The UN Security Council has passed a resolution authorising the delivery of humanitarian aid to Syria through just one crossing point. The passing of this resolution follows the lapse of the prior authorisation for a six year-long humanitarian operation in Syria. Unfortunately, it falls short of providing aid to millions of Syrians.

UN RESOLUTIONS ON AID TO SYRIA 

Cosponsored by Germany and Belgium, Resolution 2533 was passed on 11 July 2020, with 12 of the 15 Security Council members voting in its favour. Russia, China, and the Dominican Republic abstained. The resolution allows the UN to distribute medicine, food, and other essential assistance to displaced Syrians without the permission of the Assad regime. This aid can be brought into the country through the Bab al-Hawa crossing and taken to the rebel-held city of Idlib until 10 July 2021. 

This represents a significant reduction compared to the aid to Syria provided under the previous Security Council resolution, which expired at midnight on 10 July 2020. Since 2014, the UN had delivered aid to over 11 million Syrians under Resolution 2504. Under this mechanism, there were originally four crossings used to bring humanitarian assistance into the country. After opposition from Russia and China, crossings from Jordan and Iraq were closed in January 2020, but two crossings – at Bab al-Hawa and Bab al-Salam – remained. 

Representatives from Russia and China argued that the Assad government could provide assistance to Aleppo, a city under its control, and that the Bab al-Salam crossing that served the city was therefore not needed. This has been reflected in the latest Security Council resolution, which has further reduced the number of access points to one, effectively stopping UN aid to Aleppo.

A WEEK OF DELIBERATION

In discussions this July, Germany and Belgium originally proposed an extension of the existing aid programme to Syria that would have kept crossings to both Idlib and Aleppo open for a full year; this proposal was twice vetoed by Russia and China.

As an alternative, Russia put forward a draft resolution that would have allowed aid to be passed only through Bab al-Hawa crossing for six months, until 10 January 2021. According to diplomats, Russia’s proposals would also have contained language blaming the humanitarian crisis in Syria on unilateral sanctions against the Assad regime. This resolution also failed twice, being voted against by a majority of Security Council members.

It was only after these unsuccessful votes and the expiration of the existing aid programme on 10 July 2020 that a solution was found. By agreeing to channel aid only through the crossing to Idlib, but guaranteeing aid for the next year, German foreign minister Heiko Maas explained that Germany “proposed a compromise to preserve the mechanism,” but insisted that crossings to different areas of the country were still needed.

INTERNATIONAL REACTION

UN Secretary General, António Guterres, welcomed the passage of the new resolution as safeguarding support for 2.8 million Syrians, but stressed the necessity of providing humanitarian assistance to those in need across the country. On 24 June 2020, he released a report on the Syrian crisis which recommended that both existing crossings remain open for a full year, as originally proposed by Germany and Belgium.

The disagreement between nations was clear from statements issued after the passage of the resolution. Russia’s Deputy UN Envoy, Dmitry Polyanskiy, insisted that his country supported humanitarian aid to Syria, but that it needed to ensure “full respect of the country’s sovereignty” and acknowledge the authority of the Assad government. Zhang Jun, China’s UN ambassador, stressed China’s reservations about providing cross-border aid in principle, but stated that the country did not object to such aid going to Syria “at this stage”. In contrast, the US warned that reducing the number of access points to one was crossing a “red line”, and Germany’s UN ambassador told China’s and Russia’s delegates to ask their superiors “how those people who gave the instructions to cut the aid of 500,000 children … are ready to look into the mirror tomorrow.”

Aid agencies seem to echo this sentiment. There are warnings that the resolution will be damaging for civilians in Aleppo, 60% of whom are displaced. They will be left “at the mercy of the Syrian government”, warns Susannah Sirkin of Physicians for Human Rights. At a time when COVID-19 has been found to have spread to Syria, and starvation is a tactic that is known to have been used by the Assad regime already in the conflict, the closure of the Bab al-Salam crossing could have serious repercussions for Aleppo and beyond. 

Alice is currently studying the GDL at City, University of London and holds a BA in Classics from the University of Oxford. She is passionate about human rights, with a particular interest in refugee and migration issues.

LinkedIn