Third Committee, 44th plenary meeting - General Assembly, 80th session

The forty-fourth meeting of the Third Committee of the General Assembly at the eighth year session is called to order. The documentation before the Committee for this meeting is listed on iGov, in which to remind delegations that statements made in explanation of vote after the vote or general statements shall not exceed three minutes. Colleagues, delegations are also reminded that in accordance with rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, the sponsor of a proposal is not permitted to speak in explanation of what's on. And I would like to further remind delegations that the deadline for the submission of amendment is 1:00 PM today, Friday, November 14. Now, I would like to invite the Committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 26 (A), advancement of women, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C3/80/L.19, entitled "Improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas". I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L.19 contains no programme budget implications. With that, I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mongolia.

Mr. Chairman, my delegation has the honour to introduce the draft resolution entitled A/C3/10/L.19, improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas. Today, nearly 3.5 billion people, or 43% of the world's population, live in rural areas, as do 80% of the extreme poor. Globally, a quarter of employed women work in agriculture, and some 4 billion people live in households reliant on agri-food livelihoods. However, according to recent reports, achievement of global gender-related goals, including SDG 5, is severely off track and progress is slow and fragmented. For instance, the 30th anniversary review and appraisal of the implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action highlighted Rural women's disproportionate poverty, illiteracy, share of unpaid care and domestic work, and vulnerability to environmental degradation and climate change, and the urgency of enabling sustainable livelihoods, employment opportunities and outcomes, and access to social protection, public services, sustainable infrastructure, and productive resources. Therefore, this year, Mongolia has submitted a technical rollover. ensuring no substantive changes are made to the consensual framework of the previous resolution 78/189. Distinguished delegates, we deeply appreciate the understanding and support of you of our approach as well as of the draft resolution. This time, through this draft resolution L/19, we are reaffirming our collective commitment to gender equality and women's empowerment and stressing the need for governments, as well as inviting all relevant stakeholders to take measures to support the rights, well-being and resilience of women and girls living in rural and remote areas and on islands as well. We thank the delegations that have already co-sponsored the draft resolution and invite others to do so, as in previous years. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of all co-sponsors, I wish to express our sincere hope that this resolution will get unanimous support at this plenary session. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Mongolia and I give the floor to the Committee Secretary.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also joined as co-sponsors of draft resolution L19: Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Canada, the Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Ecuador, El Salvador, Finland, France, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lesotho, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Namibia, Nepal, Kingdom of the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, The Republic of Korea, the Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, the United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and Vietnam. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor draft resolution L19, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Italy, who's already a sponsor of the draft resolution. Dominica, Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, Eritrea, Malawi, Paraguay, Djibouti, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I see no further requests.

Okay, thank you. Colleagues, a recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L19 entitled "Improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas". Before we proceed to the vote, I'll give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make general statement in connection with the draft proposal or non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. I give the floor to Denmark.

Thank you, Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. We thank the facilitator Mongolia for putting forward the resolution on the improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas. The text has traditionally been adopted by consensus by the Third Committee, and as the resolution this year is a technical rollover, the text is essentially the same as two years ago. Therefore, we regret that a vote has been called on this resolution. We believe this undermines our collective effort and the constructive spirit of striving for consensus that has been a tradition in this committee. The EU and its member states are committed to uphold the constructive and collaborative spirit of the Third Committee and to defend our shared values, principles, and long-standing agreed language reflected in the text. Therefore, the Member States of the European Union will vote yes on the resolution, and we strongly encourage others to do the same. Thank you.

Thank you, Denmark, for that statement. I'll give the floor to Tunisia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Tunisia thanks Mongolia for this excellent text and is pleased to support this important resolution. The resolution addresses the persistent inequalities faced by rural women and girls, including limited access to education, land, technology, economic opportunities, and essential health services. It also responds to the impact of poverty, climate change, and food insecurity on their daily lives. These challenges require ambitious language and sustained commitment. Tunisia welcomes the progressive language throughout the text, especially the reaffirmation of gender equality and the call to eliminate gender stereotypes and discriminatory social norms that restrict the rights and choices of women and girls. We also strongly value the provisions guaranteeing universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. Consistent with the program of action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action, these elements are central to the dignity, autonomy, and well-being of rural women and girls. The resolution also recognizes rural women as essential actors in food system, biodiversity conservation, and climate resilience, and highlights their meaningful participation in decision-making processes. We regret that this resolution is subjected to a vote. We will vote in favor in this resolution, and we strongly call upon our dear colleagues to do the same. I thank you.

I thank Tunisia for the statement. I now give the floor to Paraguay.

Thank you very much, sir. Paraguay would like to make this statement on the actions that will be taken on this resolution regarding Agenda 2023 on the SDGs in paragraph 74 of resolution 70/1 of the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted on 25 September of 2015, through which the 2030 Agenda was established, including its SDGs. It highlights the voluntary nature of the follow-up and review of the 2030 Agenda. This should be in line with the normative frameworks and national priorities also, as mentioned in paragraph 55. We recognize the aspirational nature. It is not legally binding. This refers to the SDGs as well as the incorporation of it in public policies. So the national governments implement the development plans related to the SDGs. in full sovereignty, fully adhering to the principles of national independence and the self-determination of peoples. Also, we'd like to highlight that Paraguay, under what is established in our national constitution and in the current framework, we do not allow any kind of discrimination, and this legal framework allows for equality. For Paraguay, every definition of gender is identified as the difference between men and women. Also, there has been significant progress in the alignment of laws when it comes to the institutional frameworks, as well as the establishment of public policies that aim to protect and ensure the human rights of women, and their empowerment, and their independence when it comes to economic, cultural, political life. In Paraguay's constitution, there are protections for life since conception. This is in regards to health services for women. We take into account that our national laws does not consider the interruption of pregnancy. Thank you.

Thank you, Paraguay. I now have the Philippines, the United States, and Vietnam. The Philippines, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Philippines is pleased to support the resolution on the improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas, and we will vote for this resolution. Women and girls in our rural communities are indispensable contributors as farmers, fishers, foresters, micro enterprise owners, and community leaders. But they continue to face structural constraints in access to land, resources, services, decision making, and decent work. As a country where rural women are at the heart of our agricultural, fisheries, and forestry sectors, we recognize their vital role in achieving food security, community resilience, and sustainable development. The Philippines believes that when rural women are empowered, inclusive growth follows. The Secretary General's report A/80/262 highlights rural women's disproportionate vulnerability to climate change, economic shocks, and service delivery gaps, conditions that resonate deeply in the Philippines, where small-scale farmers and women-headed households bore the brunt of the pandemic and endless disasters. We echo the call in the report for disaggregated data, gender-responsive resilience building, and integrated partnerships, considering that we have improved our gender data in the agriculture, fisheries, forestry sector, and that our national recovery strategy emphasizes rural women's resilience. The Philippines also welcomes references in the report of the ASEAN Gender Outlook 2024 and global analytic work of the.

FAO and UN Women.

As we look ahead to the International Year of the Woman Farmer in 2026, the Philippines reaffirms our commitment to a rural economy where women and girls are fully recognized, their rights upheld, their leadership included, and their contributions rewarded. Thank you.

Thank you. United States, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Third Committee this year. The United States would like to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious or irrelevant issue year after year. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. It is the policy of the United States to support and promote efforts that reinforce respect for the inherent dignity of women, advance women's equality, support optimal health outcomes for women, promote and protect their inherent human rights, and advance programs that empower women and girls. It is the policy of the United States to recognize two biological sexes, male and female. To achieve this, we will use clear and accurate language that recognizes women are biologically female and men are biologically male. The United States expects the United Nations to ensure that its documents and programming align with that policy by using terminology that clearly refers to women and men, girls and boys, and avoids ambiguous terms. Some examples of language we cannot endorse include language on sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights without adequate caveats and qualification. UN agencies have used such terminology to promote abortion rights, transgender rights for children, gender ideology, and other controversial issues that are not universally agreed human rights. For this reason, we are not willing to adopt any resolution that includes language on sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. without express caveats reaffirming sovereign prerogatives on such issues. The United States also supports the elimination of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, and genetic information. The United States expects the United Nations to ensure that its documents and programming avoid using diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts and terminology at the expense of recognizing hard work, excellence, and individual achievement, and upholding the equal dignity and respect of every person. Accordingly, the United States requests a vote and will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you.

Thank you. Give the floor to Cuba.

Thank you very much, sir. We thank Mongolia for the work in presenting this resolution, which helps to give visibility to a fundamental topic that is not always given the priority and the attention it deserves. We profoundly lament the hostile attitude of the United States, which is evidenced in its request for a vote on a resolution that deals with a topic that is necessary and honorable and that has traditionally been adopted by consensus. The request for a vote from the United States and the irreverent vote that it will offer against it, rather than supporting the text, just gives visibility to the support that the international community gives to the advancement of women at the international level. The Cuban Revolution has supported a series of policies to benefit women in general and women and girls in rural communities particularly. So, the National Program for Women's Advancement, which was adopted by Decree 198/2021, expresses the will of the Cuban government to provide equal opportunities for so social advancement between men and women, which would also benefit women who are working in the rural areas of the country. Rural women benefit from specific policies such as the Comprehensive Development Program, Plan Turquino, which highlights the advancement of women in areas related to the economy, society, culture, and the family. The Cuban legal framework does not discriminate in any way based on gender. There is no impediment to rural women and girls when it comes to empowering themselves as human beings with equal rights enjoyed on an equal footing with men. This is necessary in order to achieve sustainable development. More than 219,000 women work in the Cuban countryside, but Cuba is not satisfied. We constantly work to close the remaining gaps between men and women in rural areas, particularly in areas such as land rights. We will continue working to support women's empowerment in rural areas in order to contribute to the full enjoyment of their rights. This is the reason why we will vote in favor of the resolution L.19, whose noble purpose we fully share. Thank you.

Thank you. The Committee will now commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L/19. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Now, delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes.

The committee is now voting on draft resolution L19, entitled Improvement of the Situation of Women and Girls in Rural Areas. If your button is not working, please raise your hand and a member of the secretariat will approach you. El Salvador has voted yes. Are there any microphones not working for voting delegates? If not, please confirm that your votes are correctly reflected on the screen. The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine.

Right. The result of the vote is as follows: 178 in favor, three against, and zero abstentions. So draft resolution S/3/2022 80/L19 is adopted. Any delegation which to make an EOV or general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I'll give the floor to Kuwait, to be followed by Burundi and Indonesia. The floor is yours.

Mr. Chair, first, I would like to make this statement on behalf of the member states of the GCC, the UAE, the Kingdom of Bahrain, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Sultanate of Oman, and my state, my country, the State of Kuwait. Our countries would like to express its appreciation to Mongolia and its thanks to Mongolia for its effort during the negotiation to reach this text. We have voted in favor of L.19, out of our conviction that it addresses a very important issue. As for 2 and the term "reproductive rights," we look at this paragraph in line with our norms and traditions in our countries. We would like to make sure that this statement is made part of the summary record of this meeting. Thank you.

