Discurso do Representante Permanente Alterno, Embaixador João Genésio de Almeida Filho, em "briefing" do Conselho de Segurança sobre a Não-Proliferação / Coreia do Norte - 20 de março de 2023 (texto em inglês)
Statement by Deputy Permanent Representative, Ambassador João Genésio de Almeida Filho, at the UNSC Open Briefing on the DPRK
March 20th, 2023
Thank you, Mister President,
I thank ASG Miroslav Jenča for his informative briefing and I welcome to this meeting the Delegation of the Republic of Korea.
Mister President,
We are once again struck by the timing of these meetings. It was one month ago, to the day, when we were last in this Chamber discussing the launch of a DPRK ICBM. Brazil condemned the launch, in the strongest terms, then, and we condemn it again now. We stand equally ready to condemn future launches, yet it seems clear to us that something needs to change.
We have three choices. We can resign ourselves to being back in this Chamber every month to hear briefings, condemn missile launches and restate our national positions. This could easily turn into a “new normal” for this file: monthly meetings, where we hear technical updates and restate our positions, as we do in other files.
Alternatively, we could have less meetings and resign ourselves to doing less. We could decide that the situation in the region is simply too complex, the divisions in this Council too great and that there is simply not enough overlap in positions to allow the Council some space to act. We would meet only in the event of truly unusual developments, such as a nuclear test. The rest of the time, amid missile launches and rising risks of accidents, we would simply hope for the best.
Mister President,
Both of these options are dangerous in the extreme. The first normalizes performance, while the second normalizes inaction. Let me suggest a third.
We can accept that the situation is complex and that there are divisions in the Council – but we can choose to think concretely about what can be done within this context of complexity and division. This will, necessarily, involve compromises for all. Yet it offers us our best hope for advancing this file towards our shared goal of peace, stability and denuclearization.
Mister President,
In the spirit of thinking concretely, let me put forward a few proposals that we could immediately work on as a Council:
The US Mission has shared a draft Presidential Statement. We believe the text provides a good starting point for negotiation. This Council can work towards a product that reflects the views of its members, highlighting both the need for condemnation and for sustained engagement. We urge all members to engage in good faith discussions around the proposal so that we can produce a balanced document that represents, to the greatest extent possible, the diversity of views on this Council.
Secondly, we have heard repeated references to resolutions that were proposed in the past but never adopted. We could and should be holding technical discussions, at the expert level, to see how both texts could be brought together in one document that would be able to garner consensus. There is agreement on preserving the authority of this Council, on addressing the humanitarian situation and on finding a peaceful political solution to the issues on the Peninsula. Agreement should be possible, let us work towards it.
Thirdly and finally, we should think creatively about the role that the UN itself can play to bring down tensions, facilitate engagement and help establish a process of negotiation that is transparent, predictable and seen as legitimate by all. This Council, under its Chapter VI authority, can do much to provide its good offices and recommend measures of adjustment that can lay the groundwork for sustained engagement. The tools of Chapter VI remain woefully under-explored in this file. We must revisit the Chapter VI toolbox if we are to find a comprehensive solution to this file.
Mister President,
In conclusion, the situation is urgent and the Council must act. Yet action does not always mean repeating what we have done in the past. Action, in a context of tension and division, means finding creative ways to build bridges, reduce tensions and reaffirm the authority of this Council as the main organ for promoting peace and security. It should do so using all of its tools, including – and indeed especially – those for the peaceful settlement of disputes.
And I thank you.