. “The Russian Federation should disabuse itself from the illusion that we will be distracted from the darker reality we face. We won’t be,” he said.
As well, Albania’s representative, Council President for September, stressed in her national capacity that, despite today’s topic, the core issue remains that the Russian Federation initiated an unprovoked, unjustified military aggression against Ukraine, also highlighting that the General Assembly, the International Court of Justice and other international bodies have condemned this aggression.
However, the Russian Federation’s representative pointed out that Ukraine has already received military and other assistance worth more than $100 billion from the United States and its allies. Leading experts are already warning that pumping up the Kyiv regime with new weapons — despite their logistics and equipment issues — makes no sense. Washington, D.C., has no desire to end this war. “Greed runs through the veins [of our American colleagues],” he said, pointing to corruption and volumes of support provided by the West, and spotlighting that Kyiv is basing its policy on Nazi ideology.
Refuting that stance, Ukraine’s speaker recalled the tragedy of Mariupol as an example of the fate the Russian Federation has for her country. As long as the Council remains immobilized, “let us and the responsible nations […] complete this task”, including by supplying necessary weapons and strengthening the defensive capabilities of the victim, she said. Expressing her country’s resolve to continue de-occupying its sovereign territory to save as many lives of Ukraine’s soldiers as possible, she insisted that, following its defeat in the war, the Russian Federation should be demilitarized and de-nuclearized to prevent the threat of repeated aggression.
Nonetheless, China’s representative underscored that “military confrontation is not the way out of Ukraine’s crisis”, stressing that dialogue and negotiations are the fundamental way to restore peace. Recalling the joint statement of the recently concluded Group of 20 Summit, he pointed to its unanimous message on Ukraine. “This is an outcome of a joint effort and compromise by all parties,” he added.
As well, Gabon’s delegate warned that increasing arms deliveries and new military alliances amplify the risk of violence escalation. Moreover, the massive rearmament of belligerents in Ukraine undermines disarmament efforts and the non-proliferation of weapons. Emphasizing that the most effective way to limit the circulation of weapons is to put an end to the war, he stressed: “It is an illusion by either side to strive for peace by banking on a military victory.”
THREATS TO INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY
Briefings
IZUMI NAKAMITSU, High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, reported that the provision of defensive military assistance to Kyiv has continued “in the context of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine launched by the Russian Federation on 24 February 2022 in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law”. Much of the information on transfers of weapons systems and ammunition flows from Governments is available through open sources, and over recent months, reported transfers of arms and ammunition to the Ukrainian defence forces have expanded. There have also been reports of States transferring — or planning to transfer — weapons and ammunition to the Russian Federation Armed Forces, including for possible use in Ukraine. Underscoring that the transfer of weapons must take place within applicable international legal policy frameworks, she said that any potential or suspected violations of relevant Council resolutions — if verified — “are very concerning”.
She also expressed concern over reports related to the transfer and use of cluster munitions throughout the war and took note of reports related to the transfer of depleted-uranium tank ammunition to Ukrainian forces. The supply of weapons and ammunition into any armed conflict raises significant concerns about the potential escalation of violence, she stressed, also spotlighting the significant risks of diversion and proliferation even after the conflict has ended. Therefore, measures to address such diversion to unauthorized end-users and for unauthorized uses are essential to prevent further instability and insecurity in Ukraine, the region and beyond. Such measures include enhanced marking practices; comprehensive pre-transfer diversion risk assessments; end-user certificates, including non-transfer clauses; effective legal and enforcement measures; and post-shipment verifications.
