Legal positions of States and international organisations on the item “Elimination of unilateral extraterritorial coercive economic measures used as an instrument of political and economic compulsion”(1996-2024)

LEGAL POSITIONS OF STATES AND
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ON THE
ITEM “ELIMINATION OF UNILATERAL
EXTRATERRITORIAL COERCIVE ECONOMIC
MEASURES USED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF
POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC COMPULSION”
(1996-2024)
ARITZ OBREGÓN FERNÁNDEZ
POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCHER
UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY
This documen has been p oduced hanks o he unding o he Basque Go e nmen 's
Pos doc o al P og amme o he Imp o emen o Doc o al Resea ch Pe sonnel.
Please ci e he documen as ollows:
Ob egón-Fe nández, A i z, “Legal posi ions o S a es and in e na ional
o ganiza ions on he subjec ‘Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e
economic measu es used as an ins umen o poli ical and economic compulsion’
(1996-2024)”, Labo a ó io de Di ei os Humanos da UFRJ, Ma ch 2025,
h p://doi.o g/10.13140/RG.2.2.32820.97924.
See he Spanish e sion in: Ob egón-Fe nández, A i z, “Posiciones ju ídicas de los
Es ados y o ganizaciones in e nacionales en el ema ‘Eliminación de las medidas
económicas coe ci i as unila e ales ex a e i o iales u ilizadas como ins umen o
de coacción polí ica y económica’ (1996-2024)”, Labo a ó io de Di ei os Humanos da
UFRJ, ma zo 2025, h p://doi.o g/10.13140/RG.2.2.19399.20643.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRESENTATION ........................................................................................................ 7
AFRICA ....................................................................................................................... 8
Alge ia ................................................................................................................ 8
Benin .................................................................................................................. 8
Bu kina Faso ...................................................................................................... 8
Bu undi .............................................................................................................. 9
Equa o ial Guinea .............................................................................................. 9
E i ea .............................................................................................................. 10
Eswa ini ........................................................................................................... 10
Ghana ............................................................................................................... 11
Libya ................................................................................................................. 11
Mali .................................................................................................................. 14
Namibia ............................................................................................................ 14
Senegal ............................................................................................................. 15
Sou h A ica ..................................................................................................... 15
Sudan ............................................................................................................... 16
Zimbabwe ......................................................................................................... 17
ASIA-PACIFIC .......................................................................................................... 18
China ................................................................................................................ 18
Cyp us .............................................................................................................. 19
Democ a ic People's Republic o Ko ea ............................................................ 20
Indonesia .......................................................................................................... 21
I an ................................................................................................................... 21
I aq ................................................................................................................... 26
Japan ................................................................................................................ 28
Jo dan .............................................................................................................. 29
Lao People's Democ a ic Republic ................................................................... 29
Malaysia ........................................................................................................... 30
Nau u ............................................................................................................... 31
Qa a ................................................................................................................ 31
S a e o Pales ine ............................................................................................. 32
Sy ian A ab Republic ....................................................................................... 33
Timo -Les e ...................................................................................................... 34
Yemen ............................................................................................................... 35
EASTERN EUROPE ................................................................................................. 36
A menia ............................................................................................................ 36
Bela us ............................................................................................................. 36
Bosnia and He zego ina .................................................................................. 36
Bulga ia ............................................................................................................ 38
Czechia ............................................................................................................. 39
Es onia ............................................................................................................. 40
Geo gia ............................................................................................................. 41
Hunga y ........................................................................................................... 42
La ia ............................................................................................................... 44
Li huania .......................................................................................................... 45
Mon eneg o ...................................................................................................... 46
Poland............................................................................................................... 48
Republic o Moldo a ......................................................................................... 48
Romania ........................................................................................................... 50
Russian Fede a ion .......................................................................................... 51
Slo akia ............................................................................................................ 52
Slo enia ............................................................................................................ 54
Uk aine ............................................................................................................ 55
LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN ............................................................ 58
A gen ina ......................................................................................................... 58
Boli ia .............................................................................................................. 58
B azil ................................................................................................................ 59
Colombia ........................................................................................................... 59
Cuba ................................................................................................................. 60
Ecuado ............................................................................................................ 63
Hondu as .......................................................................................................... 63
Jamaica ............................................................................................................ 64
Mexico .............................................................................................................. 64
Nica agua ......................................................................................................... 65
Sain Vincen and he G enadines .................................................................. 66
Venezuela ......................................................................................................... 67
WESTERN EUROPEAN AND OTHER STATES .................................................... 69

Aus alia .......................................................................................................... 69
Canada ............................................................................................................. 70
Iceland .............................................................................................................. 72
Liech ens ein .................................................................................................... 74
Mal a ................................................................................................................ 76
New Zealand .................................................................................................... 77
No way ............................................................................................................. 77
San Ma ino ....................................................................................................... 80
Tü kiye ............................................................................................................. 80
Uni ed Kingdom o G ea B i ain and No he n I eland ............................... 80
Uni ed S a es o Ame ica ................................................................................. 81
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND GROUPS OF STATES ..................... 84
Eu opean Union (EU) ...................................................................................... 84
G oup o 77 and China ................................................................................... 87
G oup o A ican S a es ......................................................................................... 88
G oup o F iends in De ense o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions ..................... 90
League o A ab S a es ..................................................................................... 91
Non-Aligned Mo emen (NAM) ....................................................................... 92
O ganiza ion o Islamic Coope a ion (OIC) ..................................................... 95
Sou he n A ican De elopmen Communi y (SACD) ..................................... 95
PRESENTATION
This pape is one in a se ies o epo s aimed a cla i ying bo h he s a e p ac ice and
opinio iu is on he possible c ea ion o exis ence o a ule on he p ohibi ion o
unila e al coe ci e measu es, as well as i s hypo he ical con en .
In pa icula , i p esen s he legal posi ions o S a es, g oups o S a es and
in e na ional o ganiza ions exp essed ollowing he adop ion o he Gene al
Assembly esolu ion on he ‘Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e
economic measu es used as an ins umen o poli ical and economic coe cion’ du ing
he 51s , 55 h,57 h, 65 h and 78 h sessions o he Gene al Assembly (2002-2024).
1
A hese sessions, esolu ions we e adop ed wi h he ollowing numbe o o es:
2
Resolu ion
In a ou
Agains
Abs en ion
No o e
A/RES/57/5, 27 No embe 1996
133
2
2
54
A/RES/55/6, 26 Oc obe 1998
136
2
10
41
A/RES/53/10, 26 Oc obe 2000
80
2
67
36
A/RES/51/22, 16 Oc obe 2002
56
4
76
49
As a as he s uc u e o he documen is conce ned, we ha e op ed o classi y he
S a es’ posi ions acco ding o he dis ibu ion o UN geog aphical g oups and in
alphabe ical o de . A e he S a es’ posi ions, he posi ions o he g oups o S a es
and in e na ional o ganiza ions ha ha e exp essed hei posi ions ha e been
included. In his sense, i should be no ed ha he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica and
Tu key ha e been included in he “Wes e n Eu ope and o he S a es” g oup, and he
S a e o Pales ine, a non-membe obse e , in he “Asia-Paci ic” g oup.
In addi ion, he o icial Uni ed Na ions code has been used o e e ence he eco ds
and documen s con aining he legal posi ions lis ed.
Ma ch 2025
1
A e 14 yea s, he 78 h session o he Gene al Assembly ag eed -wi hou a o e- o aise he i em
again and add ess a he nex session (A/RES/78/329).
2
The indi idual o es o each S a e can be consul ed in Ob egón-Fe nández, A i z, Vo ing eco d o he
UNGA Resolu ions on “Elimina ion o unila e al and ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es as a
means o poli ical and economic compulsion”, Ma ch 2025, h p://doi.o g/10.13140/RG.2.2.29164.07043.
A ica
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 8
AFRICA
Alge ia
2024. “[…] The unila e al coe ci e economic measu es, such as economic sanc ions
and ade emba goes, imposed on se e al de eloping coun ies unde mine he
p inciples o he so e eign equali y o S a es and o non-in e en ion, as ensh ined
in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. These measu es es ic no only he ee low
o ade and ha e a nega i e impac on popula ions by dep i ing hem o access o
ood, medicine and o he essen ial goods and se ices, bu also cons i u e a iola ion
o in e na ional law and he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
Alge ia exp esses i s suppo o all coun ies unde unila e al coe ci e measu es
and i mly belie es ha i is c ucial o all coun ies o e ain om p omulga ing
na ions […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 2-3)
Benin
2000. “The Republic o Benin nei he ecognizes no applies any coe ci e economic
measu e o law o an ex a e i o ial na u e unila e ally imposed by any S a e
wha soe e ”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, p. 2)
Bu kina Faso
1998. “[…] As we know, sanc ions we e o iginally among he poli ical means o which
S a es could eso in o de o make ecalci an membe s o he in e na ional
communi y lis en o eason. Rele an in e na ional law has done e e y hing possible
o inco po a e sanc ions in o he a senal o poli ical and legal coe ci e measu es.
Howe e , since he ounding o he Uni ed Na ions, sanc ions ha e ended o be an
excep ion among excep ions, in ha hey we e in ended o be used wi h g ea cau ion
and disc e ion, as is he case wi h any weapon. This means ha hey should be used
only once peace ul means, such as nego ia ion, media ion and concilia ion, ha e been
exhaus ed. I is in his sense ha he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions clea ly spells
ou in A icle 2, pa ag aph 3, ha : ‘All Membe s shall se le hei in e na ional
dispu es by peace ul means in such a manne ha in e na ional peace and secu i y,
and jus ice, a e no endange ed’.
Bu i is p ecisely economic sanc ions ha a e mos unjus and he mos ha m ul,
because o hei con agious e ec s and he insidious damage hey in lic . I a coun y
canno o ou , i e o six yea s expo i s p oduc s o ob ain oods u s om ab oad,
imagine he su e ing o he people o ha coun y. The pa adox is his: he ques o
punish a S a e o a se ious ailing o o an o ence i has commi ed — in o he
wo ds, because an injus ice has aken place — esul s in ano he injus ice: s a ing
a popula ion ha , in e ms o he scale o esponsibili y, is comple ely innocen .
He ein lies he iniqui y o economic coe cion. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp.
10-11)
A ica
9 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
Bu undi
1996. “[…] Fi s , Bu undi is in p inciple agains any measu e ha unjus ly a ec s
he popula ion o any S a e unde wha e e p e ex . Secondly, I should like o a ail
mysel o his oppo uni y o emind he in e na ional communi y ha my coun y
is su e ing om an inhuman, illegal and unjus economic blockade imposed by he
neighbou ing S a es unde a p e ex in ol ing my coun y’s domes ic policies — a
ques ion ha has al eady become nuga o y. […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996,
p. 24)
Equa o ial Guinea
2024. “[…] E en hough S a es, egional o ganiza ions and in e na ional
o ganiza ions, pa icula ly he Secu i y Council, a e able o adop sanc ions,
pu suan o Chap e VII o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e , such sanc ions mus be
adop ed in s ic con o mi y wi h he obliga ions unde he ules o in e na ional law.
They mus also be p opo iona e and ca e ully calib a ed. Only i hey a e concei ed
o and applied in his way can hey se e as an impo an ool o use by he
in e na ional communi y o s eng hen e o s o p e en , mi iga e and esol e long-
s anding and eme ging global challenges.
Ne e heless, ex a e i o ial unila e al coe ci e measu es, which we a e discussing
in his deba e, ail o obse e e en he basic equi emen s o in e na ional law and
do no espec ou p omise and common goal o lea ing no one behind. We he e o e
ei e a e ou wholehea ed condemna ion o he adop ion, use and ecogni ion o
unila e al coe ci e measu es by any S a e o g oup o S a es as a lag an iola ion
o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional humani a ian law, in e na ional
human igh s law and he no ms and p inciples go e ning iendly ela ions be ween
coun ies.
Such measu es con a ene he p inciples o so e eign equali y be ween S a es and
o non-in e e ence in he in e nal a ai s o S a es. They s and in he way o he ull
enjoymen o human igh s, such as he igh o an adequa e s anda d o li ing. They
wo sen he si ua ion o he mos ulne able g oups in socie y, especially women,
child en and pe sons wi h disabili ies. They dis o ade and in es men lows and
ha e a gene ally nega i e impac on in e na ional economic coope a ion and global
e o s o mo e owa ds an open, anspa en , mul ila e al and non-disc imina o y
ade sys em. They also p e en and limi he esolu ion o con lic s h ough peace ul
dialogue and mu ual unde s anding.
Unila e al coe ci e measu es a e used as an ins umen o exe poli ical, judicial,
inancial, economic and o he kinds o p essu e on de eloping coun ies, o coe ce
ano he S a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s
so e eign igh s and p omo e ce ain in e na ional poli ical in e es s. We suspec , in
ac , ha he applica ion o ex a e i o ial coe ci e measu es is being seen as an
al e na i e o mili a y o ce, jus wi hou he massi e su e ing and sac i ice
equi ed by wa . Tha p emedi a ed and absu d p ac ice gi es an un ai ad an age
A ica
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 16
2024. “[…] Sou h A ica app ecia es he con ening o oday’s much-needed deba e on
he elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es as a means
o poli ical and economic compulsion. I would like o s a e unequi ocally ha my
delega ion belie es ha unila e al ex a e i o ial economic measu es a e a
iola ion o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional law and he pu poses
and p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions. Today’s deba e comes a a ime when he e has
been a no iceable inc ease in he scope, a ge s and ex a e i o ial na u e o
unila e al coe ci e measu es. The illegali y o unila e al coe ci e measu es has been
epea edly ea i med by he Human Righ s Council and he Gene al Assembly.