Thank you.

Burundi.

Thank you very much, Chair. It's an honor to make this statement on behalf of Burkina Faso, Cameroon, and my country, Burundi. We voted in favor of this draft resolution because we are committed to improving the well-being and the empowerment of women and girls in rural areas, but we would like to express the following clarifications first. OP 2.1, the references to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights can only be understood regarding to health services approved by national authorities. They do not include the right to abortion under the relevant program of action, in particular paragraph 8.25 and the Beijing Program of Action. Second, the references to the results of the review conferences should be understood strictly in the framework of the General Assembly. The regional reviews and other processes organized by UN entities cannot modify the commitments of our States. Three, we lament inclusion of non-consensual terminologies regarding the multiple and overlapping forms of discrimination. We cannot accept interpretations that introduce categories that are not recognized at the international and national level. Also, we understand that the term gender refers specifically to men and women in the biological sense. Annex IV of the Beijing Conference. Thank you.

Thank you, Indonesia, and then I'll give the floor to Malaysia, Iran, and Argentina. Indonesia, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair. Indonesia wishes to express its appreciation to Mongolia for their efforts towards the successful conclusion of the draft resolution, and Indonesia voted in favor on the draft resolution. Reflecting the importance of this agenda for Indonesia in advancing gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls in line with 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, this issue is deeply rooted in Indonesia's national development priorities and Vision Indonesia 2045, which integrate the empowerment of women, social protection, rural development, and climate resilience. Our goal is to ensure that every woman, including those in rural areas, is not left behind and is empowered to contribute to inclusive and sustainable development. The resolution shares this same objective, which is to ensure the full inclusion and participation of women and girls in sustainable development efforts, including those in rural areas. However, we note that the text retains a reference which does not have a common understanding among Member States and has not reached universal agreement. Therefore, Indonesia reserves its position on the reference to multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination contained in the text. Indonesia reaffirms its commitment to continue working to promote the rights, participation, and leadership of women and girls in all aspects of life, including those in rural areas, as part as our shared vision to leave no one behind. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Malaysia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Malaysia thanks Mongolia for once again presenting this important resolution to the Third Committee. Malaysia remains firmly committed to the advancement and development of all women and girls, including those residing in rural areas. In this regard, Malaysia was pleased to vote in favour of this resolution, which reaffirms our shared commitment to the empowerment of women and girls in all spheres of life. However, we note that the resolution features the term “multiple and intersecting forms of”, particularly in preambular paragraph 14 and operative paragraph 2s. In this regard, we wish to put on record that Malaysia’s interpretation of the said term will be based on its national laws, values, and customs, and does not include any concepts that are inconsistent with the existing international human rights architecture. Thank you.

Thank you. I will now give the floor to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Following the provisions of its constitution, as well as the relevant national laws, policies, and regulations, the Islamic Republic of Iran promotes the rights of all, particularly women and girls, in urban and rural areas. In Iran, rural women and girls are prioritized in several development programs. Annually, adequate financial resources are allocated to implement projects and programs related to improving the situation of rural and nomadic women and girls in the country. The National Empowerment Plan focusing on rural areas addresses agricultural and rural development through capacity building, institution building, and the promotion of entrepreneurship as well as sustainable business development and promotion of professional skills in the agricultural sector to improve the situation of rural and nomadic people, including rural women and girls. Implementing the national plans on returning girls deprived of education to schools and providing programs to improve rural populations' access to health, medical care, insurance, and support services are a few of dozens of programs that are being implemented in the villages and nomadic areas of the country. To conclude, Mr. Chair, we support this resolution, and we thank the delegation of Mongolia for leading this important process. Accordingly, we voted in favor of the resolution. However, we continue to oppose any terminology in the text that is controversial, non-consensus based, or ambiguous. In this regard, my delegation disassociates itself from preamble paragraph 14 and operative paragraph 2s. I thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to Argentina, to be followed by Nigeria, Nicaragua, Libya, Gambia, and Sri Lanka. Argentina.

Thank you, sir. Argentina is an extremely large country with an important rural population who has been growing in a diverse fashion, is aware of the importance of ensuring the rights of all people who live in rural areas, and encourages greater solidarity towards those who are in a vulnerable situation, regardless of their circumstances. We also understand that every country should choose its development path and its national priorities. These cannot be imposed through instruments such as the 2030 Agenda. The spirit of the resolution has turned into a long list of suggestions, including almost demands for countries to adopt specific policies and models that are very prescriptive, that do not respect the sovereignty of each country to establish their own national priorities and encourage growth through the free market and opportunities. based on the preferences of my countries and others. This is not the place to define budgets or the priorities that each country should choose in light of the great differences in our national realities. Therefore, Argentina cannot support the OP 2.7 on the mobilization of resources or OP 2.8jj regarding gender. which is mentioned on several occasions, often in a confusing way, that is not based on international law. I'd like to clarify that my country understands the gender as men and women. Regarding the gender perspective, which has been mentioned on several occasions, we understand that the United Nations cannot interpret laws based on a single perspective, which oftentimes hasn't given rise to the desired results and could often create new sources of inequality. We do not question the importance of women's health. So, we think it would be limiting to only focus on one aspect of health that is not defined under law and that goes beyond internationally assumed duties. So we think we need to find a better way to refer to sexual and reproductive rights and related issues. We also do not include abortion in these rights. Thank you.

Thank you. Nigeria?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Nigeria welcomes the adoption of this resolution on improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas. We voted in favor of the resolution. However, my delegation wishes to place on record its reservation regarding certain paragraphs that contain languages which do not align with our national position. With respect to OP2.1, we do not align with references to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. For Nigeria, the interpretation of this paragraph must be consistent with our customary laws, values, and cultural framework. This provision refers strictly to essential healthcare services for women and girls in rural areas and shall not in any way be understood to include or endorse generic formulations relating to abortion or any other consensual interpretations. Mr. Chair, Nigeria also notes with and the inclusion in preambular paragraph 15 and OP2S of the non-concessional term "multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination." This terminology is unfamiliar in Nigeria's legal and policy context, and is not recognized as a distinct category of discrimination under our national laws. We therefore do not accept any interpretation of this language that conflicts with Nigeria's legislation, policies, cultural values, or social norms. Furthermore, we wish to reiterate that the term gender, in whatever form it appears in this document, is interpreted exclusively to mean male and female, consistent with the definition contained in the report of the Fourth World Conference on women and Article 3 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. In this regard, while we affirm our commitment to upholding our treaty obligation and to engaging constructively with treaty monitoring bodies, Nigeria reserves the right to interpret the language contained in this resolution in accordance with conventional and customary international law, as well as the culture, values, and belief of its people. We underscore that the use of non-concessional terminology in this text does not create any new obligation for Member States under international law. I thank you.

Thank you. Nicaragua.

Thank you very much, sir. We reiterate our firm commitment to promoting the rights of women and girls, particularly those who live in rural areas, who deal with conditions of inequality, poverty, exclusion, and multiple forms of discrimination. We recognize the importance of this draft resolution and the efforts of the delegations who sponsored it to give visibility to the challenges faced by women and girls in rural areas and promote policies to benefit them. In step with our national policies to fight against poverty and support rural women who are hardworking and furthermore promote sustainable development with social justice, we have supported this resolution by voting in favor. but we'd like to clarify our principled position regarding the references to reproductive rights, which is contained in OP 2I. We disassociate ourselves from reproductive rights. Any reference to reproductive rights in this resolution cannot be interpreted in any way as recognizing, promoting, or supporting abortion, or the creation of new duties or rights that are not expressly included in international human rights instruments freely accepted by Nicaragua and our national legislation. We reiterate that our constitution and our internal laws recognize and protect the right to life and the family as the fundamental nucleus of society, and that the resolution should be fully in step with this principle, as well as our ethical, cultural, and spiritual values. So we request that it be clear that our vote does not be interpreted in any way contrary to our constitution, our laws, or our understanding of the right to family and life. Thank you.

Thank you. Libya, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to thank the delegation of Mongolia for referring to the improving of the situation of the women and girls in rural areas and for tabling this draft resolution once again, we have voted in favor of this resolution based on our interest improving the situation of women and girls in general, and in particular in rural areas, and promoting their economic and social abilities and improving their access to basic services. At the same time, my delegation would like to put on the record our reservations as follows: First, with regards to Operative paragraph 2L, my delegation would like to stress that we understand that reference to promoting access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights are only limited to the services provided by the competent national authorities in line with what was contained in the programme of work of the ICPD, and particularly 8.25 and the Beijing Platform of Action, also the outcomes of the regional review conferences of UN agencies cannot change intergovernmental consensus and cannot be used as a basis to add new obligations on states that are not adopted by the GA. Third, as for paragraph 14 of the preamble and 2S, because they include the multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, because this is a vague, non-consensual concept and is open to interpretations that are not in line with our religious and cultural values and national laws. And we stress that we object to any form of violence or discrimination, but we do not accept any interpretations that go beyond international commitments or that add concepts that are not contained in international instruments. Finally, we understand the use of the term gender in this resolution and other resolutions in this Committee to refer exclusively to men and women, as males and females biologically, based on what was contained in Annex IV of the Fourth World Conference on Women, and we support all efforts to improve the situation of women and girls, particularly in rural areas. I thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to de Campbell.

The Gambia votes in favor of this resolution as central towards women's development. As a country, we remain particularly concerned about the severity of inequalities perpetuated against women, hampering their development and advancement. And we firmly renew that The Gambia will be central to addressing all major issues affecting the empowerment of women through the key frameworks of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, particularly for those in the rural areas. For too long, the plight of women around the world has been one defined by a history of silence, inaction, tribulation, endless ordeals, and marginalization. Now we must commit to making the history of women empowerment and equality more about creating successive stories. In our explanation of vote after the vote, The Gambia wish to put on record the following. The resolution in operative paragraph 2L makes reference to the provision of sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. It is important to clarify that these terms are to be interpreted as referring exclusively to those health care services that have been authorized by competent authorities within The Gambia. They do not in any way include a right to abortion. This interpretation is consistent with the agreements reached in the ICPD Programme of Action and the Beijing Platform for Action. Secondly, The Gambia also wishes to put on record that it does not support the inclusion of the term "multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination" within preparatory paragraph 15 and operative paragraph 2s. as well as in other resolutions cited in the report of the Third Committee. The delegation notes that this terminology is non-consensual and susceptible to misinterpretation. Furthermore, The Gambia does not agree with any interpretation of this term that encompasses categories of discrimination which have not been internationally agreed upon or that are not recognized within our national laws and policies. The delegation maintains that only those forms of discrimination which have received consensus at the international level and are reflected in our domestic legal frameworks would be considered legitimate within the context of this resolution. My delegation also wishes to emphasize that we understand the use of the term “gender” as referring exclusively to men and women, as biological males and females, in line with Annex IV of the report of the Fourth World Conference on Women and Article 3 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. In light of these reservations, the Gambia continues to welcome the adoption of this resolution and looks forward to constructive engagement with all States in its implementation. I thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Sri Lanka, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving me the floor. Sri Lanka perceives that the substance of this resolution is of importance in our common goal towards improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas, and therefore co-sponsored and voted in favor of the resolution. It is of fundamental importance to us all. Empowering rural women and girls is not only a matter of justice, but also an endeavor that will result in greater peace, prosperity, and sustainable development for all. Sri Lanka takes pride in being the first country to elect a woman Prime Minister. A year ago, Sri Lanka elected its third female Prime Minister. The Parliament of Sri Lanka currently holds the highest women representation in its history. Today, in Sri Lanka, women enjoy literacy rates on par with men. Mr. Chair, economic empowerment of rural women remains a cornerstone of Sri Lanka's vision for sustainable development. Sri Lanka stands determined to create a world where every woman and girl can live free of discrimination and violence, where leadership is shared equally, and where all people, regardless of gender, have endless opportunity. I thank you.

