Ukraine: Briefing
This afternoon (18 June), the Security Council will convene for a briefing on the situation in Ukraine. Slovenia and the US, the co-penholders on political issues in Ukraine, requested the meeting to discuss recent developments, including the “Summit on Peace in Ukraine” which Switzerland hosted on 15 and 16 June at Ukraine’s request. Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo is the anticipated briefer. Ukraine and other regional states are expected to participate under rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure.
Background
The “Summit on Peace in Ukraine” followed a series of meetings involving national security advisors and other high-level officials aimed at discussing fundamental principles for restoring peace in Ukraine. Switzerland organised the fourth of these meetings in Davos on 14 January. Previous meetings were held on 24 June 2023 in Copenhagen, Denmark; on 5 and 6 August 2023 in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; and on 28 and 29 October 2023 in Valletta, Malta.
The objective of the recent summit was to initiate a peace process. To achieve this, it aimed to secure the broadest possible participation, demonstrating strong support for pursuing a peaceful solution to the conflict; to foster a shared understanding on three key topics essential for building trust among the conflict parties; and to outline next steps, including Russia’s involvement in any future peace process.
The thematic sessions addressed issues such as food security, with a focus on ensuring free and secure shipping in the Black Sea; nuclear safety and security, examining ways to mitigate the risks of accidents or attacks on nuclear facilities; and humanitarian issues, including the deportation of children from Ukraine and the protection and treatment of prisoners of war (POWs), civilian detainees, and internees.
Switzerland invited over 160 delegations at head of state or government level. Approximately 101 delegations attended the summit, including 57 heads of state and government.
The following is a breakdown of participating delegations categorised by their UN regional groups:
(For full view of the table, click on the image above.)
Moscow has criticised the initiative, describing it as “meaningless and harmful” to the resolution of the conflict. It has argued that discussing potential solutions to the crisis without Russia’s involvement and disregarding Moscow’s “legitimate security interests” is futile. Switzerland clarified that, while it signalled its openness to extend an invitation to Russia, its decision not to invite Russia stemmed from Moscow’s assertions that “it had no interest in participating”. Nevertheless, the summit aimed to initiate a peace process with Russia’s eventual involvement. It provided the initial platform for high-level discussions on the modalities and timing of Russia’s engagement in this process.
A joint communiqué issued at the conclusion of the summit noted that the ongoing war continues to cause large-scale human suffering and destruction and create risks and crises with global repercussions. The communiqué affirmed that the UN Charter, including the principles of respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all states, should serve as a basis for achieving a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine. The document was endorsed by 75 member states participating in the summit, including Council members Ecuador, France, Japan, Malta, the Republic of Korea (ROK), Slovenia, Switzerland, the UK, and the US.
Furthermore, consensus was reached among the 75 member states on key aspects related to the three thematic topics discussed at the summit. According to the joint communiqué, Ukrainian nuclear power plants must be secured, protected, and remain under Ukraine’s sovereign control while being supervised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It was also agreed that any threat or use of nuclear weapons in the context of the conflict is unacceptable. The communiqué underscored that food security should not be weaponised, emphasising the importance of maintaining free and secure commercial shipping and ensuring access to ports in the Black and Azov Seas. Lastly, the joint communiqué stipulated the exchange of all POWs and the repatriation of all deported, unlawfully displaced Ukrainian children and arbitrarily detained civilians back to Ukraine.
Notably, the joint communiqué states that achieving peace requires the involvement of and dialogue between all parties. In this regard, the member states endorsing the communiqué have committed to taking “concrete steps in the future” regarding the three thematic issues, with further engagement of the representatives of all parties.
Among the BRICS bloc (comprising Brazil, China, India, Russia, and South Africa), China was the only member (other than Russia) that did not attend the summit. Brazil opted to attend as an observer. Prior to the summit, the foreign ministry of China said that it attached great importance to Switzerland hosting the “Summit on Peace in Ukraine”, and outlined three criteria essential for the summit to “play a substantive role for restoring peace”. These criteria included recognition from both Russia and Ukraine, equal participation of all parties, and fair discussion of all peace plans. Beijing cited the failure to meet these criteria as the reason for its non-participation, highlighting a perceived disparity between the summit’s arrangement and China’s principles.
On 23 May, following a meeting between Celso Amorim, chief advisor to Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Brazil and China issued a joint statement outlining “common understandings on a political settlement of the Ukraine crisis”. The statement underscored three key principles for de-escalation: refraining from expanding the battlefield, avoiding escalation of hostilities, and preventing provocations by any party involved. It emphasised that dialogue and negotiations represent the only viable means to resolve the conflict, urging all parties to create conditions conducive to restarting direct talks and to actively work towards de-escalating tensions until a comprehensive ceasefire can be achieved.
According to Beijing, as at 10 June, 101 countries and international organisations had responded positively to the common understandings outlined in the joint statement. Among these, 52 countries had confirmed their endorsement or were actively considering endorsing the common understandings.
Today’s Meeting
At this afternoon’s meeting, DiCarlo is expected to provide an overview of the political and humanitarian situation in Ukraine. As DiCarlo was an observer at the “Summit on Peace in Ukraine”, Council members, particularly those who did not participate in the summit—such as Algeria, China, Guyana, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and Russia—may be keen to hear from her about the deliberations and outcomes of the meeting.
During the summit’s closing plenary, DiCarlo reiterated the UN’s stance that “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates the UN Charter and international law”, highlighting the extensive suffering inflicted upon the Ukrainian people as a result. She acknowledged that several delegations stressed the importance of upholding UN Charter principles throughout the summit. DiCarlo also underscored the UN’s active engagement in the specific areas discussed during the summit, emphasising that the discussions provided a valuable opportunity to explore initiatives towards peace. She emphasised that these efforts could serve as a foundational step towards initiating a broader process aimed at ending the conflict in Ukraine.
This afternoon, several Council members are expected to commend Switzerland for hosting the “Summit on Peace in Ukraine”, and may describe it as an important initial step toward achieving a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Some members are likely to highlight last week’s events, which include not only the summit in Switzerland but also the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Berlin, Germany, held on 11 and 12 June, and the Group of Seven (G7) meeting in Apulia, Italy, held between 13 and 15 June. Some members may describe these events as clear indications of unwavering support for Ukraine. Following the G7 meeting in Apulia, a joint communiqué was issued, in which members pledged to provide Ukraine with approximately $50 billion by using funds from Russia’s frozen assets.
Some members might also raise concerns about the alleged supply of ballistic missiles and other munitions by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) to Russia, purportedly for use against Ukraine, in violation of Security Council resolutions. In light of these developments, these members might criticise Russian President Vladimir Putin’s planned trip to the DPRK this week for a meeting with DPRK leader Kim Jong-un. They may argue that such a meeting could potentially exacerbate tensions.
Russia is expected to dismiss the “Summit on Peace in Ukraine” and reject its joint communiqué, as indicated in a commentary by Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, who characterised the communiqué as “openly anti-Russian”. Russia is also likely to reiterate the conditions for peace outlined by Putin during his speech at the Russian Foreign Ministry on 14 June. These conditions include Kyiv’s abandonment of plans to join NATO, and the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from the four regions that Russia currently partially occupies: Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia. Only after these conditions are met would Russia consider agreeing to a ceasefire and engaging in negotiations with Ukraine, according to Putin.