Sou h A ica emains deeply conce ned abou he ex a e i o ial applica ion o laws
and egula ions imposing unila e al coe ci e measu es, and u ges S a es o make
use o mul ila e alism, diplomacy, nego ia ions, dialogue and o he peace ul ools o
esol e di e ences wi hou eso ing o coe ci e measu es such as unila e al
sanc ions.
We ei e a e ha unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e ou solemn commi men ,
pledged in he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen , o lea e no one and no
coun y behind. […]
Today mo e han one in ou coun ies a e subjec o some kind o sanc ions, a ec ing
a la ge segmen o he wo ld’s popula ion. […] Unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a
lag an iola ion o human igh s. Such p ac ices a e con a y o he In e na ional
Bill o Human Righ s, impac ing many igh s, including he igh o ood,
employmen , educa ion and heal h. […]
We would like o highligh he ca as ophic humani a ian impac o unila e al
coe ci e measu es, which, in addi ion o po e y, nu i ional and heal h insecu i y,
includes des oying essen ial public se ices, educa ional oppo uni ies o you h
and he li elihoods o amilies and inc easing he isk o he igh o li e in sanc ioned
coun ies. […]
Finally, Sou h A ica ca ego ically ejec s he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e
measu es and calls on he sanc ioning coun ies o wi hd aw hem. […]”.
(A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 25-26)
Sudan
1998. “[…] A las session's deba e, i was demons a ed ha such coe ci e economic
measu es a e illegal and ha hey un coun e o he mos undamen al p inciples
o peace ul coexis ence and in e na ional economic coope a ion. They also con adic
he in e na ional consensus on he need o a mo e open, non-disc imina o y wo ld
ading sys em, and call in o ques ion he c edibili y o he noble s anda ds o us
and he sup emacy o he ule o law, which a e impo an unde pinnings o
in e na ional ela ions and o ela ions be ween S a es. […].
[…] my delega ion ea i ms ha he use o such coe ci e economic measu es iola es
he p inciple o non-in e en ion in he in e nal a ai s o S a es, hei na ional
so e eign y, and hei poli ical and de elopmen choices based on hei own economic
and cul u al c i e ia. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 7-8)

A ica
17 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
2000. “[…] The Go e nmen o he Sudan opposes he ex a e i o ial applica ion o
domes ic laws. I opposes, in pa icula , unila e al ade measu es ha impose
coe ci e penal ies and sanc ions, such as hose ha he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica is
main aining agains he Sudan, he Libyan A ab Jamahi iya and o he coun ies o
he pu pose o ad ancing i s own in e es s in a manne ha is o ally incompa ible
wi h he p inciples o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional
coope a ion. […]
The Go e nmen o he Sudan is ully con iden ha , in con o mi y wi h he pu poses
and p inciples embodied in i s Cha e , he Uni ed Na ions will ul il i s assigned
ole in comba ing he unila e al ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional laws”.
(A/55/300/Add.1, 28 Sep embe 2000, p. 1)
2024. “[…] he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e economic measu es and sanc ions is
con a y o he p inciples o in e na ional law, he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions
and he p inciples go e ning iendly ela ions among coun ies. They unde mine
he oppo uni ies o pa icipa e in and bene i om he in e na ional inancial
sys em and in e na ional ade. […].
[…] peace and de elopmen a e na u ally in e linked. Howe e , he applica ion o
sanc ions has led o he ailu e o mee he needs o de eloping coun ies, especially
wi h ega d o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals, and has dep i ed hem o he
abili y o bene i om in e na ional inancial ins i u ions, in e na ional ade and
inclusion in he in e na ional banking sys em. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp.
10-11)
Zimbabwe
2024. “[…] The illegali y o he unila e al coe ci e measu es imposed by ce ain
coun ies agains o he S a es, businesses and indi iduals has been well documen ed
in nume ous Uni ed Na ions s udies. […]
Despi e he clea will o he global majo i y o he o al elimina ion o such illegal
measu es, se e al Wes e n coun ies con inue o impose hem wi h impuni y,
ex ending hei unlaw ul e ec s bo h domes ically and ex a e i o ially. As a esul ,
ha coe ci e in e na ional o de is unde mining he unc ions, au ho i y and
c edibili y o he Uni ed Na ions. E idence shows ha hose measu es cause g oss
iola ions o human igh s, including he igh s o li e, ood, heal h, wa e and
sani a ion. They hinde he implemen a ion o he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable
De elopmen , in addi ion o he esponse o pandemics such as he co ona i us
disease pandemic and he p o ision o humani a ian assis ance in a ec ed coun ies.
I is a allacy ha such measu es a e a ge ed in na u e. The eali y is ha hey
ha e a spillo e con agion e ec on o he coun ies, in pa icula by imposing a
blanke nega i e pe cep ion abou coun ies such as my own ac oss he wo ld,
especially in sensi i e global inancial ma ke s, whe e he e is always
o e compliance. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 9-10)
Asia-Paci ic
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 18
ASIA-PACIFIC
China
2024. “[…] Fi s , unila e al coe ci e measu es a e in lag an con a en ion o he
Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law. The Uni ed S a es, oge he
wi h a mino i y o o he S a es, wi hou au ho iza ion om he Secu i y Council,
p oceeds on he basis o i s own p e e ences and decides o a bi a ily impose
unila e al coe ci e measu es on o he S a es. Tha is an amoun o placing i s
domes ic legisla ion abo e in e na ional law and he na ional legisla ion o o he
S a es, challenging he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council, iola ing he p inciple o
so e eign equali y and lou ing he pu poses and p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions
Cha e . The Uni ed S a es has e en gone as a as o push o so-called seconda y
sanc ions, compelling he compliance o hi d S a es h ough i s unila e al coe ci e
measu es. Tha amoun s o making wo se wha was al eady w ong in he i s place,
he eby se iously unde mining he undamen al p inciples o in e na ional law and
he in e na ional ule o law.
Secondly, unila e al coe ci e measu es se iously impede he achie emen o he
Sus ainable De elopmen Goals. The 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen
emphasizes ha all coun ies should bene i equally om he di idends o
de elopmen and u ges coun ies o e ain om p omulga ing and implemen ing
unila e al economic, inancial o ade measu es ha a e con a y o he Cha e
and in e na ional law. Howe e , a hand ul o coun ies, including he Uni ed S a es,
ha e con inued o capi alize on hei hegemonic economic and inancial powe o
equen ly impose unila e al sanc ions on o he coun ies, he eby se iously
dis up ing no mal economic and ade coope a ion among he coun ies conce ned,
g a ely h ea ening he s abili y o he global p oduc ion and supply chains,
unde mining ood, ene gy and inancial secu i y, and se iously dis up ing he wo ld
economic o de and he e o s o he coun ies conce ned o achie e he SDGs.
Thi dly, he unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a c iminal ool used o in inge on he
human igh s o o he coun ies. The Uni ed S a es and a ew o he S a es claim o
p o ec human igh s, bu in eali y hey abuse unila e al coe ci e measu es o he
se ious de imen o he igh s o li e, heal h, de elopmen and educa ion, among
o he basic human igh s, o he people in he coun ies a ge ed. […]
Fou hly, unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a majo d i e o wo sening
humani a ian c ises in he coun ies conce ned. […]
Fi hly and las ly, unila e al coe ci e measu es a e an acu e mani es a ion o
hegemony and powe poli ics. The Uni ed S a es and hose ew o he S a es abuse
hei powe o weaponize and ins umen alize unila e al sanc ions. The unde lying
logic ha hey ollow is he law o he jungle, whe eby he s ong p ey on he weak.
The ul ima e aim o hose measu es is o main ain hei monopolis ic hegemony and
an unjus and un easonable in e na ional o de , in which he big bully he small,
he s ong abuse he weak and he ich opp ess he poo . The unila e al coe ci e
Asia-Paci ic
19 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
measu es equen ly imposed by he Uni ed S a es and he ew o he coun ies in
hei o eign ela ions un coun e o he his o ical end o peace ul de elopmen
and win-win coope a ion and a e incompa ible wi h he common calls o building a
mul ipola wo ld, p ac icing mul ila e alism and upholding equi y and jus ice. Such
ac ions agains he ide o his o y will ine i ably be swep away by i s i esis ible
o ce.
Fo a long ime, he in e na ional communi y has oiced i s consis en and s ong
opposi ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es. Since 1989, he Gene al Assembly has
adop ed a esolu ion e e y wo yea s opposing unila e al economic measu es as a
means o poli ical and economic coe cion agains de eloping coun ies. Since 1992,
he Assembly has adop ed a esolu ion e e y yea u ging he Uni ed S a es o end
i s economic, comme cial and inancial emba go agains Cuba. And since 1997, i has
adop ed a esolu ion e e y yea exp essing conce n abou he nega i e impac o
unila e al coe ci e measu es on human igh s. We call on he Uni ed S a es and he
ew o he S a es conce ned o heed he jus call o he in e na ional communi y and
o ully and immedia ely abolish hei unila e al coe ci e measu es. We call on he
Membe S a es, he Uni ed Na ions sys em and o he in e na ional o ganiza ions o
p o ide suppo o coun ies unde sanc ions o help hem alle ia e hei ha dships.
We call on he in e na ional communi y o pay close a en ion o he g a e
consequences o such measu es and collec i ely esis hose illegal p ac ices. […]”.
(A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 20-21)
Cyp us
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
Asia-Paci ic
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 20
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Democ a ic People's Republic o Ko ea
1998. “[…] Sanc ion measu es now being applied canno and should no be ole a ed,
ei he in iew o hei pu pose, pu suing poli ical and economic p essu e, o o he
unaccep able logical and legal g ounds used o jus i y hei applica ion and hei
ca as ophic consequences.
In his connec ion, he in e na ional communi y should pay se ious a en ion o he
ques ion o upon whom and on wha g ounds he sanc ions a e imposed, and i
should wo k ou a ai solu ion. In many ins ances, he a ge S a es o he sanc ions
a e small S a es whose social sys ems and poli ical policies and posi ions a e alleged
o be eason o sanc ions. I is bo h se ious and deplo able ha he si ua ion, which
Asia-Paci ic
21 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
is cha ac e ized by coe ci e sanc ions and domina ion by powe , has been c ea ed as
a esul o ex a e i o ial and a bi a y laws and ac s on he pa o ce ain big
Powe s.
The use o o cible means in pu sui o poli ical aims is a clea iola ion o he
pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e , he p inciples o in e na ional law,
esolu ions o he Gene al Assembly and he decla a ions and p og ammes o ac ion
o majo in e na ional con e ences […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 12-13)
2000. “[…] All o ms o unila e al coe ci e measu es con a y o he Cha e o he
Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional laws and p ac ices should be elimina ed once and o
all. […]”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, p. 2)
“The Go e nmen o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea has consis en ly
opposed he imposi ion o unila e al sanc ions on a so e eign S a e. Imposing
sanc ions on o he coun ies in pu sui o economic in e es s o o poli ical pu poses
cons i u es a iola ion o he p inciples o espec o so e eign equali y and he igh
o sel -de e mina ion embodied in he Uni ed Na ions Cha e and ele an Uni ed
Na ions esolu ions. I also uns coun e o he p omo ion o iendly ela ions and
he s eng hening o in e na ional coope a ion among Membe S a es”. (A/55/PV.41,
26 Oc obe 2000, p. 22)
Indonesia
2024. “[…] Today he global communi y is acing challenges. The use o unila e al
coe ci e measu es has no only unde mined in e na ional law and he mul ila e al
sys em, bu has also demons a ed hypoc isy, double s anda ds and a widening us
de ici and has b oken solida i y. We eg e ha coun ies a e o en p essu ed o
ake sides and apply unila e al coe ci e measu es on issues no di ec ly ela ed o
hem. Indonesia he e o e con inues o suppo e o s wi hin he Uni ed Na ions o
call o he elimina ion o such measu es.. […].
[…] he Uni ed Na ions mus pu sue ac ion on ma e s ha pu mul ila e alism a
isk. Illegal sanc ions challenge he p inciples o dialogue, diplomacy and uni y, upon
which mul ila e alism in he Uni ed Na ions is buil . […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June
2024, pp. 7-8)
I an
1996. “[…] The impe missibili y unde in e na ional law o unila e al sanc ions is
uni o mly ecognized by he in e na ional communi y. The adop ion o coe ci e
economic measu es lies only wi hin he manda e o he Uni ed Na ions in pa icula
si ua ions whe e he e exis s a h ea o peace o a b each o peace. Mo eo e , se e al
ele an p inciples se o h in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions p o ide a solid
basis o he O ganiza ion o o se he use o unila e al sanc ions by indi idual
S a es.
Acco ding o Gene al Assembly esolu ions, unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e he
p inciples o non-in e en ion and non-in e e ence in he in e nal and ex e nal
a ai s o o he S a es, as well as in he exe cise o he so e eign igh s o S a es. In

Asia-Paci ic
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 22
his ega d, bo h he Decla a ion on he Inadmissibili y o In e e ence in he
In e nal A ai s o S a es and he P o ec ion o hei Independence and So e eign y,
adop ed on 21 Decembe 1965, and he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o
S a es, adop ed on 12 Decembe 1974, […].
The Decla a ion on he Inadmissibili y o In e en ion in he Domes ic A ai s o
S a es and he P o ec ion o Thei Independence and So e eign y goes on o say ha
such measu es also canno be used o “secu e ad an ages o any kind” om ano he
S a es ( esolu ion 2131 (XX), pa a. 2) Fu he mo e, he Gene al Assembly has
denounced on a ious occasions unila e al economic coe cion as a means o achie ing
poli ical goals. Resolu ions en i led “Economic measu es as a means o poli ical and
economic coe cion agains de eloping coun ies”, adop ed a he o y- ou h and
i ie h sessions o he Gene al Assembly, is a p ominen example o a se ies o
Uni ed Na ions eac ions o such unlaw ul ac ions.
The imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es and he app o al o domes ic
legisla ion o he ho izon al escala ion o such ac ions wi h ex a e i o ial
implica ions also con adic s es ablished in e na ional ade law, including he
egula ions o he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion. […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996,
pp. 17-18)
1997. “[…]The exe cise o powe h ough he applica ion o illegal means such as
unila e al ac ions and he imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es agains o he
coun ies in o de o achie e unjus i iable objec i es is he p ominen example o an
eme ging unila e alism ha is ex emely a ogan and sel -cen ed, ha eeds on
hegemony and expansionism and ha en ails se ious in e e ence in he in e nal
a ai s o o he coun ies o he poin o sabo age and sub e sion.
Impe missibili y o unila e al sanc ions unde in e na ional law is commonly
ecognized by he in e na ional communi y. Unila e al ac ions and ex a e i o ial
applica ion o domes ic laws se iously menace he in e na ional communi y’s e o s
owa ds coope a ion in a ious a eas o peace and secu i y, de elopmen and
en i onmen . Unde aking such measu es goes agains no only he pu poses and
p inciples o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law, bu also
agains he p o isions o a la ge numbe o Uni ed Na ions esolu ions and o he
ele an in e na ional ag eemen s.
The spi i and le e o such esolu ions and in e na ional ag eemen s emphasize
pa icula ly ha S a es should e ain om in e e ence and in e en ion in he
in e nal a ai s o o he coun ies and om any a emp o impose hei policies on
hem. Acco ding o hose esolu ions, unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e he
p inciples o non-in e en ion, non-in e e ence in he in e nal and ex e nal a ai s
o o he S a es and he exe cise o he so e eign igh o S a es. […]
In e na ional ju isp udence agains such coe ci e measu es p o ides a solid base o
he O ganiza ion o o se he exe cise o unila e al sanc ions by indi idual S a es.
The imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es and he adop ion o domes ic laws o
he ho izon al escala ion o such ac ions wi h ex a e i o ial implica ions also
con adic he es ablished ules and egula ions o in e na ional ade law, including
Asia-Paci ic
23 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
hose unde he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion. The e o e, unila e al coe ci e economic
measu es unde mine he au ho i y and c edibili y o hose o ganiza ions ha a e
legi ima ely conce ned abou his end in he conduc o in e na ional ela ions.
[…]”. (A/52/343, 15 Sep embe 1997, pp. 2-3)
1998. “[…] The impe missibili y unde in e na ional law o unila e al and
ex a e i o ial sanc ions agains o he coun ies is uni o mly ecognized by he
in e na ional communi y. The adop ion o coe ci e economic measu es alls wi hin
he manda e o he Uni ed Na ions only in pa icula si ua ions whe e he e exis s
a h ea o he peace o a b each o he peace. Mo eo e , se e al ele an p inciples
se o h in he Cha e p o ide a solid basis o he O ganiza ion o o se he
exe cise o unila e al sanc ions by indi idual S a es. Uni ed Na ions documen a ion
agains unila e al ac ion is comp ehensi e. Acco ding o Gene al Assembly
esolu ions, unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e he p inciples o non-in e en ion,
non-in e e ence in he in e nal and ex e nal a ai s o o he S a es, and he exe cise
by S a es o hei so e eign igh s. In his ega d, bo h pa ag aph 2 o he
Decla a ion on he Inadmissibili y o In e en ion in he Domes ic A ai s o S a es
and he P o ec ion o Thei Independence and So e eign y, esolu ion 2131 (XX) o
21 Decembe 1965, and a icle 32 o he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o
S a es, esolu ion 3281 (XXIX) o 12 Decembe 1974 […].
The imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es and he enac men o domes ic
legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial implica ions o he ho izon al escala ion o such
ac ions and measu es also con adic p o isions o es ablished in e na ional ade
law, including hose unde Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion (WTO) egula ions. […]”.
(A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 8-10)
2000. “[…] The Membe S a es o he Uni ed Na ions, in adop ing hese esolu ions,
ha e ejec ed he applica ion o ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es o
legisla i e enac men s unila e ally imposed by any S a e. They ha e also called o
he epeal o unila e al ex a e i o ial laws ha impose sanc ions on co po a ions
and na ionals o o he S a es.
P omulga ion and applica ion o laws o egula ions ha ha e ex a e i o ial e ec s
o ha a ec he so e eign y o o he S a es and he legi ima e in e es s o en i ies
o pe sons unde hei ju isdic ion — a clea iola ion o he uni e sally accep ed
p inciples o in e na ional law — ha e been s ongly ejec ed on a ious occasions
by he o e whelming majo i y o S a es. […]
In hese imes o apid and unp eceden ed change, he wo ld needs peace, secu i y
and s abili y, which could be s eng hened h ough collec i e esponsibili y o
coun ies and also h ough, in e alia, espec o so e eign y, ejec ion o
in e e ence in he in e nal a ai s o o he S a es, e aining om compulsion and
in imida ion, as well as c ea ion o an enabling en i onmen o eplacing con lic
and unequal ela ions wi h dialogue and nego ia ions. […]”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus
2000, pp. 2-3)
2002. “[…] The Membe S a es, in adop ing hese esolu ions, ha e ejec ed he
applica ion o ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es o legisla i e enac men s
Asia-Paci ic
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 24
unila e ally imposed by any S a e. They ha e also called o he epeal o unila e al
ex a e i o ial laws ha impose sanc ions on co po a ions and na ionals o o he
S a es.
P omulga ion and applica ion o laws o egula ions ha ha e ex a e i o ial e ec
o ha a ec he so e eign y o o he S a es and he legi ima e in e es s o en i ies
o pe sons unde hei ju isdic ion — a clea iola ion o he uni e sally accep ed
p inciples o in e na ional law — has been s ongly ejec ed on a ious occasions by
he o e whelming majo i y o S a es. […]
En o cemen o unila e al coe ci e economic measu es, in de iance o he Cha e ,
has in lic ed g a e and i epa able losses, including a hea y inancial and human
oll, on he a ge ed coun ies. To his e ec , he Islamic Republic o I an, as one o
he a ec ed coun ies, ese es i s igh o pu sue i s inancial and in ellec ual
claims and lodge i s complain agains Go e nmen s enac ing hose measu es,
h ough he adop ion o conc e e ac ions. All coun ies should, in he ue spi i o
mul ila e alism and since e obse ance o in e na ional laws and egula ions, a oid
eso ing o and enac ing such measu es”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, pp. 1-2)
2024. “[…] om a legal pe spec i e, he imposi ion and applica ion o unila e al
sanc ions is a g oss iola ion o he pu poses and p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions.
Unila e al sanc ions ma e ially b each he pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions,
pa icula ly hose se ou in A icle 1, pa ag aphs 2 and 3, o he Cha e o he
Uni ed Na ions, namely, o de elop iendly ela ions among na ions, o achie e
in e na ional coope a ion in sol ing in e na ional p oblems o an economic, social,
cul u al o humani a ian cha ac e , and in p omo ing and encou aging espec o
human igh s. Simila ly, he in oduc ion and applica ion o unila e al sanc ions is
a lag an iola ion o he p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions, in pa icula hose se
o wa d in A icle 2, pa ag aphs 1 and 2, o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions,
conce ning he so e eign equali y o S a es and ul illing in good ai h he obliga ions
assumed by Membe S a es unde he Cha e . Tha is why, acco ding o he 1970
Decla a ion on P inciples o In e na ional Law conce ning F iendly Rela ions and
Coope a ion among S a es in acco dance wi h he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, all
S a es should e ain om using mili a y, poli ical, economic o any o he ype o
measu e o coe ce ano he S a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he
exe cise o i s so e eign igh s and o secu e om i ad an ages o any kind.
The imposi ion o unila e al sanc ions also con a enes he p inciples and no ms o
in e na ional human igh s law and iola es a icle 2 o he In e na ional Co enan
on Ci il and Poli ical Righ s and a icle 2 o he In e na ional Co enan on
Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s, acco ding o which, ‘[i]n no case may a people
be dep i ed o i s own means o subsis ence’.
I also ma e ially b eaches a icle 47 o he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and
Poli ical Righ s, as well as a icle 25 o he In e na ional Co enan on Economic,
Social and Cul u al Righ s, acco ding o which, ‘[no hing he ein] shall be
in e p e ed as impai ing he inhe en igh o all peoples o enjoy and u ilize ully
and eely hei na u al weal h and esou ces’.
Asia-Paci ic
25 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
Unila e al sanc ions u he mo e con adic he igh o e e yone o he enjoymen
o he highes a ainable s anda d o physical and men al heal h, as se ou in a icle
12, pa ag aph 1, o he In e na ional Co enan on Economic, Social and Cul u al
Righ s. Equally, hey iola e he inhe en igh o e e y human being o li e, as
ea i med by a icle 6, pa ag aph 1, o he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and
Poli ical Righ s, and no de oga ion he e om is pe mi ed, acco ding o he
Co enan ’s a icle 4, pa ag aph 2. While unila e al sanc ions ad e sely a ec and
iola e many o he human igh s, om he igh o wo k o he igh s o shel e , a
decen en i onmen and educa ion, he e is no need o add o he examples I
men ioned. […]
I would now like o u n o he ques ion o why he in e na ional communi y o S a es
mus pay se ious a en ion o he ho i ying end o he in oduc ion and applica ion
o unila e al sanc ions. Tha is necessa y and u gen o he ollowing easons.
Fi s , by any measu e, unila e al sanc ions a e inhumane, immo al and unlaw ul.
They a e bo h a b u al collec i e punishmen o a ge ed na ions o hei
de e mina ion o exe cise hei inhe en igh o sel -de e mina ion, as ecognized in
A icle 1 o he Cha e , as well as a icle 1 o he In e na ional Co enan on
Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s and a icle 1 o he In e na ional Co enan on
Ci il and Poli ical Righ s.
Secondly, human igh s a e no ealized in a acuum. Ra he , hey can be ealized
only i he necessa y condi ions a e c ea ed, as has igh ly been s a ed in he
p eamble o bo h Co enan s, and such condi ions canno be c ea ed, a leas no
sa is ac o ily, in coun ies a ge ed by unila e al sanc ions, since sanc ions, in e
alia, p e en such S a es om using hei esou ces, dis up hei economies and
ade ela ions and p e en hem om impo ing hei people’s basic needs such as
ood and medicine. Coun ies in oducing sanc ions weaponize ood, medicine,
medical equipmen and o he necessi ies o u he hei na ow na ional policies.
Unila e al sanc ions con inue o des oy he ab ic o mul ila e alism, wi h he
Uni ed Na ions a i s cen e; se iously b each he le e and he spi i o he Cha e ;
ejec coope a ion; omen con on a ion; and ins ead o p omo ing iendly ela ions,
cause ha ed and hos ili y. All hose ala ming eali ies con inue o unde mine he
e y essence and spi i o he O ganiza ion and i s Cha e , which we e ounded i s
and o emos on such lo y alues as inclusion, coope a ion, peace ul coexis ence,
good-neighbou liness, solida i y, eedom and jus ice. Unila e al sanc ions a e
no hing bu economic wa and e o ism. They es ic he access o he a ge ed
na ions o essen ial goods and se ices; exace ba e economic ha dship and po e y;
unde mine he well-being o ci ilians and o dina y people; pe pe ua e a cycle o
po e y, inequali y and human su e ing; and wo s o all, ha e he g ea es impac
on he mos ulne able segmen s o a ge ed socie ies. We mus no allow ha
dange ous end o unila e alism o unde mine he ule o law, mul ila e alism and
ou collec i e endea ou s o p omo e peace, p ospe i y, solida i y and iendship
among na ions. Tha is wha we owe o he cu en and u u e gene a ions o ou
socie ies. I unchecked, he Wes e n S a es ha con inue o ace o he bo om on
imposing mo e b u al sanc ions on mo e na ions will ul ima ely ans o m unila e al
Asia-Paci ic
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 32
[…] Gene al Assembly esolu ion 51/22 ecalled i s nume ous esolu ions in which i
called upon he in e na ional communi y o ake u gen and e ec i e s eps o end
coe ci e economic measu es, and exp essed g a e conce n o e he ecen enac men
o ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic laws in con a en ion o he no ms o
in e na ional law, he aims and pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions and he ele an
p o isions o he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion.
Tha esolu ion ea i med he inalienable igh o S a es o economic and social
de elopmen and o choose hei poli ical, economic and social sys em on he basis o
he in e na ional O ganiza ion's commi men o he consolida ion o he igh s o
peoples embodied in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law, in he
in e es o achie ing he O ganiza ion's objec i es o he main enance o
in e na ional peace and secu i y. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 11-12)
2002. “The Go e nmen o he S a e o Qa a has consis en ly opposed he imposi ion
o unila e al sanc ions on a so e eign S a e. The imposi ion o sanc ions on o he
coun ies wi h a iew o economic in e es s o he achie emen o poli ical ends
cons i u es a iola ion o he p inciple o so e eign equali y and he igh o sel -
de e mina ion, as se o h in he Cha e and he ele an esolu ions o he Uni ed
Na ions. I is also incompa ible wi h he de elopmen o iendly ela ions and he
s eng hening o in e na ional coope a ion among Membe S a es. A icle 32 o he
Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o S a es, adop ed by he Gene al Assembly
in esolu ion 3281 (XXIX), s a es: “No S a e may use o encou age he use o
economic, poli ical o any o he ype o measu es o coe ce ano he S a e in o de o
ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s so e eign igh s”. […]
The S a e o Qa a he e o e a i ms i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s aimed a
he ex a e i o ial applica ion o domes ic laws o na ionals o co po a ions o hi d
coun ies o he pu pose o coe cing o he coun ies o comply wi h unila e ally
adop ed economic measu es, which is con adic o y o in e na ional law and he
Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, pp. 3)
S a e o Pales ine
2024. “[…] Unila e al coe ci e measu es, including blockades, unde mine he
p inciples o so e eign y, sel -de e mina ion and in e na ional coope a ion
ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. Those measu es in lic se e e ha m
on he mos ulne able popula ions, exace ba e po e y and impede he de elopmen
o he na ions ha hey a ge , pa icula ly de eloping coun ies. In doing so, hey
obs uc ou collec i e e o s o achie e he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals,
pa icula ly hose ela ed o ending po e y and hunge , ensu ing good heal h and
well-being and os e ing inclusi e economic g ow h.