Thank you. I'll have Uganda. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation wishes to thank the delegation of Mongolia for presenting this important resolution, which addresses the critical challenges faced by women and girls in rural areas and seeks to advance their empowerment and well-being. Uganda voted in favor of this resolution. However, we would like to place the following elements of our position on record. First, references to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights in OP2L are understood strictly in line with the ICPD program of action and the Beijing platform of action. These terms do not include a right to abortion and relate only to the services approved by national authorities. Second, references to outcome of review conferences must be interpreted solely within the framework of the GA agreement and regional or agency-led processes and cannot alter the ICPD or Beijing commitments. Third, we do not agree with the inclusion of the non-consensual term, multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, and do not accept interpretations that extend to categories not internationally agreed or do not reflect in our national laws. Finally, we reaffirm that we understand the term gender to refer exclusively to biological males and females, consistent with the Annex 4 of the Beijing Conference Report and Article 3 of the Rome Statute of the ICC.

Thank you.

Thank you. Right. I will invite the committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 69A, elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Take action on draft resolution A/C3/80/L2. and titled Combating Glorification of Naziism, Neo-Naziism and other practices that contribute to feeling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. And the amendment to draft resolution L2 contained in document L56. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L2 and the amendment contained in document L/56 contain no program budget implications. With that, I would like to give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. The floor is yours.

Mr. Chairman, the delegation of the Russian Federation has the honor to present on behalf of the co-sponsors from all regions of the world the traditional draft resolution combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. 80 years ago, the member states of the anti-Hitler coalition took on the historic title of the United Nations, and they won a great victory in the Second World War. Overcoming their differences, they closed ranks for a common goal, overthrowing those who had brought the world destruction, hatred, slavery, and racial exclusivity. This victory made it possible to create the UN. Thanks to this victory, we are here in this hall today. In several days, the entire world will mark the 80th year anniversary of the establishment of the Nuremberg Tribunal, which legally cemented the victory over Nazism. However, today, the significance of the victory and the decisions of Nuremberg are being called into question for political expediency. We've frequently heard statements and calls that are tantamount to National Socialist slogans. The voices of those who are continuing to advocate for racial purity and getting rid of foreign elements have been raised. What's become commonplace are manifestations of Islamophobia, Christianophobia, Arabophobia, Afrophobia, Latinophobia, Sinophobia, Russophobia, and antisemitism. The shadow of Nazism is engulfing cities and entire countries in Europe. Those who collaborated with Nazis and committed war crimes and crimes against humanity are being repackaged as national heroes or as part of national liberation movements. In a number of countries, the destruction of monuments has been exalted to the level of a policy, a state policy and national ideology. That's monuments to those who fought Nazism, the destruction of monuments to those who fought Nazism and sacrificed their lives for a better future, and symbols associated with the victory against Nazism are being legally banned. We will never agree that those who are trying to consider the spread of racist, Nazi, and xenophobic ideology and rhetoric as the enjoyment of the freedom of speech, assembly, or association. The adoption of this resolution at the 80th year anniversary of our victory is our duty to those who laid down their lives for peace, on Earth for the triumph of the love of humanity and humanism. Any other position would be cynicism and would be a disgrace to the memory of those who freed the world of the horrors of national socialism. Thank you.

Thank you, the Russian Federation. I'll give the floor back to the Committee Secretary.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also joined as co-sponsors of draft resolution L2: Algeria, Angola, Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, China, Congo, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Namibia, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Serbia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Uzbekistan. the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor draft resolution L2, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see no requests. Thank you.

Thank you. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Liechtenstein to make a statement in connection with the amendment contained in document L-56. The floor is yours.

Thank you so much for the floor, Mr. Chair. Albania, Australia, Japan, Marshall Islands, Liechtenstein and Norway have introduced an amendment requesting the inclusion of language that has been successfully voted in in the last three years. As in previous years, the facilitators have removed OP4, which quotes verbatim from the report of the UN Special Rapporteur, who is mandated to report on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerances. We consider it important to continue to include this paragraph, given its direct relevance to the resolution, The proposed amendment reads: "Notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its territorial aggression against Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism and underlines that the pretextual use of neo-Nazism to justify territorial aggression seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism." During this year's first and only informal for this resolution, a cross-regional group of Member States requested OP 4 to be reinstated and shared the reasoning for why the paragraph should be included. Regrettably, the Russian Federation has not listened to Member States and has decided to table the resolution without OP 4. Time and again, Member States have asked the facilitator to consider new language that reflects genuine attempts to combat the glorification of Nazism, racism, xenophobia and related intolerances. And time and again, the Russian Federation has remained closed to address this important issue, rather using this narrative to justify its own illegal and immoral actions. We therefore saw no other option other than to reintroduce the amendment. We condemn the instrumentalization of history in this resolution. turning it into a vehicle for propaganda and disinformation in order to justify the Russian Federation's aggression against Ukraine. Since the outset of its illegal and unjustifiable war, the Russian Federation has cynically sought to disguise its aggression as a fight against Nazism, while using the Third Committee as a platform to spread disinformation. uphold truth and integrity within this body, we urge all Member States to join us in voting yes to this amendment. I thank you.

I thank you, Liechtenstein. Secretary, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also joined as co-sponsors of the amendment contained in L56: North Macedonia, the Republic of Korea, and the United Kingdom. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor the amendment contained in document L/56, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see no requests. Thank you.

Thank you. In accordance with rule 130 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, the Committee will first take a decision on the amendment. A recorded vote has been requested. on the amendment to draft resolution L/2, contained in document L/56. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before the vote in connection with the amendment to draft resolution L/2, as contained in document L/56? I give the floor to the Russian Federation, to be followed by Venezuela and Japan. The Russian Federation, the floor is yours.

Mr. Chairman, the delegation of the Russian Federation does not support the proposed amendment to draft resolution L2, and we urge delegations to vote against it. This is about an attempt to politicize the issues considered in the draft resolution, and it's not about a willingness to find a solution for existing problems. Furthermore, this proposal is not at all an amendment within the meeting of the methods and working method and the working practice of the United Nations, and it is a brazen procedural trap and provocation. This is a thematic resolution, and it doesn't mention any countries or groups of states, and that is important as a matter of principle. It seeks dialogue and cooperation. The problems it mentions are cross-border, and they pertain to the situation in many world countries. So this is exactly the reason why the Russian draft resolution is the logical complement to another traditional document of the Third Committee on countering racism, which is put forward by the G77 and China. Distinguished colleagues, in their zeal to scuttle the adoption of the Russian draft resolution, the authors of the amendment have outdone themselves. Even if the proposed amendment is adopted, the entire text of the resolution on the whole will still remain unacceptable for them. And still, they are going to vote against the resolution as a whole. The sponsors of the amendment and those who are behind them are hoping that in so doing, they'll force us to vote against our own draft resolution. Let me disappoint them. These plans will never work. Incidentally, practically all of these states will later vote in exactly the same way on the comprehensive draft resolution of the G77 and China on combating racism. And then after that, they're still going to tell us about their condemnation of racism and racial discrimination, Nazism, and neo-Nazism. Or do you think the best means of fighting racism and racial discrimination is cynicism and litany? hypocrisy, then you should have the courage to say so directly. The authors of the amendment have attempted to set a procedural trap, which is their only hope of reaching their goal of including in the text a justification of the spread of racist and xenophobic neo-Nazi ideas as the enjoyment of the right to freedom of speech. They weren't able to delete from the text the reference to the outcome documents of the World Conference Against Racism in Durban, and they weren't able to rewrite the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal either. We urge members of the Committee not to fall for this provocation at to vote against the proposed amendment, which is actually not even a real amendment. And furthermore, none of the... We disagree with what you said about the special rapporteur and the the other sources. If you support the draft resolution as a whole, then you need to vote against the amendment. You should take a principled stance, abstaining or not participating in the voting would only play into the hands of those who are trying to politicize the noble goal of combating racism and racial discrimination. Thank you.

Thank you. Venezuela, the floor is yours.

Sir, Venezuela has the honor of taking the floor on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations. We convey our appreciation to the Russian Federation, a fellow member of our group, for having presented the draft resolution contained in document L2 on combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism. We think this is timely in light of the current international context. We also express our support to the text as presented by its main sponsors. We reiterate our categorical rejection against the resurging Fascism and neo-fascism, Nazism, and other kinds of ideologies that represent a past that had already been defeated by humanity. We condemn and reject any current manifestation that infringes upon the fundamental rights, dignity, and value of the human person, while urging all states to categorically condemn and criminalize any manifestations and acts of hatred and segregation on ethnic or any other grounds. or attempts to establish categories or set formulas of racial exceptionalism, which would undoubtedly represent a terrible moral setback for humanity. It is immoral and politically contradictory that some governments, while attempting to lecture the world on good governance and political rectitude, have been unable to fully guarantee the right to non-discrimination for their own citizens. and actively promote discrimination among others through the illegal imposition of unilateral coercive measures, which today affect more than a third of humanity. The Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter considers that the inclusion of additional elements into this draft resolution unrelated to the topic under consideration constitutes an undeniable act of politicization, which distorts the purpose of the resolution and alters the inherent dynamics of the agenda item in question. We therefore are obliged to express our rejection to any attempt aimed at manipulating and politicizing human rights and weaponizing this issue that should rather bring us all together, especially as we commemorate the 80th anniversary of our common defeat of and victory over Nazism. Bearing this in mind, we find the proposed amendment before us neither useful nor necessary, but rather counterproductive. We urge delegations to vote against it and instead to render their support to this draft resolution in its original form as contained in document L/2. understanding that this is an important contribution to our common efforts aimed at combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that contribute to exacerbating contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and other related forms of intolerance. Thank you.

Thank you. Japan, to be followed by the United States, Belarus, and Sudan. Japan, the floor is yours.