She called on all Member States to participate in the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, which captures around 90 per cent of global arms flows and can help in tracking the influx of weapons in conflict zones. Further, States have established arms-control instruments, such as the Arms Trade Treaty, to prevent the diversion of conventional arms and regulate the international arms trade. Beyond addressing arms transfers, however, all parties to the armed conflict have a duty to protect civilians in armed conflict and to ensure compliance with applicable international law. Most civilian casualties result from the use of explosive weapons with wide areas of effect, she pointed out, expressing concern over the continued use of large numbers of uncrewed aerial vehicles against civilians and civilian infrastructure. Continued, intensified attacks against such targets in Ukraine — including energy infrastructure, health and educational facilities, ports, roads, bridges and grain facilities — also remain alarming.
“The world cannot afford for this senseless war to continue,” she stressed, appealing to all Member States to “make every effort for peace”. As the Secretary-General has repeatedly emphasized, the United Nations is committed to support all meaningful efforts to bring a just, sustainable peace to Ukraine, guided by the Charter, international law and relevant General Assembly resolutions, she added.
GEORGE SZAMUELY, journalist, said that the ongoing war could have easily been avoided, citing the Russian Federation’s two draft proposals on 17 December 2021 outlining a new security architecture for Europe: one for the United States and one for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The proposed framework recalled the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 in which the mutually antagonistic cold war parties agreed to recognize one another’s security concerns and pledged not to enhance their own security at the expense of that of their purported adversaries. “At the heart of Russia’s proposals was a commitment by NATO to no further expansion, and in particular to no NATO membership for Ukraine,” he said. “There was nothing at all unreasonable about these demands, nothing there that could not have been addressed with a little deft diplomacy.” Moscow was merely requesting that its neighbour, with whom it shared a centuries‑long history, not join a hostile military alliance. Neither the United States nor NATO deigned to respond to the Kremlin’s proposals.
Recalling that, in its 1990 Declaration of State Sovereignty, Ukraine avowed “its intention of becoming a permanently neutral State that does not participate in military blocs”, he pointed out that a May 2009 Gallup poll showed that Ukrainians were more than twice as likely to see NATO as threat than as a source of protection. As well, a September 2009 Pew Research Center survey found that 51 per cent of Ukrainians opposed NATO membership, with only 28 per cent in favour. Following his election victory in 2010, President Viktor Yanukovych submitted a bill to Ukraine’s Parliament barring his country’s membership in any military bloc. This all changed following the illegal and violent overthrow of the elected Government of Yanukovych on 22February 2014. The coup was actively supported by the United States and the European Union. One month after the coup, and before any elections had been held, the illegally constituted regime in Kyiv signed the European Union Association Agreement, in which Ukraine and the regional bloc agreed to “promote gradual convergence in the area of foreign and security policy, including the Common Security and Defense Policy”.
Moreover, the coup’s most important consequence was that the people in the country’s east and south-east, Yanukovych’s base of support, became disenfranchised, he noted. Not surprisingly, the population rebelled against Ukraine’s new rulers, who responded to this act of defiance with overwhelming force. NATO supported the rulers in Kyiv and poured in weaponry and providing training to Ukraine’s armed forces from 2014 on. What was supposed to be happening during those years was implementation of the Minsk Accords, signed by Kyiv and the representatives of the breakaway regions. The key condition for reconciliation was to be a constitutional amendment granting the breakaway regions “special status”. France, Germany and the Russian Federation served as guarantors, and the UN Security Council endorsed the accords in resolution 2202 (2015). Nonetheless, neither Kyiv, France nor Germany took their pledges seriously.
The NATO Powers pretended to be interested in implementing the Minsk Accords while encouraging Ukraine to resolve the Donbass problem by force, he continued, deploring that the result was some 14,000 deaths in the Donbass. Since February 2022, NATO countries have continued pouring weaponry into Ukraine, including shoulder-fired man-portable air defence systems, anti-ship missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, Stinger missiles, tanks, armoured personnel carriers, fighting vehicles, attack helicopters, howitzers, multiple-launch rocket systems, high mobility artillery rocket systems, drones, anti-tank missiles, Patriot missile systems, long-range cruise missiles, depleted-uranium shells and cluster munitions. Ukraine is now promised F-16 fighter aircraft and long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems. What the NATO Powers have notably failed to do is to offer a convincing explanation as to what they are trying to achieve, he stressed.
