Explanation of Position on General Assembly Plenary Resolution on Culture of Peace

Carol Hamilton
U.S. Public Delegate
New York, New York
December 6, 2022


The United States firmly supports efforts to promote dialogue and cooperation as a means of promoting peace. We thank Turkmenistan for tabling this text on an important topic.

We would like to take this opportunity to clarify our position on the following issues.

First, the United States has not seen evidence that the “policy of neutrality plays an important role in the development of peaceful, and mutually beneficial relations among countries and contributes to the strengthening of international peace and security.” Collective self-defense is an inherent right reflected in the UN Charter. Defensive security alliances promote international peace and security by deterring aggression and violence. They protect territorial integrity and provide conditions for political independence, principles enshrined in the UN Charter. Alliances and alignments based on democratic values and transparency can also be effective at preventing aggression and strengthening peace and security. We are open to conversations about the links between neutrality and the goals of the resolution. We believe this resolution would have been stronger and more effective if it referred to tangible goals supported by data.

Second, and similarly, the United States supports the idea of “friendship to all and malice towards none,” as referenced in PP14, but the language in this PP does not explicitly link and clarify how this will “contribute to strengthening international peace.”

Finally, ECOSOC resolution 1980/67 paragraph 11 states: “A final decision on a proposal for an international year should be taken by the General Assembly, not earlier than one full year after the introduction of the proposal, thus allowing the views of all Member States to be taken into account and allowing the competent organs to make a thorough assessment of the proposal in the light of its practical desirability and the probability of real results.” Any decision on international years or dates should be announced a full year ahead of time, meaning that the first possible year to observe this International Year would be 2024, not 2023. Member states should have had more time to reflect on the commitments this type of announcement entails.

Nevertheless, we reiterate our appreciation for the efforts of Turkmenistan in tabling this resolution in support of dialogue in establishing and maintaining peace. The United States remains committed to working with Member States to promote tolerance and understanding.

Thank you.