Our firm commitment to combating all forms of racial discrimination, including the dangerous ideologies of Nazism and neo-Nazism. These ideologies are unacceptable and destructive, posing threats to peace, human dignity, and equality. We continue to stand with the international community in our collective efforts to eradicate these serious threats. However, Japan is concerned that this resolution invokes neo-Nazism in a way that dilutes and diverts attention from the real issue. In particular, the Russian Federation continues to misappropriate this narrative in relation to its blatant violation of international law against Ukraine. While every nation has the right to address extremism, the use of such rhetoric to justify territorial invasion raises important questions regarding historical accuracy and the integrity of global efforts to combat Nazism. In order to truly combat racism and intolerance, the international community must resist attempts to politicize core issues. Japan believes that the proposed amendment helps to restore balance in this regard. Therefore, we respectfully call upon all Member States to vote in favor of the amendment, ensuring that our shared efforts remain focused on the crucial fight against hate and extremism. I thank you.

Thank you, Japan. The United States, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Third Committee this year. However, the United States would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious or irrelevant issue year after year. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States will vote no on this amendment to the resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be submitted as part of the record of the current proceedings and posted on our mission’s website for more information. Thank you.

Thank you. Belarus, the floor is yours.

Mr. Chairman, distinguished colleagues. The Republic of Belarus, as a co-sponsor of the draft resolution, combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, wants to point out to the delegates the fact that this resolution is exclusively thematic in nature. The draft resolution does not contain any reference to a single country of the world, even in the historical context. The coordinators of the draft resolution, having such an opportunity, did not introduce into the text any of the terms voiced by certain States or any country-specific issues. At the same time, we see an unabashedly politicized amendment being submitted, even in the technical sense of the world. This completely flies in the face of the spirit of the resolution. This is why we wish to underscore that if anyone is trying to use this resolution for their political ends, then it is the authors of the amendment L-56. In that regard, we express our strong disagreement with this hypocritical approach, and we urge delegations to vote against this aforementioned amendment. I thank you.

Thank you. Sudan, to be followed by the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Australia. Sudan, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We thank the Russian Federation for presenting and tabling the resolution contained in document L/2. All forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance are serious violations of human rights that must be rejected. Furthermore, effective measures and policies must be adopted to enhance inclusion and non-discrimination as part of strengthening democracy and respect for human rights. Sudan is a supportive and a traditional co-sponsor of this thematic-oriented resolution and will continue to uphold this position. We oppose any attempts to dilute the noble aim of this resolution by adding politicized paragraphs or terminologies.

Therefore, we will vote against the amendment in document L/56 and will vote in favor of the

resolution as a whole.

I thank you.

Thank you. The UK?

Thank you, Chair.

UK unequivocally condemns the glorification of Nazism and all forms

of violent extremism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism, xenophobia, discrimination, and related intolerance. That said, we remain appalled by Russia's attempts to use this resolution to justify its actions in illegally invading Ukraine. While the title of this resolution purports that the intent is to combat the glorification of Nazism and neo-Nazism,

In reality, the resolution shamelessly manipulates historical truth.

Russia continues to spread disinformation, as embedded in this draft resolution, to propagate false narratives.

Russia's narrative claims that neo-Nazism is the root cause of Putin's war on Ukraine.

This is a heinous lie. This is not only a war of aggression against Ukraine, it is a war on truth

and on history, and this resolution is central to that distortion.

Chair, we should be as determined to safeguard the truth as we are to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. That requires us to seriously question the content of this draft resolution. Russia has presented this draft resolution as a technical rollover, but in fact, the draft contains substantive edits,

including the deletion of OP 4, which notes with alarm that

Russia seeks to justify its territorial aggression against Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism.

Rather than pushing war propaganda through this resolution and abusing the resolution mechanism, Russia should stop its illegal

war, withdraw its forces, respect Ukraine's internationally recognized borders, and comply with its obligations under the UN Charter.

For these reasons, the UK will support the amendment presented by Liechtenstein and will vote against the

resolution as a whole. Thank you.

Thank you. Denmark, the floor is yours.

Chair, I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, as well as San Marino, align themselves with this statement. Please don't take our word for it. Take instead the words of Professor E. Tendayi Achiume, professor of law at UCLA. Born in Zambia, later a legal clerk at the Constitutional Court of South Africa, and latterly the UN Special Rapporteur on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. In her report, in response to a previous edition of this resolution, she was unsparing in her criticism of the, and I quote, "blatant instrumentalization of serious human rights concerns," end of quote. The rest of her words will be familiar to you because they are quoted verbatim in L56. They're worth repeating. I quote again, "The Special Rapporteur notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its military invasion and territorial aggression in Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism. The use of neo-Nazism as a pretext to justify territorial aggression seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism." The Special Rapporteur denounces and condemns in the strongest terms such pretextual use, including in relation to the unlawful breach of the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the humanitarian crisis that breach has caused." We invite you to defend the integrity of this Committee and reject attempts to undermine it. We urge all Member States to join us in voting yes to amendment L.56. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll give the floor to Australia.

Thank you, Chair. No member state in this room will deny the utmost importance of combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that fuel contemporary forms of racism. Australia, too, unequivocally condemns all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, including Nazism and neo-Nazism. However, this resolution presented by the Russian Federation has been misrepresented and continues to be misused by the Russian Federation to justify its illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine. Australia has again joined with Liechtenstein, Albania, Japan, Marshall Islands, and Norway in presenting this amendment to reintroduce OP4 to this resolution, which articulates Russia's motivations to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine on the pretext of neo-Nazism. The same amendment has been successfully adopted for the past three years. Chair, the OP4 that Russia has removed is language taken verbatim from the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism's report A/77/512, which I quote, "notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its military invasion and territorial aggression in Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism." This report was presented by the Special Rapporteur in 2022, but it remains relevant today. In addition to the UN findings, Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly articulated his justification of war against Ukraine to protect Russians from neo-Nazi dictatorship. Putin has said that Russia will continue fighting in Ukraine until it secures the denazification of Ukraine. It is blatantly clear what the Russian Federation's motivations are. Member States, we urge you to hold the Russian Federation to the highest standards as facilitators of this resolution. This means the UN cannot remain bystanders and endorse the Russian Federation's actions to instrumentalize this resolution. We urge you to demonstrate your principled positions to uphold international law and promote and protect human rights by voting in favor of the amendment. Thank you.

Thank you. Committee will now commence with the process of voting on the amendment contained in document L-56. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Now delegations are kindly requested to indicate their vote.

The Committee is now voting on the amendment to draft resolution L/2 entitled “Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”, as contained in document L/56. The Committee is voting on the amendment contained in document L/56. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine.

Now the result of the vote is as follows: 63 in favour, 41 against and 52 abstentions. The amendment to draft resolution L/2 contained in document L/56 is adopted. Any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote after the vote in connection with the amendment to draft resolution L.2 as contained in document L.56? I'll give the floor to Nicaragua, to be followed by New Zealand and Belarus. Nicaragua.

Thank you very much, sir. We maintain a firm position in the fight against any ideology that is extremist, including fascist expressions, as well as Nazism and neo-Nazism that promote intolerance, racism, apartheid, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, and any other kind of discrimination or intolerance. We thank the Russian Federation for submitting this draft resolution, which is essential to encourage states to adopt effective measures against the new threats from the growth of terrorist attacks encouraged by racism and intolerance and xenophobia, and also those that are perpetrated under religious pretext. This is a relevant appeal which is necessary in the current global context. We deeply lament that once again there has been a politicization of this resolution, this is a collective responsibility among all states in the international community to eliminate these harmful ideologies that undermine peaceful coexistence and the fundamental values of humanity. Therefore, Nicaragua disassociates itself from OP4, recently amended and adopted, because it weakens the international efforts to fight against racism, discrimination, xenophobia, and related forms of intolerance. It takes us away from the central goal that is consensus-based and that has historically guided this resolution. We reiterate our principled position against the selective focus and double standards which are promoted by some states in order to promote certain agendas against specific states. These practices not only undermine the credibility of this committee, they also undermine the genuine and collective efforts to create a fairer world that is more equitable, harmonious, and peaceful. Finally, sir, We request that this statement be included in the official record of the meeting. Thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to New Zealand.

Thank you, Chair.

New Zealand unequivocally condemns all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, or related intolerance, including Nazism and neo-Nazism. We are deeply concerned by this resolution. Russia is seeking to misappropriate false narratives, including the glorification of Nazism, as a pretext for its war of aggression against Ukraine, which contravenes the UN Charter's prohibition on the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. We condemn Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine and reiterate our call for Russia to respect Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and withdraw its troops immediately from inside Ukraine's internationally recognized borders. In this regard, New Zealand was pleased to co-sponsor the amendment to this resolution. We continue to have serious concerns with the way in which this resolution mischaracterizes the obligations of member states with respect to international human rights law and the provisions of the UN Charter. New Zealand stands against Nazism, antisemitism, and Islamophobia in all its forms. We reiterate our concerns with the rising global trends of these ideologies, particularly in the current global context. We further regret that there was no attempt to broaden the scope of this resolution to reflect more contemporary forms of racism, including racial discrimination, xenophobia, or related intolerance. In addressing these critical issues, it is vital that we take an inclusive and intersectional approach. Thank you.

Thank you. Since the amendment contained in document L56 has been adopted, we shall proceed to take a decision on draft resolution L2 as amended. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution LC3/80-L2. entitled Combating Qualification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism, and Other Practices that Contribute to Fueling Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance. Before we proceed to debate, I will give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal or non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation. of vote. I now give the floor to Ukraine, to be followed by Denmark. Ukraine, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to deliver a statement in explanation of vote on draft resolution L.2. Ukraine reaffirms unequivocal condemnation of all forms of Nazism, neo-Nazism, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. We reiterate our longstanding position that this draft resolution does not genuinely aim to combat this abhorrent phenomenon. Instead, the Russian Federation systematically exploits this annual resolution as a propaganda tool to justify its brutal war of aggression against Ukraine and the horrific war crimes and crimes against humanity it commits. For nearly four years, under the false pretext of fighting neo-Nazism, Russia has waged an unprovoked and genocidal campaign against my country in blatant violation of the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, and international human rights law. Its forces have deliberately targeted civilians and critical civilian infrastructure, carried out executions, torture, and sexual violence, and forcibly deported Ukrainian civilians, including children. Russian state propaganda relentlessly fuels hatred towards Ukrainians, normalizes genocidal rhetoric, and denies Ukraine's very right to exist. By deporting and indoctrinating Ukrainian children from occupied territories with the openly stated goal to make Ukrainians Russians again, the Russian authorities are engaging in practices chillingly reminiscent of the very ideology this resolution purports to condemn. If all of this does not constitute a manifestation of Nazi-like ideology, then what does? Today, 80 years since the Nuremberg Tribunal, we are working on a new special tribunal for same pattern of Russian war crimes and crimes against humanity it commits in Ukraine. To expose the true purpose of this draft, we are grateful to the delegations that introduced a substantive amendment again this year, and to all delegations that supported it. The amendment makes clear that Russia is manipulating history and distorting our shared victory over Nazism, a victory to which millions of Ukrainians contributed with their own lives. However, even with this amendment, draft resolution L2 remains a vehicle of poor manipulation. The Russian Federation has weaponized the pretext of countering neo-Nazism to rationalize its inhuman war crimes in Ukraine. It is the height of hypocrisy for the aggressor state to present a resolution condemning an ideology whose methods and rhetoric it itself employs. For these reasons, Ukraine calls for a vote on draft resolution L2 and urges delegations to vote against it. I thank you.

