Ukraine: Briefing under the “Threats to International Peace and Security” Agenda Item
Tomorrow morning (25 July), the Security Council will convene for an open briefing under the “Threats to international peace and security” agenda item. Russia, which serves as July’s Council president, initiated the meeting in its national capacity to discuss the supply of Western weapons to Ukraine. The expected briefers are Adedeji Ebo, Deputy to the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, and Karin Kneissl, co-founder of the Geopolitical Observatory for Russia’s Key Issues (GORKI) Center at the St. Petersburg University and former Federal Minister for European and International Affairs of Austria.
Ukraine has chosen not to participate in tomorrow’s briefing due to its opposition to what it views as Russia’s illegitimate holding of the Soviet Union’s permanent seat on the Security Council. Additionally, during Russia’s February 2022 Council presidency, Ukraine mentioned rule 20 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure during two meetings presided over by Russia. This rule refers to a situation where, if the president of the Council is directly connected to a question that is being addressed, that Council member should not preside and the presidential chair should move to the next member in alphabetical order. It seems that Ukraine chose to participate in the 9 July meeting on the situation in Ukraine due to the urgent nature of the incident that triggered it—the missile strike on the Okhmatdyt children’s hospital in Kyiv. It sees tomorrow’s meeting, however, as an attempt to promote a one-sided narrative at the Security Council.
Tomorrow’s briefing will be the sixteenth meeting requested by Russia on the issue of Western arms supplies to Ukraine since the start of the war on 24 February 2022. Russia has initiated these meetings to express its view that the provision of weapons to Ukraine is contributing to the escalation of hostilities and undermining efforts to achieve a peaceful settlement to the conflict. Ukraine’s allies, on the other hand, have maintained that their provision of military assistance is intended to support Ukraine’s fundamental right to self-defence, in line with Article 51 of the UN Charter.
Military assistance to Ukraine was a key focus of the discussion at the NATO summit held in Washington DC between 9 and 11 July. At the summit, which commemorated the alliance’s 75th anniversary, NATO members agreed to establish the NATO Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine (NSATU), which aims to coordinate the provision of military equipment and training for Ukraine by allies and partners. Additionally, they announced a Pledge of Long-Term Security Assistance for Ukraine, committing to a minimum baseline funding of 40 billion euros in 2025, with sustained levels of security assistance in the future.
At the summit, NATO members issued a declaration, affirming that “Ukraine’s future is in NATO” and describing current efforts as a pathway to Ukraine’s eventual membership in the alliance. They also reiterated that an invitation for Ukraine to join NATO will be extended “when [a]llies agree and conditions are met”.
The declaration underscored that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has disrupted peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic region and significantly jeopardised global security. It maintained that “Russia remains the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security”. Additionally, the declaration expressed concern over the deepening relationship between Russia and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), including the latter’s alleged support for Russia’s military activities in Ukraine.
The declaration also, for the first time, accused China of becoming “a decisive enabler of Russia’s war against Ukraine”, citing its “no limits” partnership and extensive support for Russia’s defence industry. It highlighted the deepening strategic partnership between China and Russia as well as their concerted efforts to undermine the rules-based international order. In this regard, the declaration called on China to halt immediately all forms of material and political support to Russia’s war efforts, including the transfer of dual-use materials such as weapons components, equipment, and raw materials that contribute to Russia’s defence sector.
The declaration was rejected by both China and Russia. At a press conference on 11 July, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian characterised it as “a scaremongering piece” and criticised it as reflecting a “Cold War mentality”. He denied allegations that China played a role in enabling hostilities in Ukraine, dismissing them as “disinformation created by the US” aimed at undermining China’s relationship with Europe. In a 12 July statement, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova reiterated Russia’s stance that “inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia remains the long-term objective of the alliance”. She also accused NATO of treating Ukraine as “expendable material” in the alliance’s geopolitical standoff with Russia.
Meanwhile, on July 15, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced plans to develop, by November, a framework to facilitate the holding of a second international summit based on his peace formula, and expressed his intention to extend an invitation to Russian representatives. Earlier, on 15 and 16 June, Switzerland hosted the Summit on Peace in Ukraine. By July 11, 86 member states had endorsed the joint communiqué issued at the end of that summit.
Today (24 July), Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba met with his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, in Guangzhou, China. Ukraine’s foreign ministry indicated that the purpose of the meeting was to explore “ways to stop Russian aggression and China’s possible role in achieving a lasting and just peace”. The meeting suggested Kyiv’s increased willingness to engage in direct dialogue with Russia and to seek enhanced involvement from China in these diplomatic efforts. According to a statement issued by Ukraine’s foreign ministry, Kuleba reiterated Ukraine’s willingness to enter into negotiations with Russia “at a certain stage, when Russia is ready to negotiate in good faith”, while noting that “no such readiness is currently observed on the Russian side”.
At tomorrow’s briefing, Ebo may express concern over the continued and intensified attacks affecting civilians and civilian infrastructure. In this regard, he may call on all parties to uphold their obligations to protect civilians and ensure compliance with international humanitarian law. This includes avoiding the use of explosive weapons in populated areas, which is likely to have a devastating impact on civilians and civilian objects.
Ebo may also emphasise that any transfer of weapons and ammunition must comply with relevant Security Council resolutions. Moreover, he may highlight that the influx of weapons in any armed conflict can create risks of escalation and diversion and reiterate that measures to prevent the diversion of ammunition and weapons—such as pre-transfer risk assessments and end-user verification—can help to support conflict prevention and post-conflict recovery, among other things.
Tomorrow, Council members are likely to reiterate their established positions on the issue of weapons supplies to Ukraine. Several Council members—including NATO members France, Slovenia, the UK, and the US—might refer to the Washington NATO Summit Declaration and underscore NATO’s unwavering support for Ukraine. China and Russia, on the other hand, may accuse NATO of pursuing a confrontational approach.
Council members are also expected to present diverging perspectives on the most appropriate approach to achieving a just and lasting negotiated settlement to the war. Moscow has stated its readiness to commence negotiations with Kyiv for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. However, several Council members, including the P3 (France, the UK, and the US), contend that Russia’s actions in Ukraine, such as ongoing air attacks on civilian infrastructure, show a lack of genuine willingness to participate in peace talks. In this regard, these members may refer to the 8 July missile attack on the Okhmatdyt children’s hospital and the 19 July strike on a children’s playground near a residential building in the southern city of Mykolaiv, resulting in the deaths of three civilians, including a 12-year-old boy, and injuries to 24 others, including four children. (For more information on Council dynamics, see our 18 June What’s in Blue story.)