In de eloping coun ies, he human cos o unila e al coe ci e measu es is s a k:
hey a e no jus an abs ac concep , bu a he a pain ul eali y o hund eds o
millions o pe sons a ound he wo ld. I is es ima ed ha well o e one hi d o he
wo ld’s popula ion is a ec ed by unila e al coe ci e measu es. Families a e pushed
deepe in o po e y, heal hca e sys ems a e s ained beyond capaci y, oppo uni ies
o educa ion and employmen a e se e ely hinde ed, and access o echnology is

Asia-Paci ic
33 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
ei he limi ed o es ic ed. Unila e al coe ci e measu es he e o e con a ene he
p inciples o mul ila e alism as hey e ode he spi i o in e na ional coope a ion
ha he Uni ed Na ions embodies, in addi ion o he ules and p inciples o
in e na ional law. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 12-13)
Sy ian A ab Republic
2002. I adhe es o esolu ion 55/6, he posi ion o he Non-Aligned Mo emen and
he Sou h Summi Decla a ion. Thus, […] “all peoples ha e he igh o sel -
de e mina ion and ha , by i ue o ha igh , o eely de e mine hei poli ical
s a us and eely pu sue hei economic, social and cul u al de elopmen .
[…] exp essed he need o elimina e coe ci e measu es and legisla ion as con a y o
in e na ional law, he p inciples and pu poses o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions
and he no ms and p inciples go e ning peace ul ela ions among S a es, and u ged
S a es applying unila e al coe ci e measu es o pu an immedia e end o hose
measu es.
[…] ejec ed he imposi ion o laws and egula ions wi h ex a e i o ial impac and
all o he o ms o coe ci e economic measu es. They emphasized ha such ac ions
no only unde mined he p inciples ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions
and in e na ional law, bu also se e ely h ea ened he eedom o ade and
in es men . They he e o e called on he in e na ional communi y nei he o
ecognize hese measu es no o apply hem”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, p. 6)
“[…] A na ion’s imposi ion o i s na ional laws on he na ionals o companies o hi d
coun ies in such a way as o exceed i s e i o ial limi s is a u he iola ion o he
so e eign igh s o S a es.
Unila e al, ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es a e no jus a iola ion o he
p inciples o in e na ional law and he s anda ds, goals and no ms go e ning
in e na ional ade and Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion ag eemen s, hey also ha e
nega i e consequences on he social and human de elopmen o de eloping coun ies
ic imized by such measu es. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, pp. 8-9)
2024. “[…] The Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions a i med he p inciple o so e eign
equali y among Membe S a es and p io i ized achie ing in e na ional coope a ion
and p omo ing he economic and social ad ancemen o all peoples among i s
pu poses. Wi h a iew o de eloping iendly ela ions among S a es and
s eng hening in e na ional coope a ion on he basis o jus ice and equi y, he
Gene al Assembly adop ed in 1970 esolu ion 2625 (XXV) con aining he Decla a ion
on P inciples o In e na ional Law conce ning F iendly Rela ions and Coope a ion
among S a es, which s ipula es: ‘No s a e may use o encou age he use o economic,
poli ical o any o he ype o measu es o coe ce ano he s a e in o de o ob ain om
i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s so e eign igh s and o secu e om i
ad an ages o any kind’.
The Gene al Assembly ea i med ha posi ion in a icle 32 o esolu ion 3281
(XXIX), adop ed in 1974, which includes he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies
o S a es. […]
Asia-Paci ic
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 34
In ecen yea s, he pace o he Uni ed S a es and he Eu opean Union imposing
unila e al coe ci e measu es has inc eased. The scope o hose illegal measu es was
expanded in hei a ious o ms and appella ions. Tha has caused ex eme economic
ha dships o ou coun ies and immense humani a ian su e ing. I has p e en ed
se e al peoples om enjoying hei undamen al igh s, including he igh o a
digni ied li e, o heal h, ood and de elopmen . I has subjec ed hem o collec i e
punishmen , which ep esen s a Uni ed Na ions Cha e iola ion. The Cha e
en us ed he Secu i y Council, exclusi ely, wi h he powe o impose sanc ions,
pu suan o he c i e ia se ou in Chap e 7.
The Uni ed Na ions has condemned he imposi ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es,
conside ing hem o be bla an iola ions o he p o isions o in e na ional law and
he pu poses and p inciples o he Cha e , as well as an obs acle o he enjoymen
o human igh s. The ele an Gene al Assembly esolu ions ecognize ha coe ci e
measu es di ec ly and se iously a ec all aspec s o li e in he a ge ed coun ies.
Howe e , successi e Uni ed S a es Adminis a ions and he Eu opean Union ha e
chosen o con inue o impose unila e al coe ci e measu es, igno ing he esolu ions
o ou O ganiza ion and i s p inciples and in oking he so-called ules-based o de
— and nobody knows wha hose ules a e — in hei a emp o consolida e such
ules ins ead o being guided by he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . […]
Sy ia ea i ms ha unila e al coe ci e measu es ep esen economic e o ism.
They a e a swo d hanging o e he necks o peoples, inancial ins i u ions,
comme cial and business sec o s in hi d coun ies, which e ain om ansac ing
wi h he a ge ed S a es in o de o a oid being a ge ed hemsel es by he unjus
Uni ed S a es sanc ions. Expe ience has shown he alsehood o wha is being said
abou he humani a ian exemp ions. We wi nessed ha i s hand du ing he
co ona i us disease pandemic and in he a e ma h o he de as a ing ea hquake
in Sy ia las yea .
The coun ies ha conside hose measu es as o eign policy ools ha e been o e ing
baseless jus i ica ions o hei c iminal conduc agains ou peoples, bu such
jus i ica ions will no change he ac ha unila e al coe ci e measu es un coun e
o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e and he p inciples and ules o in e na ional law and
in e na ional cus oma y law. They a e in e na ionally p ohibi ed ac s ha en ail
esponsibili y o he coun ies imposing hem. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp.
26-28)
Timo -Les e
2024. “[…] The use o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e measu es is a con o e sial
opic, wi h ad oca es and c i ics bo h p esen ing alid a gumen s. Howe e , amid
ha deba e, o e 30 coun ies a e being denied access o undamen al igh s as a
esul o hose measu es, which iola es he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, a ious
Uni ed Na ions esolu ions and he p inciple o mul ila e alism. Tha si ua ion
highligh s he u gen need o a e-e alua ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es, as
hey con adic he p inciples o in e na ional coope a ion and espec o
so e eign y, causing ha m o innocen popula ions and unde mining global s abili y.
Asia-Paci ic
35 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
I is essen ial o explo e al e na i e solu ions ha p io i ize dialogue, diplomacy and
human igh s, ensu ing ha all na ions can access basic igh s and pa icipa e
equally in he global communi y.
The emo al o economic sanc ions, ade es ic ions and o he measu es imposed
by one coun y on ano he wi hou he consen o he a ge ed coun y is a mus . As
we ha e hea d om p e ious speake s, while such measu es a e o en used as a
means o poli ical and economic p essu e, hey can ha e de as a ing consequences
o he a ge ed coun ies, including economic ha dship and ins abili y, dis up ion
o global supply chains, iola ions o so e eign y and in e na ional law,
disc imina ion agains ce ain coun ies o indus ies, and he c ea ion o obs acles
o economic de elopmen and coope a ion.
As we all know, he p ac ice o coe ci e measu es was in oduced and imposed
p ima ily by la ge and powe ul na ions agains smalle , economically weake
S a es. They can ake many o ms, including economic sanc ions, ade emba goes,
asse eezes, in es men es ic ions, a el bans and o he o ms o coe ci e
measu es used agains a ge ed na ions, such as in he case o Cuba, Nica agua and
Venezuela. Those coun ies, along wi h o he a ge ed coun ies, ha e seen he wo s
o economic ha dship and poli ical ins abili y. Wo se s ill, innocen popula ions,
p ima ily ulne able g oups such as he elde ly, women and you h, bea he b un
o such measu es.
Unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es should ind no place in ou
wo ld oday. They iola e S a e so e eign y and in e na ional law, unde mining he
p inciples o equali y and non-in e e ence. They iola e he Cha e o he Uni ed
Na ions, human igh s p inciples, he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and Poli ical
Righ s and he In e na ional Co enan on Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s.
Thei humani a ian impac is signi ican , wi h innocen ci ilians bea ing he b un .
They hinde economic de elopmen and coope a ion, es ic access o ma ke s,
echnology and esou ces and limi he po en ial o economic g ow h and
di e si ica ion, he eby pe pe ua ing economic inequali y and dependence and
unde mining he achie emen o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals.
As we ha e seen hus a , coe ci e measu es a e employed as a means o poli ical
coe cion, a he han as a legi ima e esponse o poli ical o economic conce ns. Tha
unde mines he ule o law and pe pe ua es a cul u e o “migh makes igh ”, a he
han encou aging diplomacy, solu ions and dialogue. Coe ci e measu es can also
lead o e alia ion om a ec ed pa ies, escala e ensions and po en ially spa k
ade wa s. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 11-12)
Yemen
2000. “The Republic o Yemen ei e a ed i s opposi ion o he unila e al puni i e
economic, comme cial and inancial emba go imposed by he Uni ed S a es o
Ame ica agains he Libyan A ab Jamahi iya and, acco dingly, he Go e nmen o
Yemen, main aining i s adi ional posi ion o espec o he sel -de e mina ion o
peoples, has nei he p omulga ed no applied unila e ally any laws agains Libya”.
(A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, p. 7)
Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 36
EASTERN EUROPE
A menia
2002. “[…] A menia condemns he con inuing p ac ice o unila e al coe ci e
economic measu es, pa icula ly in he Sou h Caucasus egion. Such measu es
con adic he basic measu es and no ms o in e na ional law and he Uni ed
Na ions Cha e , as well as he no ms and egula ions o he mul ila e al ading
sys em. The imposi ion o such es ic i e economic measu es has a de imen al
impac on de eloping and ansi ional coun ies, as in he case o landlocked
A menia, which, in addi ion o a geog aphical impedimen , is su e ing om a
con inuing blockade. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 13)
Bela us
2024. “[…] Those esponsible o unila e al sanc ions canno be unawa e o he eal
consequences o such measu es, which iola e e e y concei able no m o
in e na ional law and all human igh s and a e aimed solely a unde mining he
independen o eign policy o ce ain undesi able coun ies. The e is no such hing
as a sma sanc ion. All illegal economic sanc ions a e aimed a s angling and
des oying he economy o a coun y and he eby lowe ing he li ing s anda ds o i s
people. […]
By analysing da a on he impac o sanc ions on people, esea che s ha e come o
he conclusion ha unila e al measu es a e compa able in hei impac s o acu e
a med con lic s and na u al disas e s. We p opose ha illegal unila e al sanc ions
be conside ed no jus economic e o ism bu also ac s o agg ession, wi h all he
consequences ha en ails. Bela us is p oud o i s achie emen s in social policy and
economy. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 19-20)
Bosnia and He zego ina
2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s
membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o
Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade
Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean
Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been
miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no
esponsible. […]
Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance
o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he
case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he
p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is
h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei
a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med
Eas e n Eu ope
37 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul
ools o he in e na ional communi y.
Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading
and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons
he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing
he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he
adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […]
Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end
in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non-
ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he
Secu i y Council o ac .. […]
The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions
o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession
o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical
weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions.
The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains
humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I
a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o
en i ies commi ing such iola ions.
EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law,
human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos
ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose
esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i
is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y
en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o
humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by
de aul , om EU sanc ions. […]
EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due
p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and
equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he
indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals,
legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o
Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so.
EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e
p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can
ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o
punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call
hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a
change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU
ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei
business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no
ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9)

Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 38
Bulga ia
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
Eas e n Eu ope
39 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Czechia
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 40
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Es onia
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
Eas e n Eu ope
41 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Geo gia
2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s
membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o
Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade
Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean
Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been
miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no
esponsible. […]
Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance
o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he
case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he
p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is
h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei
a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med
g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul
ools o he in e na ional communi y.
Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading
and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons
he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing
he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he
adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […]
Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end
in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non-
ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he
Secu i y Council o ac .. […]
The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions
o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession
Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 48
Poland
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Republic o Moldo a
2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s
membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o
Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade
Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean
Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been
miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no
esponsible. […]
Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance
o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he

Eas e n Eu ope
49 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he
p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is
h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei
a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med
g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul
ools o he in e na ional communi y.
Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading
and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons
he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing
he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he
adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […]
Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end
in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non-
ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he
Secu i y Council o ac .. […]
The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions
o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession
o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical
weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions.
The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains
humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I
a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o
en i ies commi ing such iola ions.
EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law,
human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos
ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose
esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i
is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y
en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o
humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by
de aul , om EU sanc ions. […]
EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due
p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and
equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he
indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals,
legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o
Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so.
EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e
p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can
ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o
punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call
hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a
change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU
Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 50
ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei
business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no
ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9)
Romania
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
Eas e n Eu ope
51 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Russian Fede a ion
2024. “[…] Today in he Gene al Assembly, a e a b eak o many yea s, we ha e an
oppo uni y o make a comp ehensi e assessmen o he p ac ice o unila e al
coe ci e economic measu es. Tha p ac ice o Wes e n coun ies is no only con a y
o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and he en i e wo ld o de ha i ensh ines, i
is also an obs acle o in e na ional de elopmen , coope a ion and human igh s. I is
a p ac ice ha is qui e li e ally killing people by dep i ing hem o wha hey need
mos .
To s a wi h, ou opponen s a e ying o equa e Secu i y Council sanc ions wi h
illegal unila e al coe ci e measu es in o de o s ee he discussion away om an
unpleasan subjec . Fi s o all, Secu i y Council sanc ions a e an auxilia y
ins umen o esponding o he eme gence o h ea s o in e na ional peace and
secu i y. Thei applica ion should be calib a ed, a ge ed and ime-limi ed and
should ake in o accoun he en i e ange o po en ial humani a ian, socioeconomic
and human igh s consequences. Secu i y Council sanc ions egimes ha e o be
egula ly e iewed o ensu e ha hey a e esponding app op ia ely o he si ua ion
on he g ound. As he s abili y o he poli ical con ex imp o es, so mus he
in e na ional es ic ions be eased and ul ima ely li ed al oge he . I is
impe missible o abuse his ool in o de o pu sue un ai compe i ion and punish
undesi able S a es. I is also impe missible o supplemen Secu i y Council
sanc ions wi h unila e al es ic i e measu es, pa icula ly hose o an
ex a e i o ial na u e.
Tu ning o unila e al measu es ha ci cum en he Secu i y Council, he subjec o
ou agenda oday, we unde sco e ha he Wes e n unila e al coe ci e measu es
a ge coun ies ha ha e independen o eign and domes ic policies and he e o e
some imes espond o ha independence wi h neocolonialis economic me hods and
models. The aims o such sanc ions campaigns a e openly decla ed. They a e
Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 52
designed o isola e coun ies inancially and echnologically in o de o unde mine
hei p ospec s, weaken hei domes ic poli ical ci cums ances, c ea e p econdi ions
o egime change and exe ex e nal con ol o e so e eign esou ces. Howe e , he
Wes e n coun ies y o con ince us ha hey a e ac ing law ully. They say hey a e
only encou aging o he coun ies o ul il hei obliga ions unde in e na ional law
and allege ha he coe ci e measu es s em om hei opponen s’ own in e na ional
obliga ions. We ha e hea d ha oday as well. In ha ega d, I would like some
answe s o a numbe o ques ions.
Fi s , who appoin ed hem he judge o who, whe e, when and how much o he s a e
ul illing hei obliga ions? Le me emind hem ha unde he Cha e , he igh o
in oduce coe ci e measu es is he p e oga i e o he Secu i y Council alone.
Mo eo e , no a single in e na ional ea y p o ides ha i in he opinion o he Wes
i s p o isions a e being iola ed by any S a e, Wes e n coun ies hen ha e he igh
o abuse hei posi ion as he global inancial hegemon and hinde ha S a e’s ade
o seize i s so e eign asse s.
Secondly, wha should we do when he Wes i sel iola es i s obliga ions? The
answe is o cou se clea . The e a e no such iola ions. The posi ion o coun ies ha
p ac ice illegal unila e al coe ci e measu es can be exp essed in a well-known La in
maxim: quod lice Io i, non lice bo i — Jo e may do wha ca le may no . In o he
wo ds, he e is no legal basis, me ely ules ha he Wes changes as i goes along o
sui i s in e es s.
As has al eady been said oday, unila e al measu es a e cu en ly in e ec agains
oughly 30 coun ies wi h a o al popula ion o almos 2 billion people, meaning ha
mo e han a qua e o he wo ld’s popula ion a e dealing wi h illegal es ic ions on
hei economic ac i i y. […]
In gene al, we wan o emphasize ha he Wes e n coun ies’ a emp s o main ain
hei slipping hegemony — and hei eliance on un ai compe i ion, “g een”
ba ie s, clamping down on e ec i e o ms o echnology and in es men lows and
e ec ing o he new kinds o ba ie s — a e sel -des uc i e choices by ou opponen s,
whose own popula ions a e al eady exp essing hei opinion o hem. Unlaw ul and
uncon olled economic p essu e om Wes e n coun ies is ensu ing ha he e will
be s eng hened join esis ance o hose measu es and consolida ion a ound a new
global model based on polycen ici y, equali y and mu ual espec […]”. (A/78/PV.89,
13 June 2024, pp. 23-25)
Slo akia
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Eas e n Eu ope
53 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he

Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 54
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Slo enia
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
Eas e n Eu ope
55 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Uk aine
1996. “In spi e o he ac ha eso o unila e al measu es o economic compulsion
no sanc ioned by he wo ld communi y o he pu pose o gaining poli ical di idends
has been epea edly deplo ed in he highes in e na ional o ums, including hose
held unde Uni ed Na ions auspices, we no e wi h eg e ha his p ac ice emains
in he poli ical a senals o some S a es, which use i o in e e e in he in e nal
a ai s o o he S a es and, in ce ain si ua ions, o so-called ma e ial suppo o
di ec e i o ial claims.
Tha is why ou delega ion s ongly belie es ha his p oblem should no be ea ed
as ela ing exclusi ely o he de eloping coun ies. I is simila ly acu e o he new
so e eign S a es ha a e expe iencing oday a complica ed and some imes e y
pain ul pe iod o achie ing sel -de e mina ion and es ablishing hei own models o
na ional de elopmen . […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, pp. 15-17)
2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s
membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o
Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade
Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean
Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been
miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no
esponsible. […]
Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance
o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he
case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he
p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is
Eas e n Eu ope
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 56
h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei
a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med
g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul
ools o he in e na ional communi y.
Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading
and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons
he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing
he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he
adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […]
Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end
in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non-
ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he
Secu i y Council o ac .. […]
The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions
o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession
o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical
weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions.
The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains
humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I
a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o
en i ies commi ing such iola ions.
EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law,
human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos
ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose
esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i
is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y
en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o
humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by
de aul , om EU sanc ions. […]
EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due
p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and
equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he
indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals,
legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o
Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so.
EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e
p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can
ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o
punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call
hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a
change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU
ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei
Eas e n Eu ope
57 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no
ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9)
La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 64
Hondu as he e o e main ains i s p incipled posi ion no o p omo e o apply any
unila e al economic o ade measu es o laws agains o he S a es ha would a ec
he ee conduc o in e na ional ade, in compliance wi h ou obliga ions unde he
Uni ed Na ions Cha e and in e na ional law. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, p.
11)
Jamaica
2002. “The Go e nmen o Jamaica has epea edly suppo ed he esolu ions o he
Gene al Assembly o da e, in which i condemns he use o unila e al ex a e i o ial
coe ci e economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic compulsion. Such
p ac ices a e con a y o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and he p inciples o
in e na ional law.
Unila e al coe ci e economic measu es h ea en he so e eign y o S a es, wi h
dele e ious e ec s on all aspec s o hei de elopmen . As a me hod o economic o
poli ical compulsion, hey a e an a on o he a ge ed S a e and comp omise i s
economic, poli ical and cul u al iden i y. They a ec he mos ulne able g oups in
socie y, including women, child en and he disabled. […]”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, p.
2)
Mexico
2000. “Mexico is con inced ha he in e na ional communi y should adop u gen
and e ec i e measu es o p e en he imposi ion agains de eloping coun ies o
coe ci e economic measu es which a e no exp essly au ho ized by he ele an
o gans o he Uni ed Na ions o a e inconsis en wi h he p inciples o in e na ional
law as se o h in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions.
The esolu ion o con lic s by peace ul means is essen ial o he coexis ence o
na ions. Consul a ion and nego ia ion a e he ins umen s h ough which na ions
should esol e hei p oblems. Mexico is also opposed o he use o any ype o
unila e al measu e, whe he economic o poli ical, by any S a e as a means o
exe ing p essu e in o de o change poli ical o economic p ocesses ou side i s
ju isdic ion.
I will be ecalled ha , in 1996, Mexico p omulga ed he Ac o p o ec ade and
in es men om o eign no ms ha con a ene in e na ional law, […]”. (A/55/300,
17 Augus 2000, p. 7)
2024. “Mexico has ei e a ed many imes ha he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions
es ablishes ha he Secu i y Council is he only body en i led o impose sanc ions i
i deems hem necessa y in cases whe e he e a e h ea s o peace and secu i y. The
applica ion o unila e al economic, inancial o comme cial measu es is simply
incompa ible wi h he Cha e and he p inciples o in e na ional law, especially
hose ela ing o equali y among S a es and he igh o sel -de e mina ion. Such
measu es ha e a nega i e impac on indi iduals’ enjoymen o hei human igh s,
on he sus ainable de elopmen o S a es and on he economic p ospec s o

La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean
65 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
de eloping coun ies, and hey a e an obs acle o p og ess owa ds he ul ilmen o
he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals.
Unila e al sanc ions also ha e nega i e e ec s on ci ilians li ing in con lic and pos -
con lic si ua ions. In ou own egion o La in Ame ica, we ha e seen how unila e al
coe ci e measu es hinde de elopmen and con ibu e o inc eases in i egula
mig a ion. In ha ega d, in ollow-up o he commi men s a ising om he
Palenque Summi , on he heme o “good-neighbou liness and well-being”, we call
o he li ing o he unila e al coe ci e measu es ha ha e been imposed on he
coun ies o ou egion, which, as I said, a e con a y o in e na ional law. […]”.
(A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 22-23)
Nica agua
2024. “[…] Since 1983, he Gene al Assembly has adop ed esolu ions ecognizing
he nega i e e ec o unila e al coe ci e measu es on he economies o de eloping
coun ies and he ac ha such illegal measu es in no way bene i mul ila e alism
o con ibu e o c ea ing a clima e o peace and iendly ela ions among S a es.
Since 2000, he imposi ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es has become a key o eign
policy ool used by coun ies such as he Uni ed S a es and he membe S a es o he
Eu opean Union, which ha e imposed mo e han 26,000 sanc ions a ec ing almos
one hi d o he wo ld’s popula ion. Such coe ci e measu es ample people’s igh s
o sel -de e mina ion and eedom. Mo e han 40 yea s a e he adop ion o
esolu ion 38/197 o 1983, en i led “Economic measu es as a means o poli ical and
economic coe cion agains de eloping coun ies”, he Uni ed S a es and i s allies
con inue o display hei impe ial a ogance wi h o al impuni y, by aking
ad an age o hei dominan posi ion in he in e na ional economy and using such
economic measu es o exe cise p essu e on o o cibly in luence he so e eign
decisions o de eloping coun ies.
The Gene al Assembly has ecognized he ex a e i o ial na u e o hose coe ci e
legisla i e and adminis a i e measu es, policies and p ac ices, which a e adop ed
unila e ally o obs uc he de elopmen o people and he ull ealiza ion o hei
human igh s. The Gene al Assembly has p esc ibed ha de eloped coun ies mus
e ain om he h ea o applica ion o ade es ic ions, blockades and o he
economic measu es ha un con a y o he p o isions o he Cha e o he Uni ed
Na ions. The Cha e es ablishes he so e eign equali y o all S a es. Howe e , bo h
he Cha e and in e na ional law a e con enien ly applied by he impe ialis
Powe s, which ha e con e ed upon hemsel es he au ho i y o c ea e unila e al
lis s, no only by ins umen alizing human igh s and democ acy bu also by alsely
accusing o he s o sponso ing e o ism, unde con i ed p e ex s and con a y o
in e na ional law. A icle 32 o he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o S a es,
adop ed in esolu ion 3281 (XXIX), o 1974, es ablished ha , “No S a e may use o
encou age he use o economic, poli ical o any o he ype o measu es o coe ce
ano he S a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s
so e eign igh s [o secu e om i ad an ages o any kind].” […]
La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 66
Those unila e al coe ci e measu es a e u he examples o he use o o ce and
mechanisms o in e e e in he in e nal a ai s o S a es, which is p ohibi ed by he
Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. They cons i u e a collec i e punishmen agains
peoples, dis up he economies o coun ies and a ec he s anda d o li ing o en i e
popula ions, es ic ing hei access o ood, medicine, wa e and sani a ion, heal h,
housing, educa ion and employmen , wi h he aim o p o oking social discon en and
o e h owing legi ima e Go e nmen s. Such measu es a e usually based on ake
news and a e accompanied by nega i e s e eo ypes and ha e speech agains
b o he ly coun ies, such as China, Cuba, I an, Bela us, E i ea, Nica agua,
Venezuela, Russia and o he coun ies, including Zimbabwe, which a e also ic ims
o such measu es. Coe ci e measu es a e no innocen ools o so powe . They kill
jus as bulle s kill in wa . They s a e people o dea h. They kill people by dep i ing
hem o medicine. They a e aimed a delibe a ely a ec ing he li ing condi ions o a
popula ion o b ing abou i s o al o pa ial physical des uc ion. Tha is called
genocide.
