In a move widely condemned by the UK and the US, Russia has voted against a UK-backed UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Sudan.
British Foreign Secretary David Lammy called the veto “shameful”. But Russia accused the UK of meddling in Sudanese affairs without involving Sudan itself.
Sudan’s 19-month long civil war is believed to have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people. More than 11 million have been forced to leave their homes.
Aid workers say the conflict has created the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, with many thousands at risk of starvation.
Sudanese activists have been critical of the UN for being slow to respond to the conflict.
It began in April last year after the military and a powerful group, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), began a bitter struggle for power.
The military is in charge of the government.
Monday’s draft resolution, proposed by the UK and Sierra Leone, called on both sides to immediately end hostilities and start talks aimed at agreeing to a national ceasefire.
It also called on the military and the RSF to honor previous agreements to protect civilians, but specifically mentioned RSF attacks in the western Darfur region and elsewhere in the country.
Sudan’s representative at the UN said that the sections they wanted in the text were not included.
Apart from Russia, all 14 other member countries of the Security Council voted for the draft, but the vote meant that the resolution failed.
“This Russian veto is shameful and shows the world the true colors of Russia,” Lammy said at a meeting in New York.
“I ask the conscientious representative of Russia sitting there on his phone. How many more Sudanese must be killed? How many more women must be raped? How many children must not eat before Russia takes action?”
The US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield was equally open, accusing Russia of preventing measures “to correct the bad situation in Sudan, and playing both sides – both sides of the conflict to advance its political goals, at the expense of the lives of the Sudanese people. “.
Russia was once seen as supporting the RSF in the conflict, but appears to have switched sides.
Russia’s representative to the UN, Dmitry Polyanskiy, said that Sudan’s sovereignty was being ignored, adding that the UK-backed decision was “an attempt to give itself the opportunity to interfere” in what is happening in Sudan.
“Shame on you, UK!”, sent to X later. “By trying to pass a decision that pours fuel [the] The crisis in Sudan leaves muddy waters for the West, who are very interested in the former, to advance their agenda. “
Sudanese analyst Alex de Waal described this as “an unusual argument to make in the face of a humanitarian crisis – the collapse of the entire country of Sudan and the fact that the government is able to rule a very small corner of the country”.
In an interview he had with the BBC World Service on the Newsday program, he added that “it was a very bad day in Africa” as previously the continent’s ambassadors through the African Union (AU) were able to close the gap between the Security Council between Russia and the US. and China when it came to Sudan.
Speaking after the conclusion of the Security Council talks, Sudan’s ambassador to the UN, Al-Harith Idriss al-Harith Mohamed, said that certain “needs” were not on the list.
He said Sudan wanted a clause criticizing the United Arab Emirates’ support for the RSF, something the UAE has consistently denied.
He also demanded that the RSF be described as “terrorists… because they are fighting a war to exterminate civilians”.
Both the army and the RSF are accused of human rights violations that amount to war crimes.
Additional reporting by the BBC’s Nada Tawfik in New York
Source link