Statements
VASSILY A. NEBENZIA (Russian Federation) reported that Ukraine has already received from the United States and its allies military and other assistance worth more than $100 billion. Further, based on the results of the last week’s visit to Ukraine of United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken, another supply was made, worth more than $1 billion. Right before the visit, “the Zelenskyy regime” conducted a provocation — a missile attack on the market in the city of Kostyantynivka — which was immediately pinned on the Russian Federation. However, facts recorded by surveillance cameras show different evidence which the Kyiv provocateurs are now attempting to “hush up”. This incident reveals the same behavioural pattern as the shelling of the train station in Kramatorsk in April 2022, when publications of witnesses’ statements on social networks clearly indicated the guilt of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
Further, President Zelenskyy, complaining that support for Ukraine among voters in Western countries is rapidly falling, descended into direct threats, with his statement that “it is impossible to predict how millions of Ukrainian refugees in European countries will react to the fact that their country is being abandoned”, he reported. However, leading experts are already warning that pumping up the Kyiv regime with new weapons — despite their logistics and equipment issues — makes no sense. The priority of the Western military is not achieving the military defeat of the Russian Federation, which is by definition impossible, but inflicting as much damage as possible. Washington, D.C., has no desire to end this war. “Greed runs through the veins [of our American colleagues],” he said, pointing to corruption and volumes of support provided by the West in spite of the fact that the current Kyiv authorities are basing their policy on Nazi ideology. This manifests in the way the Kyiv regime treats its own people, including those who reject military service, he said, also noting that it uses Ukrainian refugees as pawns.
ROBERT A. WOOD (United States), recalling that this is the fifth meeting requested by Moscow on this topic in six months, said: “The Russian Federation should disabuse itself from the illusion that we will be distracted from the darker reality we face. We won’t be.” Noting that Moscow could receive munitions and raw materials from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to use against Ukraine, he said that Pyongyang could channel any revenue to further develop its mass destruction and ballistic-missile programmes. He, thus, called on that country to cease its efforts to transfer arms to Moscow. Underlining that the support for Ukraine is being carried out responsibly, he pointed to strengthening border management and security, as well as capacity-building to that end. Further, the cluster munitions, provided to Kyiv by Washington, D.C., are tested and designed to maximize effect, while limiting failure rates, he reported, adding that, in contrast, Moscow has employed high-failure-rate cluster munitions across the country.
NICOLAS DE RIVIÈRE (France) pointed out that it was the Russian Federation that decided to violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. This aggression — along with Moscow’s illegal attempt to annex Ukrainian territory — was condemned by a large majority in the General Assembly. Noting that the Russian Federation has denounced the military support that Western countries have provided to Ukraine — “a State that it has assaulted” — he emphasized that Moscow has procured combat drones from Iran and munitions from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. This is in violation of resolutions and sanctions that the Council has adopted unanimously. Since the start of the war, France has chosen to support Ukraine in exercising its legitimate right to self-defence under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. He stressed that such assistance has one goal — to allow Ukraine to defend itself to make credible negotiations possible when Kyiv decides to engage in them.
BARBARA WOODWARD (United Kingdom) said that the Russian Federation is desperately seeking to inflict pain on civilians and pressure the international community, declaring: “Let us call this meeting out for the farce that it is.” Moscow is again misusing this Council to obfuscate its responsibility for atrocities in Ukraine, pin blame on the West and hide its own failures. The Kremlin has convened this Council as Kim Jong-Un of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea visits the Russian Federation to negotiate a potential arms deal. This epitomizes the bare-faced hypocrisy, she said, noting that there is evidence that Moscow is negotiating potential deals for significant quantities and multiple types of munitions from Pyongyang to be used against Ukraine. The pursuit of these weapons violates Security Council resolutions, including ones the Russian Federation voted for. The only peace that is compatible with the Charter is one that sees the Kremlin’s forces withdraw fully. Until then, Kyiv should have the support it needs to exercise its right to self-defence.