Thank you. Denmark.

Thank you, Chair. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States. The candidate countries Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, as well as San Marino, align themselves with this statement. There is something wrong in claiming to combat nationalism by denying the existence of a sovereign people. There is something dangerous in waging a war of aggression, supposedly in the name of peace. And there is something distasteful, especially in this week of remembrance for veterans, in seeking to exploit the United Nations, born to save us from untold sorrow, as a platform for propaganda. Last year, the Russian representative complained of being tired of cynicism and hypocrisy. Yet the recent letter circulated by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation contains 105 pages of distortion and disinformation, including unworthy and untrue personal attacks on the President of the General Assembly. Delegations may form their own views as to the precedent that this sets and what it means for them. None of this will distract the European Union, its member states and partners from what really matters: our common fight against contemporary forms of extremism and totalitarian ideologies. We are fully committed to the global fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, antisemitism, anti-Muslim hatred and related intolerance. Unfortunately, the present resolution L2, even as amended, does nothing to advance this work. We therefore encourage all Member States to join us in voting no. Thank you.

Thank you. The Committee will now commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L2 as amended. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are now kindly requested to indicate their vote.

The Committee is now voting on draft resolution A/C.3/82/L.2. entitled "Combating Glorification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism, and Other Practices that Contribute to Fueling Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance," as amended. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine.

The result of the vote is as follows: 114 in favour, 52 against, and 12 abstentions. Draft resolution LC380L2, as amended, is adopted. Has any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I give the floor to Venezuela, to be followed by Cuba and Vietnam.

Venezuela.

Thank you, sir. We once again would like to thank the Russian Federation for presenting this draft resolution L2 on fighting the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that exacerbate current forms of racism and racial discrimination, xenophobia, and other kinds of intolerance. This is timely. Every year, we support them as co-sponsor. So in light of the presentation of a hostile amendment in the Third Committee that does not contribute to the goal of this resolution and aims to undermine its spirit based on an issue that is extremely important, such as the fight against the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and extremist ideologies, which aims to consolidate racial exceptionalism, which we thought had been overcome, and furthermore aims to politicize the content of the resolution. We would like to clarify that we disassociate ourselves from OP4, And also, we reiterate our full support to the rest of the content of the resolution. And we know that this statement will be inscribed in the record of the meeting. Thank you.

Thank you. Cuba, de Farias.

Sir. We reiterate our full commitment to the fight against all forms of racism, discrimination, xenophobia, and other forms of intolerance. We fully reject Nazism and neo-Nazism. These theories are scientifically faulty, they are morally unacceptable, they are unfair, they are unacceptable, they deny our shared humanity, and they aim to undermine the principle that all human beings are equal in dignity and rights. The international community must adopt effective measures to avoid legitimizing hate speech, intolerance, discrimination, Nothing can justify the promotion of racist or supremacist or xenophobic ideas. This is why Cuba has always been among the co-sponsors of the draft resolution L.2 on fighting the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Thus, and in light of the fact that the resolution is focused on its traditional elements and the importance of preserving unity in the international community on this important topic, my delegation voted against the amendment L/56. This is the fourth time that this amendment has been presented. It introduces a divisive element that undermines consensus in our efforts against Nazism and neo-Nazism. It is an amendment that aims to give visibility to a specific context in a resolution that is clearly thematic in nature. The issue of Nazism and neo-Nazism could also be highlighted in other contexts, particularly in developed countries. The amendment deliberately omits any reference to that. Several countries that voted in favor of the amendment are opposed to the resolution as a whole, even having adopted the amendment. This creates doubts about their real purpose. So Cuba disassociates itself from OP.4, which was introduced as a result of the amendment in question, and we'd like to clarify that it is not agreed-upon language, and we do not feel bound by its possible extent. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate Cuba's commitment to the eradication of all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. using as our guidepost the Durban Plan of Action, which remains fully valid. Thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to Vietnam, to be followed by Zimbabwe, Argentina, and Burundi. Vietnam, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Vietnam reaffirms its steadfast commitment to combating all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Guided by this conviction, we are pleased to co-sponsor and vote in favor of this important resolution. The 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War offers a solemn reminder of history and of the tremendous sacrifices made to overcome hatred, racism, and extremist ideologies. Vietnam firmly believes that genuine cooperation and constructive dialogue grounded in the principles of equality, impartiality, non-politicization, and non-selectivity, remain the most effective means to bridge differences and identify sustainable solutions. At the same time, it's our conviction that any proposed amendments to this resolution should be pursued in good faith and through broad, transparent consultations among all member states, with a view to contributing meaningfully to the integrity of the text. It is, therefore, regrettable that the adopted amendment has instead generated division and confrontation. Only 63 Member States, less than one-third of the UN membership, voted in favor of this amendment. Besides, we are particularly concerned that some delegations supporting this amendment proceeded to vote against the resolution even after its incorporation. In these circumstances, Vietnam abstains from voting for the amendment and disassociates itself from OP4. We emphasize that this resolution represents a critical call for international unity against racism and extremism and should not be undermined by political maneuvering. I thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to Zimbabwe.

Thank you, Chair.

Zimbabwe welcomes the adoption of this important resolution and takes this opportunity to explain our position.

Chair, we are.

Witnessing a disturbing resurgence of acts of xenophobia and racism, and the adoption of this resolution is a timely reminder of the need for the international community to come together, notwithstanding our different perspectives, to combat all forms of intolerance and to build a world where we can live together harmoniously. Zimbabwe voted in favor of the resolution, consistent with our history of resisting colonialism, minority rule, and racial oppression, exceptionalism, and also in recognition of the solidarity we received from many partners during our liberation struggle. Further, we firmly believe that any form of intolerance, be it Nazism, neo-Nazism, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, Afrophobia, and Islamophobia, must never be glorified under any pretext, and we must never justify any acts of hate and intolerance.

It is for us the basis of this.

Resolution, and we believe the resolution remains an essential instrument in that collective effort. We therefore call on all Member States to retain focus on the spirit of the resolution. It is in the same spirit that we voted against the amendment, as it is not in line with the intended goal of the resolution and that it detracts from the long-standing consensus around this important initiative. Consequently, Zimbabwe wishes to disassociate itself from OP4 introduced by this amendment.

I thank you.

Thank you. Could we go to Argentina?

Thank you, sir. Argentina reiterates its firm and ongoing commitment to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, whose implementation continues guiding our commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights. But this does not involve automatically accepting any text, including in resolutions or documents that are tied to it, particularly when they are removed from the originally contemplated conceptual framework. We would like to highlight that this includes language without context, and furthermore, it relates to determined forms of government that include political elements that go beyond its legal framework. This would validate subjective perspectives on ideology that would not be relevant in a respectful negotiation within the framework of sovereignty of states. This is why we believe it is essential to conserve the neutrality of this text, avoiding political judgments. In OP 10, we mention far-right ideologues. It is problematic that a resolution would aim to define national ideologies this way without a clear reference to treaties or documents that define such things. Also, if there's a reference to extremism, it would be worth mentioning far-left extremism in order to avoid bias. This lack of balance is concerning to our delegation. When the resolution includes ideological characterizations, it becomes difficult to establish objective criteria in order to define hate speech. How can we determine clear definitions when the text already includes a partial ideological view? In various paragraphs, there is a mention of extremism without limiting their reach. We think it is necessary to define and include expressions of far-left radicalism that recently have exacerbated expressions of hate against the State of Israel and Jewish communities, reviving symbols whose elimination is the goal of this text. In OP 61, there is a mention of fighting against extremist political groups and movements, including skinheads and neo-Nazis, who, and actually we agree with mentioning them, but the general reference to extremists without greater clarification opens the door towards subjective interpretations. We make these comments in a view to being able to make progress in the upcoming years towards a more balanced and detailed discussion that will effectively contribute to the fight against glorifying Nazism, neo-Nazism, and all practices that exacerbate current forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Burundi, the floor is yours.

Thank you very much, sir. I will be very brief. My delegation is pleased by the adoption of this resolution. And we'd like to recall that the Republic of Burundi is against any kind of racism or discrimination, but we would like to clarify after the vote on the amendment that was presented today that my delegation dissociates itself from that amendment, which is OP 4. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I now give the floor to South Africa to be followed by Malaysia, the Democratic Republic, People's Republic of Korea, and the United States. South Africa.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This resolution remains an important thematic resolution that works in tangent with the resolution on the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Racism and racial discrimination are structural issues in the global system and must not be abused for political purposes because it will undermine the intent of this agenda item and limit its capacity. Thematic debates and resolutions are not the forum for the examination of country-specific issues. South Africa has consistently maintained this position as a matter of principle, which is shared by other Member States, and we have regularly observed numerous Member States denouncing the politicization of the human rights agenda. This resolution is no different. And we therefore call on states to not follow this direction, because it will only serve to erode the value of the international conversation. Separate mechanisms already exist within the multilateral human rights architecture for examining a wide array of country-specific situations. Therefore, South Africa wishes to reaffirm its co-sponsorship of this resolution and recognizes its critical value as one of the key pillars in the global fight against racial discrimination. However, given the amendment that has been included, we unequivocally disassociate ourselves from the amendment L2, the new paragraph OP4, that introduces country-specific language in a thematic human rights resolution. I thank you.

Thank you. Malaysia, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Malaysia firmly rejects racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia. and all forms of related intolerance. These abhorrent acts not only divide communities, but also sow fear, hatred and mistrust within societies. Left unchecked, they pose a serious threat to peace and security. Malaysia has consistently supported this resolution as it reinforces the global commitment to eradicate the ideologies and narratives that perpetuate contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. Extremist ideologies, including Nazism and neo-Nazism, must be decisively rejected and prevented from taking root in any society, given the profound dangers they represent. For these reasons, Malaysia continues to vote in favour of the resolution in its entirety. Mr. Chair, Malaysia, however, could not support the amendment contained in document L56, which has been incorporated into the resolution. Its inclusion has diverted the focus of what was originally a unifying and thematic text on combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, into one that singles out specific countries. This shift undermines the collective spirit and unity required to confront extremism, particularly Nazism and neo-Nazism, and instead risks sowing further division among member states, contrary to the very principles upon which this august body was established. We also note with concern that those who supported the amendment nevertheless voted against the resolution as a whole, further highlighting the politicisation of this important issue. In light of these considerations, Malaysia disassociates itself from the amendment adopted as operative paragraph 4 and reiterates that the fight against racism Racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance must never be used as a platform for political confrontation. I thank you.

Thank you. Now, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

DPRK reaffirms its commitment against all types of extremist, fascist, Nazi, and neo-Nazi ideologists that promote intolerance, racism, apartheid, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, and all other forms of intolerance. At the same time, my delegation extends gratitude to the Russian delegation for presenting this resolution, which we consider contributes to encouraging States to take appropriate measures to address the new threat inciting contemporary forms of racism, xenophobia, and others.