I is impe a i e o immedia ely suspend he unila e al coe ci e economic measu es
imposed on ou peoples. We mus elimina e hose agg essions, which a e genuine
obs acles o he e adica ion o po e y, and ad ance owa ds he achie emen o he
Sus ainable De elopmen Goals con ained in he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable
De elopmen . The Gene al Assembly mus be p oac i e. I mus no be sa is ied wi h
encou aging and condemning hose genocidal p ac ices in iola ion o in e na ional
law. The Gene al Assembly mus adop a esolu ion in acco dance wi h A icle 96 o
he Uni ed Na ions Cha e , e e ing he legal issues ela ed o he unpunished
implemen a ion o illegal unila e al coe ci e measu es o he In e na ional Cou o
Jus ice, eques ing an ad iso y opinion on he consequences o he con inued
imposi ion o such measu es and es ablishing he obliga ion o compensa e he
coun ies ha a e ic ims o hose measu es o he damages caused”. (A/78/PV.89,
13 June 2024, pp. 18-20)
Sain Vincen and he G enadines
2024. “[…] Today’s imely, albei o e due, discussion is occu ing a a pi o al
momen . The wo ld is augh wi h disco d, and we a e wi nessing inc easing
ecou se o he p omulga ion o unila e al economic coe ci e measu es, which a e
o en applied agains de eloping coun ies by de eloped coun ies in he pu sui o
na ionalis ic agendas o o he sake o poli ical expediency. This cons i u es a g a e
h ea o he no ms and p inciples go e ning iendly ela ions among S a es,
u he unde mining he e y ules o engagemen upon which ou in e na ional
sys em has been buil and h ea ening an al eady agile mul ila e al o de .
Such measu es a e imposed in iola ion o in e na ional law and ha e been
condemned ca ego ially by an o e whelming majo i y o he Gene al Assembly, as
in he case o he esolu ion en i led ‘Necessi y o ending he economic, comme cial
and inancial emba go imposed by he Uni ed S a es agains Cuba’. This indica es
ha hei use is a a iance wi h he goodwill o he in e na ional communi y and
he spi i o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions.
La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean
67 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
No S a e has he igh no he au ho i y o ci cum en in e na ional law. The
p omulga ion and applica ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es is a iola ion o he
commi men made by we he peoples o he Uni ed Na ions. I demons a es a
bla an dis ega d o mul ila e alism and mul ila e al ins i u ions, sugges ing ha
in e na ional no ms, s anda ds and laws can be lou ed wi h impuni y, he esul o
which is an e osion o us , always wi h di e consequences o ci izens.
Too o en, unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a ool used as pa o he powe dynamic
be ween S a es, wi hou ega d o he o en-de as a ing e ec ha hey ha e on he
well-being o peoples. These measu es impede he ull ealiza ion o human igh s
and cons ain access o heal hca e and o he basic, e e yday necessi ies, o which
e e y human being is dese ing. They also o en ha e a - eaching consequences,
such as impeding e o s o s eng hen Sou h-Sou h coope a ion. The dis up ion o
he Pe oCa ibe ag eemen — he concessiona y inancial oil ag eemen be ween
Venezuela and Ca ibbean Membe S a es — had a signi ican impac on he
economies o he pa ies o he ag eemen . Mo eo e , he applica ion o unila e al
coe ci e measu es impedes he o e all de elopmen o a S a e, including i s abili y
o implemen he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen and a ain he
Sus ainable De elopmen Goals — ano he amewo k wi hin which we ha e made
a people-cen ic p omise. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 3-4)
Venezuela
1996. “We o ed in a ou o his esolu ion because we ag ee wi h he main elemen s
i con ains. […]
We belie e ha ope a i e pa ag aph 1 can be unde s ood only in he con ex o
S a es’ ull compliance wi h he commi men s hey ha e en e ed in o unde he
Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional law, democ a ic p inciples and he
Uni e sal Decla a ion o Human Righ s”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 23)
2024. “Since a leas 2014, he c iminal Uni ed S a es Go e nmen , allied wi h
sec o s o he e il and co up Venezuelan and La in Ame ican ul a- igh oliga chy,
has been applying one o he mos agg essi e illegal sanc ions p og ammes in
mode n his o y agains Venezuela. I s pu pose has always been o impose a policy o
egime change and i s p eda o y model on a people who, in building hei eedom
and independence, ha e e used o gi e in o i s blackmail, and who a e i mly
de e mined o be he mas e s o hei own des iny.
As pa o wha hey called a maximum p essu e campaign agains ou coun y, a
whole ne wo k o lies and legal and inancial alsehoods has been app o ed o a ack
ou people — c iminal laws, damaging execu i e o de s, lis s o sanc ioned en i ies
and people and egula ions aimed speci ically a ou coun y. All o hose ac ions
make up a c iminal s uc u e ha seeks o legi imize and jus i y an illegal and
spu ious policy, applied ex a e i o ially, designed o conceal he conduc o a
decaden empi e ha belie es i can ac wi h impuni y in he ace o a weak
in e na ional sys em. Tha se o sys ema ic and sus ained measu es o economic
e o ism — mo e han 930 o da e — applied by he Go e nmen o he Uni ed
S a es, he Eu opean Union and o he sa elli e na ions has esul ed in eezing he
La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 68
Venezuelan people’s asse s and p ope y. They ha e blocked accoun s and p e en ed
bank ans e s, among o he hings in e up ing ou coun y’s paymen o deb s and
collec ion o in e es , i les and bonds. They ha e p e en ed he pu chase o
machine y, supplies and pa s o a ious kinds on he in e na ional ma ke . They
ha e pa alysed he con ac ing o se ices a he in e na ional le el, exe ed
p essu e aimed a discou aging economic and comme cial exchanges be ween
Venezuela and hi d coun ies and hinde ed impo s o goods and se ices ha a e
essen ial o ensu ing he wel a e o he Venezuelan people.
Those measu es, which cons i u e mode n-day colonialis p ac ices, a e aimed a
achie ing he collapse o he Venezuelan na ional economy and a manu ac u ing
and inducing an unp eceden ed mul i ac o ial c isis, wi h a nega i e impac on he
public and p i a e economy o ou na ion. Tha has been acknowledged by he
p omo e s o hose c imes agains humani y hemsel es. One o he c iminals,
William B own ield, he in amous ep esen a i e o he genocidal Go e nmen o he
Uni ed S a es o Ame ica, con essed: ‘We mus ea his as an agony, a agedy ha
will con inue un il i eaches an end ... and i we can do any hing o speed i up, we
mus do i , unde s anding ha his is going o ha e an impac on millions o people
who a e al eady ha ing di icul y inding ood and medicine ... We canno do his and
p e end ha i is no going o ha e an impac . We ha e o make a ha d decision. The
desi ed end jus i ies his se e e punishmen ’.
Howe e , o e ade hei in e na ional esponsibili y o he c imes commi ed, he
inancial execu ione s who impose ha se o unila e al coe ci e measu es y o hide
behind he issuance o he well-known licenses. In eali y, such licenses, which in
some cases a e e en euphemis ically p esen ed as so-called humani a ian
exemp ions, a e a means o adminis e ing collec i e punishmen , a mechanism o
economic neocoloniza ion ha en o ces condi ions on he a acked S a es and adap s
o he poli ical and economic in e es s o p i a e co po a ions and he Go e nmen
o he agg esso S a e. In o he wo ds, hey a e licenses o domina e, adminis e
pain, deepen and ex end he s uc u al ies o economic and inancial dependence —
a dependence al eady sus ained by an unjus in e na ional sys em and designed o
sui he in e es s o he No h — and manipula e he so e eign y and sel -
de e mina ion o peoples. […]” (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 3-6)
Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
69 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
WESTERN EUROPEAN AND OTHER STATES
Aus alia
1996. “My delega ion abs ained in he o ing on d a esolu ion A/51/L.23 because
he d a esolu ion ails o d aw a clea dis inc ion be ween measu es imposed
unila e ally by indi idual S a es and hose measu es ha a e unde aken pu suan
o esolu ions o he Secu i y Council unde he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
Aus alia has, in his and o he o ums, made clea i s opposi ion o na ional
legisla ion ha seeks o impose ex a e i o ial sanc ions, de e mined unila e ally,
on companies and indi iduals o hi d coun ies”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p.
21)
1998. “Aus alia d aws a clea dis inc ion be ween sanc ions imposed unila e ally
on o he coun ies by indi idual S a es and hose sanc ions ha a e p omulga ed
and implemen ed wi h he ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council. This esolu ion does
no di e en ia e su icien ly be ween hose wo e y di e en se s o ci cums ances.
Fu he mo e, i con ains o he language which Aus alia conside s p oblema ic. In
pa icula , i s e e ence o he inalienable igh o e e y S a e o choose he poli ical,
economic and social sys em ha i deems mos app op ia e o he wel a e o i s
people appea s o unde mine he uni e sali y o undamen al human igh s. […]”.
(A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 18)
2000. “When his i em was conside ed in he Gene al Assembly wo yea s ago,
Aus alia abs ained in he o e on he d a esolu ion because o conce n ha i did
no adequa ely di e en ia e be ween unila e al ex a e i o ial measu es, abou
which we ha e long-s anding conce ns, and sanc ions p omulga ed and implemen ed
wi h he ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council. […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000,
p. 23)
2002. “Aus alia con inues o oppose he applica ion o ex a e i o ial unila e al
economic coe ci e measu es ha a ec hi d coun ies and, he e o e, we suppo
he cen al ene s o his d a esolu ion.
Howe e , unde ce ain ex eme ci cums ances, i may be app op ia e o S a es o
ake app op ia e measu es aimed a encou aging o he Go e nmen s o cease
iola ing hei ci izens’ human igh s and igno ing he ule o law. […]”. (A/57/PV.31,
16 Oc obe 2002, p. 13)
2024. “I am pleased o deli e his s a emen on behal o Canada and my own
coun y, Aus alia.
Canada and Aus alia ejec he claim ha au onomous sanc ions a e illegi ima e o
illegal. Canada and Aus alia apply au onomous sanc ions judiciously,
anspa en ly and consis en ly wi h in e na ional law, including he Cha e o he
Uni ed Na ions. Au onomous sanc ions a e aimed a de e ing and p e en ing he
e y beha iou s ha pose a h ea o in e na ional peace and secu i y, including
human igh s iola ions and abuses and se ious co up ion, and a es ic ing he

Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 70
p oli e a ion o weapons o mass des uc ion. The Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions
ecognizes ha he e a e imes when sanc ions a e necessa y o add ess h ea s o
global peace and secu i y. By imposing au onomous sanc ions, Membe S a es send
a clea signal ha policies and beha iou s ha iola e in e na ional ules, no ms
and conduc will no be ole a ed.
Canada and Aus alia also challenge he claim ha con empo a y au onomous
sanc ions disp opo iona ely impac ulne able people. Ou sanc ions a ge egimes
ha gi e li le conside a ion o he needs o hei people. And sanc ions a ge
en i ies ha ca y ou c imes whose ic ims a e e e yday people in ou communi ies.
When Canada and Aus alia implemen a ge ed sanc ions measu es, we s i e o
minimize any ad e se consequences o ci ilian popula ions and o legi ima e
business and humani a ian ac i i ies. We wo k closely wi h he p i a e sec o and
humani a ian pa ne s o ensu e ha humani a ian aid can be deli e ed e ec i ely
in con ex s in which sanc ions apply. And we s and eady o add ess any legi ima e
conce ns in ha ega d.
Canada and Aus alia expec he Secu i y Council o lead on applying and
moni o ing he implemen a ion o sanc ions egimes ha i has adop ed. Bu on
ma e s in which he Council is blocked om esponding o eg egious beha iou ,
including iola ions o he Cha e , we look o a b oade se o ools o ensu e ha
egimes and e o is s canno bene i om in e na ional c imes. Sanc ions a e one
o a sui e o ools ha we use o espond o si ua ions o in e na ional conce n. […]
Finally, Canada and Aus alia a e deeply conce ned ha his deba e con inues o
d aw a en ion away om p essing in e na ional issues. C i icisms o au onomous
sanc ions, oo o en, a e a delibe a e e o o di e a en ion om b eaches o
in e na ional peace and secu i y, se ious human igh s iola ions, weapons
p oli e a ion and e o ism — an e o made by pe pe a o s o hose iola ions and
h ea s. We u ge all Membe S a es o ocus on he undamen al need o p omo e
espec o he Cha e and in e na ional law”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 13-
14)
1997. “Belgium, like i s pa ne s in he Eu opean Union, is opposed o he
ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional legisla ion, mo e pa icula ly he unila e al
imposi ion o comme cial measu es, especially sanc ions. The Eu opean Union
con i med his posi ion in i s explana ion o o e when he Gene al Assembly o ed
on esolu ion 51/22, en i led ‘Elimina ion o coe ci e economic measu es as a means
o poli ical and economic compulsion” on 27 No embe 1996”. (A/52/343, 15
Sep embe 1997, p. 2)
Canada
1996. “[…] Canada has always aken a igo ous s and agains measu es wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec ha seek o cons ain he eedom o in es men and ade o
hi d coun ies. While he esolu ion we ha e jus conside ed calls o he epeal o
unila e al, ex a e i o ial laws ha impose sanc ions on o he S a es, i ails o
make clea he essen ial dis inc ion be ween hose measu es unde aken wi h he
ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council and in con o mi y wi h he Cha e o he
Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
71 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
Uni ed Na ions, and hose imposed unila e ally by indi idual S a es. As a esul , we
we e no able o lend ou suppo o his ex ”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p.
22)
1998. “[…] Canada has always been i mly opposed o ex a e i o ial measu es
aimed a limi ing he eedom o ade and in es men o hi d pa ies.