MICHEL XAVIER BIANG (Gabon) said that increasing arms deliveries and new military alliances amplify the risk of violence escalation. Moreover, the massive rearmament of belligerents in Ukraine undermines disarmament efforts and the non-proliferation of weapons, he stressed, noting that the increase of arms flow runs a risk of aggravating the situation. Underlining that new weapons stockpiles acquisitions will further shutter peace efforts and prolong the conflict, he stressed: “It is an illusion by either side to strive for peace by banking on a military victory.” He recalled the common engagement of those present to protect the people from the scourge of war, emphasizing that the most effective way to limit the circulation of weapons is to put an end to the war. Noting that the continuation of the conflict will condemn the region to a long-term insecurity, he suggested using regional instruments and mechanisms to prevent the risk of conventional weapons diversion.
GHASAQ YOUSIF ABDALLA SHAHEEN (United Arab Emirates) said that, while all Member States have a right to self-defence, risks associated with transfer, storage and deployment of weapons should be managed. Underlining the threat of weapons ending in the hands of terrorist groups and other malign actors, which may target civilians, she underscored the importance of preventing the weapons diversion. In this regard, she spotlighted the role of national competent authorities and international actors in bolstering such efforts, while also pointing to the technical guidelines to facilitate the implementation of Security Council resolution 2370 (2017). This document can support the development and implementation of national policies and facilitate international coordination, she added. Emphasizing that “the most effective way to mitigate the risks associated with weapons transfers during wartime is to end the war”, she called for dialogue and de-escalation. “The diplomatic path towards peace remains fraught, but it is the only path that offers hope,” she stressed.
HERNÁN PÉREZ LOOSE (Ecuador) expressed regret that the extended invasion of Ukraine continues to worsen global military spending, which exceeded $2 trillion in 2022. He reiterated that standards of marking, registering and traceability for arms and munitions must not only be maintained, but made stricter. Further, any transfer of weapons should be accompanied by measures to avoid diversion and escalation. Adding that any delivery of weapons and munitions should come with a guarantee of respect for the principles of distinction and proportionality when such weapons are used, he emphasized that his country does not support the transfer or use of cluster munitions for this reason. However, he also underscored that an occupying Power — in this case, the Russian Federation — cannot expect that an invaded country will not defend its population or territory. “The contrary would mean a complete refutation of the UN Charter,” he observed, calling on the Russian Federation to cease its “military neo-colonial aggression”.
VANESSA FRAZIER (Malta), expressing regret that the Russian Federation has, once again, called for a meeting to discuss the transfer of weapons from the West to Ukraine, said its sole purpose is to push Moscow’s narrative depicting “the aggressor as the victim, and the victim the aggressor”. Noting that this nothing more than “another blatant attempt by the Russian Federation to justify the unjustifiable”, she observed that alternative version of events conveniently leaves out the fact that, on 24 February 2022, Moscow chose to launch an unprovoked war of aggression against its sovereign neighbour. The recent missile attack perpetrated by the Russian Federation on a market area in Kostyantynivka is the latest shocking development in a long string of atrocities since then. Urging Moscow to cease attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure, she pointed out that “these reprehensible actions are the real obstacle to peace”.
SHINO MITSUKO (Japan) said that the Russian Federation convened the Council on the same topic not long ago, stressing that Member States upholding the Charter have since continuously supported Ukraine in exercising the right of self-defence. On the contrary, Moscow perpetuates its aggression in a flagrant violation of the Charter. “The intensified cooperation by some Member States with Russia that enables this behaviour should not be overlooked,” she warned, adding that the Kremlin’s attempts to repeatedly convene the 15-nation organ on Ukraine, just for the sake of reciprocating, are squandering the body’s valuable resources. She urged the Russian Federation to use its rich diplomatic experience and influence to foster peace and stability, rather than undermining it.
