Statement by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Brazil, Ambassador Mauro Luiz Iecker Vieira, during the Security Council Open Debate on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict - May 23rd, 2023

Mister President,

I would like to thank Switzerland for organizing this year's debate on the protection of civilians. I am very pleased to take part in this discussion under your presidency. 

I would like to thank the Secretary-General, the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the representative of the civil society for their insightful remarks.

At the outset, let me express that Brazil associates itself with the statement to be delivered by the State of Kuwait on behalf of the group of friends of the protection of civilians in armed conflict.

Mister President,

The choice of the topic of this year’s debate could not be timelier.

Unfortunately, after more than 150 years of progress in the development of international humanitarian law, belligerents have not consistently prioritized efforts to reduce harm to civilians and safeguard essential civil infrastructure during conflicts. The Secretary-General’s report on the protection of civilians in 2022 brings harrowing examples of the need for parties to conflicts to step up efforts to protect civilians.

After lessons painfully learned in places such as the Balkans and Rwanda, the Security Council finally included in its agenda the protection of civilians in 1999. Since then, it has adopted a number of documents that join the robust framework provided by international humanitarian law to protect civilians.

Despite the existence of this vast body of norms, civilians remain largely vulnerable in contexts of war and their lives have not been spared in most instances. In fact, the loss of one civilian life is one too many. The contexts may change, but actions remain largely the same: the indiscriminate use of explosive weapons in urban and other densely populated areas; attacks against civilian infrastructure, schools and medical facilities; disruption of agriculture and trade; hostilities against medical and humanitarian personnel; conflict-related sexual violence; and increased vulnerabilities faced by women, children, refugees, internally displaced people, and persons with disabilities.

Mister President,

This month marks the fifth anniversary of the approval of resolution 2417, which acknowledged the vicious cycle of armed conflict and food insecurity. Its adoption was only the starting point. Much more needs to be done.

The increase of food and nutrition insecurity in the world is a multifactor issue, with conflict being one of its main causes. Today, a vast majority of the world’s population experiencing acute hunger is located in conflict-affected areas.

Conflicts, especially protracted ones, contribute to long-term food insecurity. They erode social and economic networks, reduce resilience, and disrupt markets, supply chains and infrastructures. They also lead to diminished production and yields, often causing barriers to the achievement of three of the main pillars of food security: stability, availability and access. Therefore, we must translate the provisions of the resolution into meaningful action.

Among the many important recommendations listed in the Secretary-General’s report, I would like to highlight the need to find political solutions to conflicts, support the economies of vulnerable countries and safeguard livelihoods.

Political solutions to conflicts are one of the “raisons d’être” of this body and a necessary tool to address the interplay between armed conflict and food insecurity. Even when the prospects of peace are not yet on the horizon, practical measures to ensure access to food supplies and the delivery of humanitarian assistance are essential to save lives.

Many of the conflict-affected countries were previously net food importers. The aggravation of hostilities deepens even further their already vulnerable situation. The truce and subsequent facilitation of exports to Yemen, supported by the UN verification and inspection mechanism, or the opening of new humanitarian corridors in Syria, are powerful examples of how political solutions can yield significant benefits for the food security – and even the survival – of affected populations. We hope that these initiatives will also play a part in rebuilding trust among parties and setting the path for peace.

It is also crucial to acknowledge that the delivery of humanitarian aid through in-kind food transfers can potentially harm countries that still have some production capacity. We know today that in-kind food assistance to countries that still have functioning markets can distort prices and displace local producers. When feasible, providing aid through cash transfers empowers people to address their essential needs and helps local producers thrive.

We cannot forget that displacement caused by conflicts often force people to leave behind their land and livelihoods. This puts them in a very vulnerable situation and expose them to various forms of food insecurity.

The implementation of resilience measures is even more crucial in times of conflicts. We recognize the various initiatives that the Roman-based agencies – in partnership with other UN agencies and international organizations – are putting in place in countries facing armed conflicts.

Mister President,

In 2022, the conflict in Ukraine sent food and energy prices soaring. Although food prices are back in line with levels similar to those before the conflict began, the scourge of inflation, especially harmful to the poor and needy, still hovers over the world.

Developing countries dramatically suffered the repercussions from the conflict in Ukraine, due to their structural vulnerabilities to fluctuations in the prices of food and agricultural inputs. The renewal of the Black Sea grain initiative is a key step to limit uncertainties about the global supply of grains and fertilizers.

As the Secretary-General acknowledges in his report, conflict is a primary driver of acute food insecurity, but not the only one. Conflicts, coupled with inflation, trade bottlenecks and other macroeconomic challenges, affect access to food supplies, particularly in developing countries. Therefore, it is imperative to pursue responses to food insecurity in all relevant fora.

Unilateral coercive measures, as well as market-distorting subsidies and other forms of protectionism, hamper developing countries’ ability to build resilient agrifood systems and to participate fully in international markets. Without addressing such pervasive practices, they will continue bearing the brunt of global inequities.

In this regard, we welcome the adoption of Resolution 2664 last December. It will play an important role in ensuring the delivery of impartial humanitarian assistance, including food and medical supplies, to the millions of civilians who have the misfortune to live under sanctions regimes. Domestic implementation will be crucial for its effectiveness. 

Mister President,

As one of the largest food suppliers in the world, Brazil has a significant interest in ensuring food security both domestically and as a foreign policy goal. Brazil will remain a reliable international supplier to help complement local production efforts and ensure adequate nutrition in an accessible manner. The Brazilian constitution recognizes the human right to adequate food, reflecting the country's commitment to addressing food insecurity. President Lula himself is a notable advocate for the eradication of poverty and hunger, both within Brazil and beyond its borders.

We are also giving due attention to the subject in our current tenure as elected member of this Council. We are proud to be, alongside Switzerland, focal point for food security and conflict in this body.

As we know, eradicating hunger is of paramount importance for the achievement of the SDGs and Agenda 2030. In light of the significant advancements in agricultural production technology, hunger is entirely preventable and, more importantly, unacceptable.

Societies that are able to feed their populations and offer them economic opportunities are more resilient and less vulnerable to conflict.

This goal is feasible. It is also a moral imperative for all of us.

I thank you.