Carried out in the name of religion or belief. Mr. Chair, we deeply regret to see unjustified selective approach by some countries presenting counterproductive amendment of this resolution and politicizing the resolution repeatedly this year. In this regard, our delegation dissociates itself from operative paragraph.

4, which undermines the international efforts to combat and eliminate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related forms of intolerance.

The DPRK reiterates its principled position of rejecting the selective approaches and double standards by some countries which aim to promote agendas against specific countries and hinder collective efforts to achieve.

A more just, harmonious, equitable, and peaceful world. Mr. Chair, my delegation requests the Secretariat our disassociation from OP4 with this resolution be reflected in the official records of this meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to the United States.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Third Committee this year. However, the United States would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious or irrelevant issue year after year. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations’ core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. The United Nations condemns the advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred and other hateful ideologies. That said, we do not act at the expense of our strong support for freedom of opinion and expression. Free speech, even odious speech, is protected under the U.S. Constitution. This fundamental freedom does not exist merely to protect widely accepted speech. but also to ensure protection of speech that bucks current norms. To the extent this resolution refers to efforts to prevent, prohibit, or eliminate hateful ideas or speech, such efforts must be carried out in a manner that fully respects freedom of opinion and expression and is consistent with the requirements in Article 19 of the ICCPR. The United States resoundingly rejects vague and overbroad notions of misinformation and disinformation, and regrets that member states cite Orwellian definitions of controlled information to justify their control of speech. These efforts are a threat and a danger to free thinking people everywhere. Accordingly, the United States voted no on this resolution. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be submitted as part of the record of the Third Committee's proceedings and posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you.

Thank you. Now I have Algeria, Japan, and Belarus. Algeria, the floor is yours.

Mr. Chair, Algeria requested the floor to deliver an explanation of vote after the vote on the resolution and related amendment adopted by our committee. My delegation voted in favor of this resolution to reaffirm Algeria's commitment to combating and eliminating all contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance based on religion, belief, or origin, among others. The international community must intensify its efforts to address new forms of discrimination and intolerance, which have worsened and become more acute, particularly due to the misuse of modern technologies. Additionally, Algeria abstained on the amendment introduced as OP.4, in line with its principled position of avoiding the politicization of human rights issues. which must be addressed in accordance with the principles of neutrality, independence, and non-selectivity. From this perspective, Algeria calls upon all Member States to exert their utmost efforts to preserve the technical and objective nature of such a resolution and to favor the values of multilateralism to reinstate the consensus on today's resolution. I thank you.

Thank you. Japan, the floor is yours.

Japan remains firmly committed to combating racism and all forms of extremism, including ideologies such as neo-Nazism. We regret that the resolution as adopted still does not adequately address the current global context and emerging challenges. Japan believes the resolution’s focus should be broadened to reflect the complexities of contemporary discrimination. A more balanced approach would foster unity and promote equality rather than narrowing the scope of this critical discussion. We also reiterate our concern over attempts to instrumentalize Nazism in relation to the ongoing situation in Ukraine. Such issues must be handled carefully to ensure global efforts to combat extremism remain genuine and effective. Additionally, The negotiation process for this resolution raises concerns, as the lack of inclusive and transparent consultations limited the opportunity for Member States to contribute meaningfully. Our collective efforts must be based on open, balanced dialogue to properly address these issues on a global scale. For these reasons, Japan has voted against the resolution. Before concluding, I regret having to address the misleading document circulated by the Russian delegation under this agenda item. Its contents are factually incorrect and completely inconsistent with Japan's position. While we will not respond to each and every point, I must make it clear all nations must be humble about their history, and Japan has squarely faced its history, reflecting upon the past eight decades, has walked the path of a peace-loving nation. Conflicts and human rights violations still profoundly threaten human dignity around the world. In this context, Japan reaffirms its unwavering commitment as a responsible Member State to contribute to peace, stability, and prosperity for all. Thank you.

Thank you. Give the floor to Belarus.

Mr. Chairman, dear colleagues, As a country that lived through all of the horrors of the Second World War, including the genocide of the people of Belarus, we are deeply troubled by the spread of neo-Nazism all over the world and the encouragement of neo-Nazism from certain politicians and the spread of radical political movements, especially among young people. These processes are coupled with an attempt to rewrite history and justify the crimes of Nazis. In this regard, the Republic of Belarus from the very beginning strongly supported the resolution submitted by the Russian Federation, and we were one of the first co-sponsors of the zero draft, and we called upon states to engage in constructive and non-politicized cooperation. We regret to note the non-professionalism, the ignorance, and the fact that certain states have unthinkingly towed a general line set out in their bilateral relations. The result of this is the forcible entry of a politicized country-specific paragraph in this thematic resolution. In this regard, Belarus disassociates itself from the operative paragraph contained in the amendment L-56. Yet we reaffirm our dedication to the noble spirit of the resolution set up by the coordinators. Thank you.

Thank you. I now give the floor to the Russian Federation, to be followed by China and Liechtenstein. Russian Federation.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Allow me to begin by expressing my sincere thanks to those delegations that voted in favor of the resolution as a whole and thus confirmed their dedication to maintaining historical truth and to preventing the distortion and falsification of the outcome of the Second World War. Furthermore, I would like to respond to some of the comments that I've just heard. Specifically, already several times we've heard the argument advanced from certain delegations that they didn't have open, transparent negotiations on the draft of this resolution. We noted those statements. And we also remember the fact that when holding the consultations that were held by the delegation of the Russian Federation, we declared that these same delegations that need negotiations due to principled considerations weren't going to engage in any negotiations on this draft resolution. And that's been repeated already for several years. If anybody wants to engage in negotiations with us, we stand ready to do so. but without casting doubt on the principled positions and factors that have to do with the essence of our resolution. Furthermore, I want to avail myself of this opportunity to thank those who voted against the politicized and completely inappropriate proposal contained in draft resolution L/56. In that regard, the Russian Federation also reaffirms, like many delegations have already done, and as we understand, some will continue to make similar statements, we would like to distance ourselves from the baseless, artificial OP 4, which, I will repeat, has nothing to do with the essence and the focus of this thematic resolution. I thank you.

Thank you. China.

Mr. Chair, 80 years ago, the world won a great victory in the war against fascism. As one of the principal victors, China has always advocated that the international community uphold the correct historical view of World War II, safeguard the hard-won outcomes of the victory and the post-war international order, firmly oppose any attempt to glorify or revive Nazism, fascism, or militarism, and resolutely reject all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and intolerance. The draft resolution submitted by the Russian delegation contributes to these objectives and has received broad support from the overwhelming majority of Member States. China has therefore co-sponsored and voted in favor of the draft resolution. The document before us is a traditional thematic resolution that addresses the principled issue of combating the glorification of Nazism and neo-Nazism. The proposed amendment attempts to insert country-specific elements into the resolution, thereby deviating from its intended scope and clearly contravening the established practices of the Third Committee. It is also worth noting that The main sponsors of the amendment include a certain country that seeks to distort the history of World War II and refuses to acknowledge its war crimes, including large-scale sexual violence. For these reasons, China disassociates itself from the consensus on the amendment to the draft resolution A/C/3/80/L2. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Lixin, the floor is yours.

Mr. Chair, let me start by saying that Liechtenstein condemns all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and related intolerance, including Nazism and neo-Nazism, and is alarmed by the increase of these phenomena in manifold forms and manifestations across the globe. We wish to express our sincere gratitude to delegations who have supported amending this resolution. Nevertheless, we continue to have strong reservations concerning this resolution due to the way in which it misrepresents obligations of Member States under human rights law and other provisions of international law, and how it continues to promote false narratives and justification of territorial aggression. We have therefore again voted against the resolution. I thank you.

Thank you. I now have Sweden, to be followed by Sri Lanka, Canada, and Slovenia. Sweden, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair. I deliver this statement on behalf of the eight Nordic and Baltic states. We are all unequivocal in our condemnation of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and all forms of racial intolerance, including Nazism and neo-Nazism. We agree that preventing extremism and combating intolerance is a shared responsibility for all. We are fully committed to the global fight against all forms of these abhorrent ideologies and their manifestations. We're deeply concerned with the increase in anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hatred worldwide. We want our societies to be open, democratic, and diverse. We celebrate our diversity and we defend it. These are core values of our countries. It's precisely for these reasons that we react so strongly to the resolution in front of us today. Because even though it has important language on the fight against racism, this is a document that at its core has a more sinister context. Shamefully, it attempts to rewrite history and build a false narrative that is used to justify the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, which aim is to destroy its democratic and peaceful neighbor under a cynical slogan of denazification. This same argument has been used before by Soviet Russia to justify occupying the Baltic states. Almost 50 years of the illegal occupation brought their nations executions, repressions, mass deportations, and forced Russification. Chair, we categorically reject this instrumentalization of history to justify a full-scale invasion and attempted annexation of a sovereign neighboring country. We strongly believe that this undermines the genuine fight against these heinous ideologies. And this is why all Nordic and Baltic states voted in favor of the amendment today. We did it to redress the utter lack of this context in the draft as it was presented. Mr. Chair, even with the amendment passed, our fundamental problems with the resolution still stands. A resolution on such an important topic deserves an inclusive approach. Instead, Russia has consistently avoided to engage seriously on the text and has failed for years at taking the concerns of other Member States into account. If there is no interest in having an open and fair process, we call on Russia to give up its role in it. There are many other Member States in this room whose track record on combating racism, Nazism, and neo-Nazism is unblemished and in whose leadership and facilitation we would trust and welcome. We want to engage in an honest and action-oriented conversation about this very important topic, and not have it misrepresented and misappropriated for war. For all these reasons, the Nordic Baltic States also voted against the resolution as a whole. Colleagues, please do not misunderstand our vote. The Nordic Baltic States stand ready to work side by side with all serious partners in the critical fight against racist and xenophobic ideologies, but let us do so in partnership. Let's do so in an open and transparent manner and in good faith. Thank you.

Thank you. Sri Lanka, the floor is yours.

Sri Lanka perceives that the substance of this resolution A/C3/80/L2 is of importance in our common goal towards elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Sri Lanka's policies are anchored in social justice. We strive for a society where fairness of opportunity leads to fairness of outcome, where no person's class, ethnicity, religion, language, caste, or gender affects how they are treated or protected under the law. Our nation continues to pursue reconciliation with commitment and humanity. As the above resolution aligns with our policies on social justice, Sri Lanka co-sponsored this resolution. However, Sri Lanka is of the view that the introduction of country-specific and restrictive language hinders the resolution in achieving its true prospects. Therefore, Sri Lanka abstained on paragraph OP4 and disassociates itself from its contents while voting in favor of the resolution as a whole. We call on all parties to adhere to the principles of universality, impartiality, non-selectivity, and objectivity in the promotion and protection of human rights. I thank you.

Thank you. Give the floor to Canada.