CAROLYN ABENA ANIMA OPPONG-NTIRI (Ghana) expressed concern about the growing number of civilian casualties and the risks occasioned to international peace and security by the proliferation of arms. “Nothing is normal about the prevailing security and humanitarian situations in Ukraine as ordinary and innocent citizens continue to pay the price of the war with their lives and livelihood,” she said. She also reemphasized the necessity for strict compliance by all concerned States with their obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty and other international arrangements to safeguard against the diversion or illicit transfer of conventional weapons to unintended recipients. The security concerns of the parties can best be addressed through peaceful means and not through the barrel of the gun. She, therefore, encouraged the drawing of lessons from past UN-mediated conflicts to support a peaceful, comprehensive and lasting resolution of the conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
GUSTAVO SÉNÉCHAL DE GOFFREDO JUNIOR (Brazil), fully recognizing the right of all States to self-defence, stressed that the introduction of increasingly more destructive weapons feeds the spiral of armament and makes peace even more elusive, with consequences well beyond the battlefield. An additional factor of instability brought by the transfer of weapons and ammunition to conflict zones is the constant risk of diversion to non-State actors, including criminal and terrorist groups. Accordingly, he urged all Member States to adhere to the Arms Trade Treaty and other instruments to prevent diversion. Further, he strongly urged the parties to prevent harm to residential areas, energy and transport infrastructure and port facilities. Nuclear civil installations are of particular concern and should be carefully protected against any harm. The only truly effective manner to protect civilians and vital infrastructure and economic activity is to end the war, he emphasized, underscoring that only a political solution that takes into account the legitimate security concerns of all parties will bring lasting peace.
ADRIAN DOMINIK HAURI (Switzerland) strongly condemned the attacks perpetrated by the Russian Federation which target civilians and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine or affect them disproportionately. In addition, attacks on ports and grain infrastructures continue. Coupled with Moscow’s decision not to pursue the Black Sea Initiative, these attacks are affecting global food security. The contamination of agricultural land by mines and other explosive devices only exacerbates the difficulties encountered in exporting products from Ukraine. Turning to the sad news that two humanitarian volunteers were killed and two others wounded in the Donetsk region this weekend, he said that this incident is one of more than 100 that have already hampered aid operations in 2023. Humanitarian action is particularly difficult in territories under the Russian Federation’s military control. It is deeply worrying that eastern Ukraine has become increasingly dangerous for humanitarian workers, he added.
GENG SHUANG (China), expressing hope for an early ceasefire and recalling a number of peace initiatives put forward, said that many weapons — with greater variety and lethality — are still flowing to the battlefield. This leads to the expansion of fighting on the ground, increases civilian casualties and plunges the situation in a vicious cycle. “Military confrontation is not the way out of Ukraine’s crisis,” he stressed, emphasizing that dialogue and negotiations are the fundamental way to restore peace. Recalling the joint statement of the recently concluded Group of 20 Summit, he pointed to its unanimous message on Ukraine. “This is an outcome of a joint efforts and compromise by all parties,” he added. He also voiced hope that the Council will draw on its wisdom and experience, avoid widening differences and divisions and push in the direction of peace and stability.
DOMINGOS ESTÊVÃO FERNANDES (Mozambique) said that the persistent conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine has exacerbated weapons transfers and is posing a threat to global peace and security. “As military hostilities mark their 565th day without any visible prospects for a settlement, we must brace ourselves to the grim reality of a prolonged war,” he noted, reiterating a call for the cessation of hostilities. While the eagerness to find common ground and compromise is missing among the warring parties, he noted that both States seem to be awaiting favourable outcomes determined by “sheer military might”. Expressing concern that a relentless escalation in military posturing and arms accumulation may push the world closer to a precipice, he said that the Council should persist as a “a pivotal advocate” for its binding decisions. In this regard, he called for a renewed commitment to diplomacy and the return to face-to-face negotiations.