While he esolu ion we ha e jus conside ed equi es ha unila e al
ex a e i o ial laws imposing sanc ions on hi d pa ies mus be epealed, i ails o
dis inguish clea ly be ween measu es aken unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y
Council and in acco dance wi h he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, and measu es
imposed unila e ally by S a es. The e o e, we ha e no been able o suppo he
esolu ion”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 18)
2002. “[…] Canada opposes ex a e i o ial measu es ha con adic o unde mine
he laws o clea ly enuncia ed policies o ano he S a e exe cising concu en
ju isdic ion on a e i o ial basis o e he same conduc .
Wi h espec o he esolu ion jus adop ed, Canada unde s ands ha he inclusion
o he e m “coe ci e”, no ably in ope a i e pa ag aph 4, is in ended o ensu e ha
he scope o he esolu ion is mean o apply o he S a e ha is he subjec o he
sanc ions o o a ec ed hi d S a es and hei na ionals and co po a ions.
Canada’s unde s anding is ha he inclusion o he wo d “coe ci e” is no in ended
o condemn unila e al p esc ip i e measu es ha apply he objec i e na ionali y
p inciple. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 13)
2024. “I am pleased o deli e his s a emen on behal o Canada and my own
coun y, Aus alia.
Canada and Aus alia ejec he claim ha au onomous sanc ions a e illegi ima e o
illegal. Canada and Aus alia apply au onomous sanc ions judiciously,
anspa en ly and consis en ly wi h in e na ional law, including he Cha e o he
Uni ed Na ions. Au onomous sanc ions a e aimed a de e ing and p e en ing he
e y beha iou s ha pose a h ea o in e na ional peace and secu i y, including
human igh s iola ions and abuses and se ious co up ion, and a es ic ing he
p oli e a ion o weapons o mass des uc ion. The Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions
ecognizes ha he e a e imes when sanc ions a e necessa y o add ess h ea s o
global peace and secu i y. By imposing au onomous sanc ions, Membe S a es send
a clea signal ha policies and beha iou s ha iola e in e na ional ules, no ms
and conduc will no be ole a ed.
Canada and Aus alia also challenge he claim ha con empo a y au onomous
sanc ions disp opo iona ely impac ulne able people. Ou sanc ions a ge egimes
ha gi e li le conside a ion o he needs o hei people. And sanc ions a ge
en i ies ha ca y ou c imes whose ic ims a e e e yday people in ou communi ies.
When Canada and Aus alia implemen a ge ed sanc ions measu es, we s i e o
minimize any ad e se consequences o ci ilian popula ions and o legi ima e
business and humani a ian ac i i ies. We wo k closely wi h he p i a e sec o and
humani a ian pa ne s o ensu e ha humani a ian aid can be deli e ed e ec i ely
Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 72
in con ex s in which sanc ions apply. And we s and eady o add ess any legi ima e
conce ns in ha ega d.
Canada and Aus alia expec he Secu i y Council o lead on applying and
moni o ing he implemen a ion o sanc ions egimes ha i has adop ed. Bu on
ma e s in which he Council is blocked om esponding o eg egious beha iou ,
including iola ions o he Cha e , we look o a b oade se o ools o ensu e ha
egimes and e o is s canno bene i om in e na ional c imes. Sanc ions a e one
o a sui e o ools ha we use o espond o si ua ions o in e na ional conce n. […]
Finally, Canada and Aus alia a e deeply conce ned ha his deba e con inues o
d aw a en ion away om p essing in e na ional issues. C i icisms o au onomous
sanc ions, oo o en, a e a delibe a e e o o di e a en ion om b eaches o
in e na ional peace and secu i y, se ious human igh s iola ions, weapons
p oli e a ion and e o ism — an e o made by pe pe a o s o hose iola ions and
h ea s. We u ge all Membe S a es o ocus on he undamen al need o p omo e
espec o he Cha e and in e na ional law”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 13-
14)
Iceland
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s
membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o
Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
73 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade
Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean
Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been
miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no
esponsible. […]
Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance
o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he
case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he
p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is
h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei
a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med
g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul
ools o he in e na ional communi y.
Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading
and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons
he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing
he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he
adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […]
Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end
in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non-
ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he
Secu i y Council o ac .. […]
The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions
o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession
o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical
weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions.
The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains
humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I
a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o
en i ies commi ing such iola ions.
EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law,
human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos
ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose
esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i
is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y
en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o
humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by
de aul , om EU sanc ions. […]
EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due
p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and
equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he
indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals,
Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 80
business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no
ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9)
San Ma ino
1997. “The Pe manen Mission o he Republic o San Ma ino o he Uni ed Na ions
has he honou o in o m he Sec e a y-Gene al o he Uni ed Na ions ha he
Republic o San Ma ino does no ha e any laws ega ding he abo e-men ioned
ques ion and has ne e applied such measu es o sanc ions”. (A/52/343, 15
Sep embe 1997, p. 4)
Tü kiye
1996. “[…] Tu key is basing i s o e only on i s opposi ion o he p ac ice o
ex a e i o iali y — in o he wo ds, any p ac ice ha ex ends he applica ion o a
coun y’s legisla ion ou side i s ju isdic ion. The applica ion o ex a e i o ial
measu es no only uns coun e o in e na ional law bu also has a nega i e impac
on he economic in e es s o hi d coun ies and on he ee low o in e na ional
ade.
In he iew o my delega ion, coe ci e economic measu es can be imposed only by he
Uni ed Na ions in con o mi y wi h i s Cha e . Ou o e in a ou o he d a
esolu ion be o e us simply e lec s hese conside a ions”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe
1996, p. 20)
1998. “[…] opposi ion in p inciple o he ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional
legisla ion, which is no in acco dance wi h he gene al p inciples o in e na ional
law. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
Uni ed Kingdom o G ea B i ain and No he n I eland
2024. “The Uni ed Kingdom main ains ha ou au onomous sanc ions s ongly
suppo and a e consis en wi h he undamen al pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions, as
exp essed in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions.
The Uni ed Kingdom’s p e e ence is o suppo sanc ions h ough he Secu i y
Council in o de o ad ance in e na ional peace and secu i y. […]
The Uni ed Kingdom’s au onomous sanc ions a e consis en wi h in e na ional law.
They a e a ge ed and a e ocused on de e ing and dis up ing malign beha iou and
demons a ing suppo o in e na ional no ms.

Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
81 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
We ecognize ha o he Gene al Assembly membe s also use sanc ions, e en i hey
do no call hem ha , as do some egional o ganiza ions. The Uni ed Kingdom
de ends he igh o S a es o use sanc ions in compliance wi h in e na ional law.
The Uni ed Kingdom’s sanc ions legisla ion is binding only on pe sons o he Uni ed
Kingdom o pe sons wi hin he Uni ed Kingdom. While i egula es how hose wi hin
ou ju isdic ion engage wi h sanc ioned indi iduals, en i ies and S a es, i does no
a emp o egula e he ac i i ies o hose ou side ou ju isdic ion.
E e y sanc ion o he Uni ed Kingdom complies wi h ou domes ic and in e na ional
legal obliga ions, including ou human igh s obliga ions, which a e indi idually
assessed o each lis ing. Ou legisla ion p o ides o a anspa en and obus
sys em o legal challenge and e iew.
We use sanc ions p opo iona ely and igo ously, including by aking ca e ul s eps
o mi iga e any unin ended nega i e impac s. Tha includes issuing licences o
espond o humani a ian eme gencies, such as ea hquake elie in Sy ia. […]”.
(A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, p. 5)
Uni ed S a es o Ame ica
1996. “[…] Libya would ha e Uni ed Na ions Membe S a es belie e ha his d a
esolu ion is abou ee ade and he igh o S a es o choose hei own models o
economic de elopmen . I is no . I is aimed a dis ac ing a en ion om Libya’s
obs ina e e usal o comply wi h i s obliga ions unde Secu i y Council esolu ions
731 (1992), 748 (1992) and 883 (1993). These esolu ions we e imposed because o
Libya’s in ol emen in wo e o is bombings o ci ilian ai c a — Pan Am ligh
103 and UTA ligh 772 — and i s con inued suppo o in e na ional e o ism.
By in oducing his d a esolu ion, Libya seeks o b eak ou o he in e na ional
isola ion imposed by he wo ld communi y and o lend some legi imacy o i s
campaign o end e o ism- ela ed sanc ions, including hose imposed by he
Secu i y Council. These sanc ions, mos ecen ly e iewed his mon h, ha e been le
in place wi hou change h ough 14 consecu i e e iews. Libya mus no be
encou aged o belie e ha any hing less han ull compliance wi h Secu i y Council
esolu ions can end i s con on a ion wi h he in e na ional communi y. […]”.
(A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, pp. 20-21)
1998. “[…] The use o sanc ions as an e ec i e and app op ia e o eign policy ool by
S a es, mul ila e al o ganiza ions and he Uni ed Na ions i sel is wo hy o
discussion. Bu when i is aised in a condemna o y way in a body such as he
Gene al Assembly o he Uni ed Na ions by a S a e ha does no espec Secu i y
Council esolu ions, he subjec is unwo hy o he a en ion o Membe S a es.
E e y so e eign S a e has he igh o decide wi h whom i will o will no ade. My
Go e nmen ega ds economic sanc ions as a legi ima e ins umen o o eign policy.
The Uni ed S a es is by no means he only na ion ha eso s o such measu es when
necessa y. In ac , applying he logic o pa ag aph 2 o he d a esolu ion, he
in e na ional communi y would ne e ha e imposed economic sanc ions agains he
Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 82
Republic o Sou h A ica o o ce i o end he apa heid egime o agains wha was
hen known as Rhodesia — wha is now Zimbabwe.
When aced wi h unaccep able in e na ional beha iou , he Uni ed S a es eso s o
unila e al economic ac ion eluc an ly. Whene e possible, we wo k wi h o he
membe s o he global communi y o de ise a collec i e esponse o eg egious
beha iou ha iola es in e na ional no ms o h ea ens in e na ional secu i y, as
we did in he ace o I aq's a med agg ession agains i s neighbou , Kuwai . Bu he
Uni ed S a es has esponded and will con inue o espond unila e ally when aced
wi h policies and ac ions ha pose unusual and ex ao dina y h ea s o i s i al
in e es s, including i s secu i y, such as S a e suppo o in e na ional e o ism,
he p oli e a ion o weapons o mass des uc ion and o ballis ic missiles and massi e
human igh s abuses. We do no ake such ac ion ligh ly. When o ced o ac , we
make i clea wha policies we wan o see changed and wha he a ge S a e mus
do o ha e sanc ions li ed.
Ou sanc ions also seek o a ge he subjec Go e nmen , while a oiding ha m o
ulne able ci ilian popula ions. […]
We should also no e ha imposing economic sanc ions en ails eal economic sac i ice
on he pa o he Uni ed S a es. Tha he Uni ed S a es is willing o make such
sac i ices indica es he g ea impo ance we place on he issues in ol ed. In
esponding o ogue S a e beha iou , he Uni ed S a es is de ending no only i s own
in e es s bu he secu i y o he in e na ional communi y as a whole”. (A/53/PV.43,
26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 16-17)
2002. “[…] Le me begin by saying ha economic measu es, including sanc ions, a e
a legi ima e, app op ia e and e ec i e ool o add essing h ea s o in e na ional
peace and secu i y. The Uni ed S a es is no alone in his iew o p ac ice.
The Uni ed S a es uses sanc ions o add ess some o he mos abho en and
des abilizing ac i i ies o ou ime. We use sanc ions o de e e o ism, p oli e a ion,
a icking in pe sons, a icking in wildli e and a icking in d ugs. We use
a ge ed sanc ions o add ess beha iou s ha h ea en ou secu i y and unde mine
human digni y.
In some cases, we use ou sanc ions because he e is no a enue o pu suing ac ion
a he Uni ed Na ions, ei he because he e is no applicable au ho i y o because a
mino i y o S a es a e obs uc ing he implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions.
The loudes p oponen s o he so-called unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e
simul aneously obs uc he implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions and o en
bla an ly iola e hem.
In such cases, we and o he Membe S a es will wo k o add ess h ea s o peace and
secu i y as bes we can wi hin he means a ou disposal. We would much p e e o
see Uni ed Na ions sanc ions ully implemen ed and upda ed in line wi h he h ea s
ha hey a e designed o de e .
To echo wha ou colleagues om he Eu opean Union ha e said, Uni ed Na ions
sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul, peace ul ools ha he in e na ional
communi y has o add ess h ea s o in e na ional peace and secu i y. We suppo
Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es
83 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
hei use whene e app op ia e, and we wo k closely wi h in e na ional pa ne s in
building he capaci y o Membe S a es o implemen Uni ed Na ions sanc ions ully
and e ec i ely.
In cases whe e Uni ed Na ions ac ion is no easible, he Uni ed S a es o en wo ks
in andem wi h o he Membe S a es o implemen au onomous sanc ions o add ess
h ea s o ou secu i y and alues. Sanc ions impose inancial cos s on co up ion
and es ic he low o dual-use componen s o Go e nmen s ha a e wo king ha d
o build weapons o mass des uc ion ha hey will use o menace hei neighbou s
and, indeed, he en i e wo ld. We also use sanc ions o hold o accoun S a e ac o s
who iola e he igh s o selec mino i ies, o women and o hei poli ical opponen s.
Those ha s oke he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e con end ha
au onomous sanc ions unde mine he p inciples o so e eign y and non-in e e ence.
Ou au onomous sanc ions a e a ge ed and c a ed wi h a clea nexus o he Uni ed
S a es. […]
Some allege ha ou sanc ions ha m innocen s, when in ac we use ou sanc ions o
a ge hose who obs uc he deli e y o humani a ian aid and hose who s ip hei
ci izen y o weal h h ough co up ion. We use sanc ions o uphold he igh s o hose
who canno de end hemsel es.