Thank you, Chair. Canada firmly and unequivocally condemns all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, including Nazism and neo-Nazism. We have ratified the relevant international conventions and remain fully committed to their implementation. We urge all member states that have not yet done so to ratify the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Racial discrimination is fundamentally incompatible with respect for human rights and freedoms. Racism dehumanizes individuals, fractures societies, and fosters fear and hostility. Tragically, far too many people around the world continue to be denied their rights solely because of the color of their skin or their ethnicity. We regret that, once again, the text fails to adequately address contemporary forms of racism, reinforce the importance of freedom of expression, and correct mischaracterizations of Member States' obligations under international human rights law. We also regret that the facilitator has yet again refused to engage in transparent and inclusive negotiations. Canada remains deeply concerned that Russia is exploiting neo-Nazism and indeed this very resolution as a pretext to justify its illegal and unjustifiable aggression against Ukraine. This false narrative is dangerous and undermines genuine efforts to combat neo-Nazism and all forms of racial intolerance. Politicizing this issue to advance national interests dishonors the memory of millions of victims of the Nazi regime and their descendants, including my own family who are victims of these horrific crimes, just to add. We are losing the generation that saw the horrors of Nazism firsthand, and to honor their courage for sharing their stories and to teach future generations the importance of our promise of never again. When accusations of Nazism are misused, we risk ignoring their stories, rewriting history, and eroding trust in legitimate warnings about real acts associated with Nazism. We welcome the adoption of this important amendment proposed by Liechtenstein, and we thank all states that supported it. However, despite this positive step, the text as a whole remains problematic. Canada will continue to engage constructively on this resolution and hopes that our concerns will receive more serious consideration in the future. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll give the floor to Slovenia.

Mr. Chair, Slovenia aligns with the explanation of vote delivered by Denmark on behalf of the European Union and its member states. and would like to deliver the following explanation of vote on the resolution L2 in our national capacity. Slovenia was among the Allies in the Second World War and proudly defeated fascism and Nazism on our land. We remain firmly committed to the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance.

In Slovenian constitution, it is stipulated that.

Any incitement to national, racial, religious, or other inequality and incitement of national, racial, religious, or other hatred and intolerance is unconstitutional, as well as any incitement to violence and war. Let me use this opportunity to express our deep empathy and compassion to all the victims of Nazism, among them were also Slovenians.

We must never forget Holocaust and other atrocities.

As a member of the International Holocaust.

Remembrance Alliance, we foster awareness of this appalling chapter in history, convinced that education contributes to prevention of such tragedies.

From ever happening again.

Any attempt to instrumentalize the fight against racism to justify military aggression is utterly unacceptable.

We therefore unequivocally reject Russia's attempt to rationalize its illegal, unprovoked, and unjustified war against Ukraine under the pretext of fighting neo-Nazism. It is for this very reason that Slovenia voted against this resolution.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next on my list are Australia, Angola, and Eritrea. Australia, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair. Chair, we reiterate that hateful and divisive rhetoric has no place in Australia or anywhere in the world, online or offline. The evidence presented from UN findings, including the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine, and the Russian president himself, demonstrate a direct correlation between this resolution and Russia's illegal aggression against Ukraine being undertaken on the purported basis of combating neo-Nazism. This is of grave concern to Australia, and we are pleased to see that language that articulates Russia's instrumentalization of this resolution has been adopted again into the resolution. We thank member states for their support. Australia voted against this resolution because we remain concerned that the Russian Federation is misrepresenting this resolution to justify its illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine, and because the Russian Federation did not afford due process to this important issue. We reiterate the utmost importance of combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other contemporary forms of racism and intolerance. The last time this resolution saw substantive changes or open negotiations was in 2021. In 2022, the Russian Federation denied member states the opportunity to meaningfully engage in the resolution. It is of no coincidence that 2022 was also the year that the Russian Federation commenced its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and since then has continued its practice of denying member states meaningful engagement with this text. Should the Russian Federation genuinely wish to combat the glorification of contemporary forms of Nazism, neo-Nazism, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, The Russian Federation should hold open and transparent dialogue on this resolution and end its illegal invasion of Ukraine. Thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to Angola.

Thank you, Mr. President, for giving me the floor. Angola welcomes the adoption of this draft resolution. Angola condemns, without any reservation, glorification of Nazism, xenophobia, racism, racial discrimination, and related intolerance. We emphasize that the text holds fundamental value for advancing human rights worldwide, particularly in promoting global fight against racism and racial discrimination. We stress the need to preserve the thematic nature of this important resolution. which is consistent with provisions set out in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action adopted in 2001 in the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance. In addition, we express serious concern on the introduction of country-specific contexts, politicization, and selectivity, which may distort the purpose, nature, and scope of a purely thematic resolution. We consider the country-specific issue should not be addressed within thematic debates or resolutions. There are already dedicated mechanisms within the multilateral human rights framework designed to scrutinize diverse country-specific situations. For this reason, Mr. President, Angola co-sponsors this draft resolution. Therefore, we disassociate ourselves from the amendments and the new paragraph OP.4. that introduce country-specific language contrary to the thematic nature of this draft resolution. Finally, Angola requests that these positions is recorded in the proceedings of this meeting. Thank you.

Thank you. Eritrea, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Eritrea dissociates.

Itself from the amended new paragraph OP4, as it is not in line with the main contents of the resolution.

I thank you.

Thank you. Next on my list, Israel, to be followed by Kyrgyzstan and Slovakia. Israel, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair. The darkest chapter in the history of the Jewish people, the Holocaust, remains a stark reminder of how deeply humanity can descend when driven by hatred and dehumanizing ideologies. The October 7th terror attack was yet another painful reminder of this reality. We should all be alarmed by the unprecedented rise in anti-Semitism worldwide, with incidents skyrocketing across continents in the past two years. The world is once again witnessing Jews threatened, attacked, and murdered, both inside Israel and around the globe, solely because they are Jewish. The world is once again becoming a dangerous place for the Jewish people, and history teaches us a difficult lesson. When one minority is targeted, others soon face the same fate. This is the time to rise to the challenge and combat antisemitism decisively. We call on all states to adopt the IHRA working definition of antisemitism as an indispensable, non-legally binding tool that provides a clear benchmark for identifying and addressing long-lasting and contemporary expressions of antisemitism at a moment when it is needed more urgently than ever. Honorable Chair, given the paramount importance of combating antisemitism and confronting the glorification of Nazism, Israel voted in favor of this resolution. However, the support must not be misconstrued as legitimizing unacceptable comparisons between Nazi ideology or the Holocaust and the ongoing war in Ukraine. We unequivocally reject any attempt to politicize this issue or exploit these historic crimes for political gain. We all share a duty to learn from history, not to manipulate it. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

I give the floor to Kyrgyzstan.

Chair, on behalf of the Member States of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, Kazakhstan, and my country, Kyrgyzstan, have the honor to deliver the following statement in connection with the adoption of this resolution. Our states are co-sponsors of this initiative of the General Assembly. This year marks the 80th year anniversary of the end of the largest scale and bloodiest war human history has known, which affected most of the population of the globe, the member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, and this important anniversary of the Great Patriotic War. Note this war, our holy duty is to champion the historical truth of these years and to transfer from one generation to another the exploits – the brave and selfless exploits of the people of the Soviet Union who destroyed Nazism and rid Europe and the world from Nazi slavery in 1945. And it’s values are important for us, and we are going to have a special UNGA meeting on the end of World War II. Yet we regret to note that in recent years, we’ve seen attempts to consign to oblivion the lessons of this war and to desecrate the memory of those who fell in it. We roundly condemn actions aiming to rewrite the history of World War II. We express our dedication to maintaining an objective memory of these events, and we think it’s unacceptable to attempt to distort them. We express a deep concern about the attempts to resurrect Nazism and the former members of the Waffen-SS and other neo-Nazi groups, including in carrying out public demonstrations for neo-Nazi purposes. And we We disagree with the attempt to paint those who were collaborators of Hitler and committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, and to repackage them as those who participated in national liberation movements. We think it's unacceptable to desecrate monuments as well that are in honor of those who fought Nazism in the years of World War II. At the same time, in the context of our joint initiative, we flatly condemn all forms discrimination along any lines that pose a serious threat to the social cohesion and undermine equality and justice. At the day of this anniversary, we note the beginning of the Nuremberg Tribunals as well. They have no statute of limitation, and they are part of the modern just order.

The microphone has been cut off.

Thank you. Slovakia. The floor is yours.

Mr. Chair, thank you for giving me the floor to make our explanation of vote after the vote on the resolution contained in the document A/C3/AT/L.2 entitled "Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance". Slovakia aligns itself with the position expressed by Denmark on behalf of EU and its member states before the vote. Slovakia therefore voted in favour of the amendment and against the draft resolution again this year. I would like to highlight the following points in my national capacity, which my delegation considers important to note in connection with our vote today. Firstly, the Government of the Slovak Republic categorically rejects the promotion of fascism, Nazism, racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia, and upholds and honours the legacy of the anti-fascist Slovak National Uprising of 1944. Secondly, the Slovak Republic rejects all attempts to downplay the importance of the fight against fascism and Nazism, as well as attempts to glorify its leaders, deny existence of the Holocaust, and to distort the history of World War II. The anti-fascist movement remains very strong in my country, even 80 years after the end of the Second World War. The Slovak government is making every effort to preserve the memory and traditions of the fight against fascism and Nazism. This includes organizing commemorative events and celebrations of the victory over fascism. The aim is to pay tribute to those who risked or lost their lives in the anti-fascist and anti-Nazi resistance during the Second World War in my country. Last but not least, the Slovak government also places great emphasis on protecting memorials, monuments, and commemorative blocks in Slovakia dedicated to fallen heroes. This include not only those from Czechoslovak military units abroad, the insurgent First Czechoslovak Army in Slovakia, and the domestic resistance movement, but also from the armies of other states or the anti-fascist coalition that fought on our territory. I thank you for your attention.

Thank you. Next on my list, Switzerland, to be followed by Senegal, Egypt, and Nigeria. Switzerland, the floor.

Is yours?

Sir, Switzerland fully condemns any form of racism and racial discrimination, xenophobia or related intolerance, including Nazism and neo-Nazism. These ideologies are incompatible with human rights and fundamental freedoms, and their glorification is a serious threat to social cohesion and peace. Switzerland firmly rejects anti-Semitism and any form of intolerance based on religion, and we adopt measures under international law against encouraging discrimination or hostility or violence. We also call upon all states that they have the duty to uphold and protect human rights of each individual on their territory who are subject to their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind. The resolution before us includes elements that are very important in the fight against racism and hatred, particularly the recognition of the role of digital technologies in the dissemination of extremist statements. We commend the mention of the permanent instruments and the work of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, but certain issue, there are certain issues that are politicized and they could undermine the protection of fundamental freedoms in the fight against hatred, we highlight that no state should weaponize the memory of Nazism in order to justify acts that are contrary to international law or to legitimize violations of the UN Charter. This is why Switzerland supports the adoption of the amendment L2, which aims to strengthen clarity in the text and furthermore avoid any instrumental in a political sense. It is essential for Switzerland that the serious topic of Nazism and neo-Nazism be dealt with great rigor respecting the memory of victims. Any political instrumentalization of this topic is unacceptable. We remain concerned by certain references that could undermine the universality of the duties of states when it comes to human rights, such as those mentioned in international instruments in the UN Charter. Switzerland furthermore reiterates its commitment to the right to freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, association and, furthermore, protection of minorities. These are fundamental pillars of a democratic society. So, and for all of the foregoing reasons, Switzerland abstained on this resolution. Thank you.