ALBANA DAUTLLARI (Albania), Council President for September, spoke in her national capacity to underscore that the core issue is — and will remain for as long as this war continues — that the Russian Federation has an initiated unprovoked, unjustified military aggression against Ukraine. The General Assembly, the International Court of Justice and other international bodies have condemned this aggression, and thus, the international community will support Ukraine politically, diplomatically, economically and militarily to defend itself, peace and security in Europe and the international rules-based order. She pointed out that, according to the Kremlin’s logic, the Western arms supply to Ukraine is prolonging the war, but somehow the arms supply to the Russian Federation from Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is contributing to peace. “What is even more ridiculous,” she observed, “is the recycling of the most absurd komplot ever” — the so-called organ trafficking involving Kosovo and Albania. She underscored that no one — including the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia — has ever found any evidence for such claims for the simple reason that none exists.
Mr. NEBENZIA (Russian Federation) took the floor a second time, stressing that, despite of the facts provided, Albania’s delegate is trying to protect the Kosovo bandits and murderers. Among the victims of transplants were mostly “policemen, soldiers from the nation of Yugoslavia, Albanian citizens who collaborated with the Kosovo Liberation Army and civilians”; foreign investigators speak of hundreds of victims. Data about persons who disappeared without a trace has confirmed that a number of victims have exceeded 1,000. This criminal activity peaked from 1998 to 2000. After the introduction of NATO forces to the territory of Kosovo, the number of abductions increased significantly. The victims were abducted on the territory of Kosovo and sent to places where they underwent a medical analysis, transported to Albania to special camps where they were operated on and organs were extracted. Without NATO’s assistance, the number of victims would not have been this high, he stated.
Ms. DAUTLLARI (Albania), taking the floor a second time in her national capacity, stressed that NATO operations in Kosovo in 1999 followed over a year of intense diplomatic efforts by the United Nations and the Contact Group, of which the Russian Federation was a member. Further, the Council repeatedly branded the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and the mounting number of refugees as a threat to international peace and security, and NATO’s mission helped end large-scale, sustained violations of human rights and the killing of civilians. She added that the Kosovo Force (KFOR) — NATO’s ongoing peacekeeping mission — has a Council mandate and is supported by both Kosovo and Serbia.
KHRYSTYNA HAYOVYSHYN (Ukraine) said that her country, together with the United States and the United Kingdom, organized an event yesterday to screen the film, titled 20 Days in Mariupol, made by journalists. The tragedy of Mariupol is probably a most powerful example of what fate the Russian Federation assigned for Ukraine. As long as the Security Council remains immobilized, “let us and the responsible nations […] complete this task”, including by supplying necessary weapons and strengthening the defensive capabilities of the victim, she said, also calling for international solidarity, moral support, humanitarian assistance and fair reporting from the ground. Not a single sign of de-escalation has been seen from the Russian Federation side yet. On the contrary, Moscow attempts to actively militarize its industry and seeks foreign sources to replenish its military arsenals.
Kyiv will closely follow the current contacts between the Russian Federation and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which may focus on sourcing weapons and munitions from the latter, she continued. That would constitute another grave violation by the Kremlin of the relevant Council resolutions, she said, adding that it already happened with the supplies of military drones from Iran. Council resolution 1718 (2006) prohibits Member States from procuring arms and related material from Pyongyang, as well as any items that would enhance the operational capabilities of armed forces of another Member State. Expressing her country’s resolve to continue de-occupying its sovereign territory in order to save as many lives of Ukraine’s soldiers as possible, she insisted that, following its defeat in the war, the Russian Federation should be demilitarized and de-nuclearized to prevent the threat of repeated aggression.