Explanation of Vote (EOV) by Russia before the General Assembly 64th Session

Vote on Report of Fact Finding Mission on Gaza Conflict

New York( 

5 November 2009

RUSSIAN FEDERATION REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr. President, the Russian Federation was forced to absta
in during the vote on the General Assembly draft resolution on the discussion of the report on the Human Rights Council.  The main topic of this document is the report of the fact-finding mission on human rights violations committed during the winter conflict around Gaza headed by Richard Goldstone.  
When the Goldstone report emerged, we immediately deemed that it contained some conclusions we could agree with.  At the same time, the document had assessments which we could not agree with and which required further work.  However, the Goldstone mission report was published and submitted to the Human Rights Council where work started on a resolution on it.
Our delegation, along with a number of missions in Geneva, played an important role in ensuring that the resolution was political in nature and that it would support the idea of national investigations but would not seek to continue a discussion on it in the UN Security Council.  We remain convinced that that would only complicate establishing conditions to achieve a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East.  
That resolution was agreed to, but as we all know, it was then withdrawn and replaced with a new text, which does not take into consideration the amendments made by the Russian delegation and which meant that this question would be kept within the political sphere in the HRC.  
In an emotionally charged atmosphere in Geneva, apart from the topic addressed in the Goldstone report, the draft included another important issue for the peace process; the need to cease archeological excavations in Jerusalem which are damaging the holy sites, as well as the importance of taking specific steps to alleviate the blockade of Gaza and to satisfy the basic needs of the Palestinian people who are in an extremely difficult situation.
In this regard, guided by its fundamental stance on these issues, Russia supported the HRC resolution, but at the same time it made a statement that we do not agree with a part in it which called for a continuation of the Goldstone report in the UN Security Council.
Unfortunately, despite the arguments of many delegations, parts on the Security Council were kept in the General Assembly resolution.  This is not conducive to a level-headed, professional analysis of the Goldstone report recommendations that should continue primarily in the HRC, including the importance for both Israel and the Palestinians to hold their investigations.  
Russia, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council and a participant of the quartet, continues to be unswervingly guided by the international and legal basis for Middle East settlement that has been reaffirmed in all recent UN Security Council resolutions, as well as by the four leading mediators and the League of Arab States.  The basis of this is the relevant Security Council resolutions, the road map and the Arab peace initiative.  
An important point that is now necessary in order to relaunch negotiations is the first part of the road map requiring parties to refrain from any steps that could prejudice the outcome of final status issue discussions, namely the future of Jerusalem, borders, refugees and settlements.  There is a need to continue our collective work, in particular within the UN to achieve these goals in the context of a comprehensive Middle East settlement.  Thank you very much Mr. President.