Thank you. Senegal, you have the floor.

My delegation is pleased by the adoption of this resolution. We would also like to clarify our position by voting in favor of the resolution and against the amendment that was introduced for two reasons. First, the resolution has always been adopted by consensus in the past due to noble objectives that we aim to achieve, fighting Nazism, neo-Nazism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, Islamophobia, and intolerance. Second, this resolution should remain topical to the extent in which the paragraph that was introduced is inappropriate and has all the necessary it is taken into account in this committee. Sir, Senegal has always abstained from getting involved in the internal affairs of other States, and we reiterate our neutral position. So we call for highlighting the importance of this resolution, and we must protect it against any kind of instrumentalization. For all these reasons, and as a co-sponsor of this resolution, my delegation voted in favor of the resolution with its amendment, but we dissociate ourselves from OP 4. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I give the floor to Egypt.

Thank you, Chair. I'm delivering this statement as an explanation of vote after the vote. Egypt has voted today in favor of resolution combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance in the light of our longstanding support to all efforts combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. We voted against the inclusion of amendment of OP4 as a principle position, rejecting the politicalization of thematic resolution and with this associated from this paragraph. I thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Give the floor to Nigeria, please.

Thank you, Chair. Nigeria voted in favor of the resolution and welcome the adoption. but disassociate with the amendment, which is not in line with the main resolution. Nigeria condemns all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and other related intolerance, and will continue to stand firm against racial discrimination in line with our principles and foreign policy. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. With that, The Committee has therefore concluded its consideration of agenda item 69 A. Now I invite the Committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 70, right of peoples to self-determination, to take action on draft resolution A/C3/80/L.42, entitled "Use of mercenaries as a means to violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination. I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L/42 contains no programme budget implications. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cuba.

Thank you very much, sir. Cuba. has a zero-tolerance policy vis-à-vis mercenaries. We are convinced that the use of mercenaries and related activities are an obstacle to enjoying human rights and a threat to peace, security, and self-determination of peoples. For this reason, my delegation presents every year, as in our national capacity in the Third Committee, the draft resolution on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination. It is an honor to present document L/42, which is essentially a technical update of the prior resolution adopted during the 79th session and preserves its traditional content. We would appreciate the historic support of the countries who have co-sponsored this draft resolution and those who voted in favor of it over the years. sending a clear message against the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of self-determination. This is a resolution that is aligned with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and international law, which should be adopted by consensus. But If any delegation were to request a vote, we invite delegations to support the draft resolution by voting in favor. This would contribute to the UN being able to continue to deal with this serious problem of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the rights of people to self-determination. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Cuba. give the floor back to the Secretary.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have joined as co-sponsors of L42: Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Eritrea, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Jamaica, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Myanmar, Namibia, Nicaragua, the Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and South Africa. If any other countries wish to join as co-sponsors of draft resolution L42, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Burundi and Djibouti. I see no further requests. Thank you.

Thank you. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.42, entitled "Use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of people to self-determination." Does any delegation wish to make a general statement on Are any explanations of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L/42? I see Poland, to be followed by the United States. Poland, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair.

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Lublin Triangle states, Lithuania, Ukraine, and my own country, Poland. Our countries are deeply concerned by the proposal submitted by Cuba.

We note with regret that the.

Condemnation of the use of mercenaries with the objective of overthrowing legitimate governments of member states.

Present in this resolution does not go hand in hand with actions of the proponent of the document.

Mr. Chair, our countries' work within the Third Committee is firmly based on the values of the UN Charter. We strive to protect human rights and to ensure respect for international law and sovereignty of all member states.

We are disappointed that the member states asking for our support for this resolution is selective in its adherence to the same values.

For years, Cuba has politically supported Russia in its war of aggression against Ukraine, where notably private military companies have been used alongside regular Russian military forces. Now we learn that a number of Cuban nationals participate in an ongoing Russian attacks against its neighbors. This foreign involvement is a clear violation of the provisions of the UN Charter and creates.

A stark contrast to the message Cuba is trying to relay today in this Committee.

Our country strongly urges Cuba to take necessary measures to prevent its national from joining Russian military and being complicit in an aggressive.

War inconsistent with the UN Charter and repeatedly condemned by the General Assembly.

We call on all Member States to push back against the exploitation of economic difficulties of people around the world by the Russian Federation, which engages them in dangerous and illegal military invasion. As a result, our countries will vote against this draft resolution, and we ask all Member States to do likewise. Thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor to the United States.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Third Committee this year. However, the United States would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious or irrelevant issues year after year. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there's little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. We firmly oppose this resolution as an effort to politicize the work of this committee, which undermines the credibility of the UN. This resolution is the type of performative exercise that fails to improve the lives of our collective citizenry in any meaningful way. We find Cuba's involvement in authoring a resolution on mercenaries pathetic, as it has been well documented in the international press that numerous Cubans have traveled to fight in Russia and Venezuela. Further, it is simply unbelievable the Cuban government, a totalitarian state with a large intelligence service, had no knowledge of thousands of young men of fighting age obtaining a passport and leaving the country without its knowledge. Its alleged prosecution of those caught in the act is comical, a mere slap on the wrist when compared with the lengthy prison sentences handed out by those peacefully protesting for food, water, electricity, and more. freedoms on July 21, 2021. Accordingly, the United States will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you.

Thank you. I now give the floor to the United Kingdom.

Thank you, Chair.

I have the honor to speak on behalf of the United Kingdom. Our position on this issue remains unchanged from last year.

The UK continues to be deeply concerned by the persistent threat mercenaries pose to international peace and security. It is essential to address the activities of mercenaries and mercenary-related actors, and it is.

Vital that such actors are held to account for human rights abuses.

We maintain serious reservations about this resolution's approach.

Particularly its conflation of mercenaries, defined under international humanitarian law, with legitimate, law-abiding private military and security companies, PMSCs.

The UK remains committed to advancing work on PMSC regulation through the Intergovernmental Working Group.

Where efforts are underway to establish a UN framework to monitor and oversee PMSCs and ensure compliance with international.

Human rights and humanitarian law.

For these reasons, the UK will vote against this resolution. Nonetheless, we stand ready to engage constructively with all Member States on this important issue.

Thank you.

Thank you. With that, the Committee will now commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L/42. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are now kindly requested to indicate their votes.

The Committee is now voting on draft resolution L/42, entitled "Use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination." Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine.

The result of the vote is as follows: 120 in favour, 53 against, and 5 abstentions. Draft resolution L-33-80-L.42 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or general statement after the vote on the draft? The exercise of the right of reply has been requested in accordance with rule 115 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly. I should like to remind delegations that the number of interventions in the exercise of the right of reply for any delegation at a given meeting should be limited to two per item. First intervention should be limited to five minutes, and the second to three minutes. I give the floor to Cuba.

Sir, I'm intervening to exercise a right of reply to the baseless statements made by the U.S. representative. and a few other lackeys, I reject these statements in the most vehement terms. It is shameful that the US government is not updating its obsessive interventionist policy vis-à-vis Cuba, and it's paradoxical that they use the same UN bodies for their hegemonic designs. The Cuban government has rejected the lies of the US government regarding a supposed participation of Cuba in the military conflict in Ukraine. It is a calumny that began in 2023 based on certain press media sources that lack any basis. The Cuban government, furthermore, would like to highlight that we do not participate in the Ukrainian military conflict, and we do not send troops there or anywhere else. Our authorities do not have specific information on Cuban nationals who, on their own, have participated or are participating in the military forces of both sides in the conflict. What is undeniable is that none of them have the commitment or the consent of the Cuban state for their actions. I would like to reiterate that the Cuban government, in step with its national legislation and its international duties, has a zero-tolerance practice vis-à-vis mercenaries, human trafficking, and the participation in armed conflicts in other countries. All of these are serious crimes in our national legal framework. as declared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on September 4th of 2023, and as was reiterated on October 11th, 2025, by detecting the presence of Cubans in the Ukrainian conflict, we neutralized the recruiting, recruitment efforts in our national territory, and we initiated a criminal process to stop that. Between 2023 and 2025, there have been nine criminal court cases for the crime of mercenarism against 40 individuals, and there have been five sentences against 26 individuals accused, which include jail time. There are three cases that are currently underway. We are waiting for the decisions of the courts. Cubans who participate on both sides of the armed conflict have been recruited through organizations that are not based in our country. They do not have any tie to the Cuban government. In the vast majority of cases, this recruitment takes place through international channels that are in different countries, as is the case of people of various nationalities who are recruited to participate in that conflict, and we don't have specific data. The U.S. government does not have any evidence, and it will not provide any evidence that would support its false and baseless claims in its defamatory campaign against Cuba. Thank you.

Thank you. With that, I now invite the Committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 71B, human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, to take action on a number of draft proposals. Before I move on, I would like to inform delegations that the meeting will be extended by 15 minutes, and we'll end our morning session at 1:15. I invite the committee to turn to draft resolution A/C3/80/L.25 entitled "Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion and/or belief. I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L.25 contains no programme budget implications. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Egypt on behalf of Organization of Islamic Cooperation. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It gives me a great pleasure to introduce this draft resolution on behalf of the OIC group, entitled “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief.” This text, which has enjoyed broad and long-standing support across all regions, reaffirms the commitment of Member States to promote tolerance, mutual respect, and peaceful coexistence among peoples of different faiths and beliefs. It builds on the consensual framework established by the Human Rights Council resolutions, emphasizing practical measures to combat hate speech, incitement, and religious discrimination while safeguarding freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression. This resolution calls on all States to foster education, dialogue, and awareness raising as a tool to counter intolerance and promote inclusion. I wish to thank all delegations for their constructive engagement and continued consensus on this important issue and this important initiative, which remains a cornerstone of our collective efforts to uphold the principles of respect, equality, and human dignity. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Egypt, for your statement. I now I turn the floor to the Committee Secretary.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have joined as co-sponsors of L25: Australia, Canada, Congo, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Japan, Peru, Thailand, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. If any other countries wish to join as co-sponsors of draft resolution L/25, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Central African Republic, South Africa, and Malawi. I see no further requests. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Any delegation to make a statement in connection with draft resolution L25? I see none. May I take it that the committee wishes to adopt draft resolution L25? I hear no objection. It is so decided. Does any delegation wish to make a statement after the adoption of the draft resolution? Right. The Committee has therefore completed its consideration of draft proposals for this meeting. The Committee will convene this afternoon at 3:00 PM in this conference room to take action on the remaining draft proposals listed in today's programme. The last schedule for the consideration of draft proposal is available on iGov. The meeting is now adjourned. Thank you so much for your kind cooperation.