The Uni ed S a es has aken conc e e ac ions o mi iga e any unin ended
consequences o sanc ions domes ically and a he Uni ed Na ions. […]. Las ly, he
Uni ed S a es apply sanc ions consis en wi h in e na ional law.
Allow me o lea e you oday wi h one inal obse a ion: he Uni ed S a es has been
he a ge o au onomous sanc ions by some o he mos oci e ous c i ics o so-called
unila e al coe ci e measu es. They ha e ac ually sanc ioned us as well, which is he
heigh o hypoc isy. These S a es aim o denig a e all sanc ions wi h his na a i e,
which is designed o challenge he abili y o independen na ions o ensu e hei
collec i e secu i y h ough he peace ul egula ion o hei own esou ces. We hope
ha e e yone he e will see his poli ical hea e o wha i is. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13
June 2024, pp. 6-7)
In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 84
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND
GROUPS OF STATES
Eu opean Union (EU)
1996. “The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o ei e a e i s ejec ion
o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis. We ha e also
ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al
comme cial measu es. We s ess ha in e na ional coe ci e measu es can be
imposed on S a es only by, and unde he au ho i y o , he Secu i y Council, in
acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
In his ega d, we wish o men ion he legisla ion ha p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
The Eu opean Union ea i ms i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any
ex a e i o ial measu es ha appea o con a ene in e na ional law. The
Eu opean Union mus , howe e , make a i m and unmis akable dis inc ion be ween
measu es imposed unila e ally by indi idual S a es and hose ha a e unde aken
wi h he ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council, and in con o mi y wi h he Cha e
o he Uni ed Na ions. […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 20)
1997. “Belgium, like i s pa ne s in he Eu opean Union, is opposed o he
ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional legisla ion, mo e pa icula ly he unila e al
imposi ion o comme cial measu es, especially sanc ions. The Eu opean Union
con i med his posi ion in i s explana ion o o e when he Gene al Assembly o ed
on esolu ion 51/22, en i led ‘Elimina ion o coe ci e economic measu es as a means
o poli ical and economic compulsion” on 27 No embe 1996’”. (A/52/343, 15
Sep embe 1997, p. 2)
1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and
he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion
coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and
No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal
ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis
con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o
coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha
binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he
Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e .
In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es
85 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion
o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion,
including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading
wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al
p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es.
We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law
and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h
ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e
ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o
any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i
will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17)
2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The
Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union —
Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland,
Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and
No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical
ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains
he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law.
The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he
coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […]
Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he
so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on
legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and
unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o
hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such
measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so.
The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al
measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic
coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed
by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o
S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24)
2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he
Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia,
Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he
Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea,
Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26
Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11)
2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s
membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o
Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade

In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 86
Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean
Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen .
Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been
miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no
esponsible. […]
Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance
o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he
case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he
p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is
h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei
a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med
g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul
ools o he in e na ional communi y.
Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading
and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons
he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing
he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he
adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […]
Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end
in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non-
ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he
Secu i y Council o ac .. […]
The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions
o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession
o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical
weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions.
The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains
humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I
a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o
en i ies commi ing such iola ions.
EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law,
human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos
ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose
esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i
is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y
en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o
humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by
de aul , om EU sanc ions. […]
EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due
p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and
equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he
indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals,
In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es
87 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o
Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so.
EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e
p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can
ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o
punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call
hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a
change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU
ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei
business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no
ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9)
G oup o 77 and China
The G oup o 77 and China is o med by 134 S a es.
3
1998. “[…] he p ac ice o imposing unila e al coe ci e measu es o an
ex a e i o ial na u e has acc ued addi ional se ious dimensions and i s impac can
ha e de as a ing consequences o he a ec ed coun ies. Such p ac ices un coun e
o he impe a i es o in e na ional coope a ion o de elopmen and o he spi i o
pa ne ship being os e ed in he inc easingly in e dependen wo ld. Mo eo e , he
imposi ion o such measu es by one coun y on ano he con a enes in e na ional
law and is o ally incompa ible, no only wi h in e na ional ules and egula ions,
bu also wi h he p inciples o equal so e eign y, non-in e en ion and non-
in e e ence in he in e nal a ai s o so e eign S a es.
As a esul , such coe ci e ac ions p e en he a ec ed coun ies om enjoying hei
equal and non-disc imina o y igh s in pu suing de elopmen and om eely
expanding hei in e na ional ade. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 5)
2002. “[…] In adding ou suppo o he d a esolu ion, I would like o ei e a e
he posi ion o he minis e s o he de eloping coun ies, exp essed in he Decla a ion
issued on he occasion o he Twen y-Six h Annual Minis e ial Mee ing o he G oup
3
A ghanis an, Alge ia, Angola, An igua and Ba buda, A gen ina, Aze baijan, Bahamas, Bah ain,
Bangladesh, Ba bados, Belize, Benin, Bhu an, Boli ia, Bo swana, B azil, B unei Da ussalam, Bu kina
Faso, Bu undi, Cabo Ve de, Cambodia, Came oon, Cen al A ican Republic, Chad, Chile, China,
Colombia, Como os, Congo, Cos a Rica, Cô e d'I oi e, Cuba, Democ a ic People's Republic o Ko ea,
Democ a ic Republic o he Congo, Djibou i, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuado , Egyp , El
Sal ado , Equa o ial Guinea, E i ea, Eswa ini, E hiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, G enada,
Gua emala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hai i, Hondu as, India, Indonesia, I an, I aq, Jamaica,
Jo dan, Kenya, Ki iba i, Kuwai , Lao People's Democ a ic Republic, Lebanon, Leso ho, Libe ia, Libya,
Madagasca , Malawi, Malaysia, Maldi es, Mali, Ma shall Islands, Mau i ania, Mau i ius, Mic onesia,
Mongolia, Mo occo, Mozambique, Myanma , Namibia, Nau u, Nepal, Nica agua, Nige , Nige ia, Oman,
Pakis an, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Pa aguay, Pe u, Philippines, Qa a , Rwanda, Sain Ki s and
Ne is, Sain Lucia, Sain Vincen and he G enadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and P incipe, Saudi A abia,
Senegal, Seychelles, Sie a Leone, Singapo e, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sou h A ica, Sou h Sudan,
S i Lanka, S a e o Pales ine, Sudan, Su iname, Sy ian A ab Republic, Tajikis an, Thailand, Timo -
Les e, Togo, Tonga, T inidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Tu kmenis an, Uganda, Uni ed A ab Emi a es,
Uni ed Republic o Tanzania, U uguay, Vanua u, Venezuela, Vie Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 88
o 77, held a New Yo k on 19 Sep embe 2002. Pa ag aph 42 o ha Decla a ion
s a es:
“We i mly ejec he imposi ion o laws and egula ions wi h ex a e i o ial impac
and all o he o ms o coe ci e economic measu es, including unila e al sanc ions
agains de eloping coun ies, and ei e a e he u gen need o elimina e hem
immedia ely. We emphasize ha such ac ions no only unde mine he p inciples
ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law, bu also
se e ely h ea en he eedom o ade and in es men . We he e o e call on he
in e na ional communi y nei he o ecognize hese measu es no apply hem”. […]”.
(A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 2)
2024. “[…] De eloping coun ies ace g ea challenges, including he inc ease in
unila e al poli ical, economic and ade ac ions o policies and he weakening o
mul ila e alism, which a e lag an iola ions o he p inciples es ablished in he
Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law and he pu poses o he Uni ed
Na ions. We conside ha i is u gen o s op hose ac ions, which h ea en he
economic and social de elopmen o he coun ies ha a e subjec o hem and
consequen ly p e en hem om achie ing he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals.
The G oup conside s ha he applica ion o hose measu es, oge he wi h all
unila e al p o ec ionis measu es, including a i and non- a i ba ie s, also
iola e he ules o he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion, unde mine he mul ila e al
ading sys em and se iously h ea en ee ade, he igh o S a es o expo o
impo goods o se ices om wo ld ma ke s, in es men and sus ainable
de elopmen . Those measu es also cons i u e means o a bi a y disc imina ion
agains de eloping coun ies subjec o hem. The impac o hose measu es also
a ec s, among o he hings, echnical and inancial coope a ion; echnology ans e ;
ag icul u al and indus ial p oduc ion in he coun ies; access o ood; he supply o
medicines, accines, ea men s and medical equipmen o ea diseases, as
occu ed du ing he co ona i us disease pandemic; and e en he pa icipa ion o
delega ions in mee ings o he Uni ed Na ions sys em o o spo s delega ions
wishing o a end in e na ional e en s. […]
In conclusion, he G oup ca ego ically ejec s he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e
measu es and calls on he coun ies conce ned o e ain om imposing hem,
including unila e al sanc ions and ade es ic ions, which nega i ely impac he
human igh s o millions o people li ing unde hose illegal measu es in de eloping
coun ies and in u n deepen he gap be ween hose coun ies and de eloped
coun ies. Ins ead, hose coun ies mus show g ea e solida i y and coope a ion o
suppo o he coun ies in o e coming he huge challenges and ulne abili ies hey
ace in implemen ing he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen and achie ing
he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals, in compliance wi h he spi i o he Uni ed
Na ions Cha e ”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 10-11)
G oup o A ican S a es
2002. “[…] on behal o he A ican G oup […]:
In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es
89 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024)
[…] In spi e o he ac ha he Uni ed Na ions Cha e allows he O ganiza ion o
use economic coe ci e measu es only in cases ha ep esen a h ea o in e na ional
peace and secu i y, he implemen a ion o such means by some coun ies unila e ally
is illegal, acco ding o he p o isions and no ms o in e na ional law. The Gene al
Assembly has exp essed i s ejec ion o such measu es on many occasions and has
adop ed a numbe o esolu ions ejec ing unila e al coe ci e economic measu es.
These esolu ions emphasize he ac ha S a es should e ain om using
ex a e i o ial laws which cons i u e a clea h ea o in e na ional coope a ion and
o he undamen al p inciples on which he in e na ional inancial, ade and
economic sys ems a e based.
[…] Such measu es no only unde mine he p inciples ensh ined in he Uni ed
Na ions Cha e and in in e na ional law, bu also se iously h ea en he eedom o
in es men s and ade, since e e y S a e has an inalienable igh o economic, social
and cul u al de elopmen , and he igh o choose eely he poli ical, economic and
social sys em ha is app op ia e o he p ospe i y o i s people and in acco dance
wi h i s na ional plans and policies”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 6)
2024. “[…] Se e al Membe S a es in A ica ace unique challenges ha a e
compounded by unila e al economic measu es. Those measu es signi ican ly
unde mine ou collec i e e o s o achie e sus ainable de elopmen and widen he
economic dispa i y be ween A ican na ions and he de eloped wo ld. Sanc ions lead
o educed ma ke s, collapse o in as uc u e and inc eased ansac ion cos s o
small businesses.
Unila e al economic measu es ha e esul ed in subs an ial ade e enue losses o
A ican coun ies, se e ely hampe ing ou p og ess owa ds achie ing he
Sus ainable De elopmen Goals. The imposi ion o unila e al sanc ions and ade
es ic ions se e ely a ec s ou economies, pa icula ly in a eas c i ical o ou
de elopmen , such as ag icul u e, heal hca e and in as uc u e. Those measu es
dis up supply chains, es ic access o essen ial goods and se ices and impede
inancial and echnical coope a ion. […]
A ica’s de elopmen elies hea ily on mul ila e alism and in e na ional
coope a ion. Unila e al measu es no only iola e in e na ional law and he
p inciples o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, bu hey also unde mine he global
ading sys em, limi ing ou access o ma ke s and in es men oppo uni ies. The
A ican G oup emphasizes ha hose unila e al measu es ha e a disp opo iona e
impac on ou women and child en, who su e he mos om economic ins abili y
and educed access o essen ial se ices. We s ess he impo ance o a ai and
equi able ading sys em ha suppo s ou de elopmen al aspi a ions. […]
The A ican G oup ca ego ically ejec s he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e
measu es. We u ge all na ions o demons a e g ea e solida i y and coope a ion in
o de o help us o e come his immense challenge we ace. We mus ensu e ha no
one and no coun y is le behind in ou collec i e jou ney owa ds sus ainable
de elopmen . The con inen has also been a he o e on o echnological
inno a ion, wi h se e al na ions eme ging as ech hubs. Sanc ions and ade
In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es
Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 96
e o s. Such ac ions con a ene he spi i and le e o in e na ional law, in inging
upon he so e eign igh s o na ions o de e mine hei own poli ical, economic and
social sys ems.
We call upon all S a es o e ain om imposing unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e
economic measu es on any coun y and o esol e dispu es h ough dialogue,
nego ia ion and peace ul means, in acco dance wi h in e na ional law. […]
SADC ea i ms i s commi men o solida i y, coope a ion and mu ual espec among
na ions, and his dialogue session is he e o e a i s s ep owa ds add essing any
conce ns in a peace ul and amicable manne . We call o collec i e ac ion o elimina e
he use o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es as a means o
poli ical and economic compulsion. We also ea i m ou commi men o a
mul ila e al sys em ounded on he p inciples o equali y, jus ice and espec o
in e na ional law, as en isaged in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. We u ge he
in e na ional communi y o ea i m i s commi men o mul ila e alism and he
p inciples ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. I is impe a i e ha we
uphold he p inciples o so e eign equali y, non-in e e ence and espec o
e i o ial in eg i y. Unila e al coe ci e measu es, pa icula ly hose wi h
ex a e i o ial each, a e incompa ible wi h hose p inciples and mus be
unequi ocally ejec ed. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 9-10)