Session 5-9 Transcript
(OEWG 2021-25)

Good morning, distinguished delegates. The 9th meeting of the 5th substantive session of the OEWG on security of and in the use of ICT is now called to order. Dear friends, distinguished delegates, I apologize for beginning the meeting later than anticipated. I was engaged in a series of informal conversations with regard to the way forward. It is now my intention that we begin consideration of Agenda Item 7, which is entitled Adoption of Annual Progress Reports, to consider the draft Annual Progress Report. In this regard, I wanted to highlight to you the letter I had sent yesterday evening, in which I had attached a document contained in document number A-AC.292-2023-CRP, and that document was made available only in English. I also wanted to apologize for having made available the document a little later than I had planned, but the document contained in document CRP-1 required a little bit more time in drafting than I had anticipated. I wanted to at this point share with you my thoughts on the document before you. It is my hope that all of you would have seen the document and studied it carefully. I want to say that the document in CRP-1 is a final attempt on the part of the Chair at putting forward a package that is balanced and that has overall balance, and therefore I try to make the least possible amendments in order to attain an overall balance in the document that is before you. I also should say that the document in CRP-1 does not aim to seek perfection, but it is a very careful attempt to put together a package of action-oriented outcomes that also at the same time preserves political balance. With regard to the action-oriented outcomes, I also want to say that the document in CRP-1 is a very substantive package with very action-oriented outcomes, and what is on the table in terms of outcomes is very substantive and it is within our grasp. As part of creating this carefully crafted document with overall balance, I included an additional section, Section H, entitled Concluding Observations, which is self-explanatory, but the idea of this additional section on Concluding Observations is to note how this open-ended working group has become a platform for the engagement of so many countries, so many delegations from different regions, and in that sense, the OEWG has become an exercise in multilateral work in the classic tradition of the United Nations, and I think this is something that we can all be proud of. Secondly, the Concluding Observations also is an attempt to recognize the fact that over the last two and a half years there has been a great deal of contributions made by states to the work of the OEWG, and therefore I thought that it would be important and relevant to capture the different working papers submitted by states and groups of states that have been made to the OEWG to outline their national and group positions, ideas, and initiatives on the issues under the mandate of the OEWG. That too, in my view, is an outcome that we can all collectively be proud of because if one looks at the list of working papers that have been made, there are about 81 of them, and many of you would see that your own contributions have been listed there, and I was very surprised to see so many of you having made your contributions. And in some ways, because the Second Annual Progress Report is almost like a mid-term stocktake because we are midway of this five-year process, the document in Annex D, which is a listing of the different working papers, gives a good overview to all of us and reminds us how much work has been done. And of course, in listing the different working papers, it is also my hope that that listing will contribute to creating the overall balance which is needed for us to adopt the Annual Progress Report by consensus. The third point I would want to make with regard to the CRP is that it is really important that all of us resist the temptation to reopen this fragile balance. Obviously, the document in CRP-1 is not perfect, and I have no doubts that many of you have very good ideas, but if we reopen this document, it is my assessment that there is a risk that we will upset the apple cart, so to speak, and it may be very difficult for us to put together something that could potentially command consensus. So I would therefore urge all of you to think very carefully about how you look at the CRP document. Now, I also want to say, this is my fourth point, that if delegations were to have any specific concerns about the document in CRP-1, then you would have the opportunity to put your views and statements, or even possibly reservations, as statements in explanation of vote, or explanation of decisions, I should say, we are not voting, after the adoption of the Second Annual Progress Report. This is what we did last year, when we adopted the First Annual Progress Report, that we offered all delegations the opportunity to make explanation of decisions, which was then compiled and distributed as an official document of the working group. So your statements and explanation of decisions after the adoption would be documented, circulated as an official document of the working group. And you also have the possibility of submitting your statements in writing after the adoption of this document in CRP-1. So to summarize, dear friends, what we have before us is a very fragile document, which I said the other day. It’s fragile because it attempts to bring together diverse positions, views, and even competing positions and competing visions about what we need to do. And to summarize also, what we have before us is a very substantive package of action-oriented outcomes that will contribute immensely to our agenda, which is ICT security, but also specifically in the area of building confidence, in the area of capacity building, which is an area that we have all recognized is very important, not only as an exercise in building confidence, but also in making available the capacity that is needed to so many countries, especially developing countries. My own sense is that an outcome by consensus is within grasp. It is not impossible to achieve. And if we were to achieve an outcome by adopting this report, then we will demonstrate that the OEWG as a confidence-building mechanism is working well. We will also, in the process, establish a very strong foundation for cooperation in subsequent years, including post-2025. So this is something that I invite all of you to reflect upon. And we also need to very carefully weigh the consequences of not being able to adopt this document, the consequences it might have in terms of what we lose or potentially stand to lose, what we will stand to lose in terms of the opportunities for building trust, building confidence, rebuilding trust, rebuilding confidence, putting in place a global POC directory, which is going to be a very significant outcome arising out of this package that is on the table. And the global POC directory in itself would give us the basis to do so many other things in the area of confidence-building measures, of course, but also capacity-building and rebuilding trust and confidence. So one has to weigh carefully the cost and benefit of adopting this document and leaving this meeting without an outcome. This, too, is something that I’d like to invite all of you to reflect very, very carefully. So at this point, I want to open the floor for comments and to get a sense of the room with regard to the document in CRP-1. The floor is now open. Thank you. Thank you, distinguished delegates. I’ve got quite a number of delegations. There are some of you who I believe have indicated that you might be speaking on behalf of a group. So with your permission, I’d like to invite those delegations an opportunity to take the floor. So we’ll start with Chile. You have the floor, please.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The Chilean delegation would like to say that we approve the text that you’ve proposed in that we have here a compromise, and not just seeking consensus but also moving forward with specific actions that will enable us to implement the framework that we have today, for example, the global PAC directory. As we have said on several previous occasions, this group is indeed a confidence-building measure in itself. Therefore, the approval of this report should be both a reflection and a commitment to this end. We are very grateful to you, your team, and the UN Secretariat for the work they’ve done and their endeavors to craft this document. We do realize that there’s still a road to follow, and we want to not lose ourselves, as you suggested. We think that we want to not lose ourselves in the trees but have a good, wood, fertile trees, and so we want indeed to seek consensus approving your document today. Thank you.

Thank you, Chile. The floor is now to the European Union, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. With the risk of becoming repetitive, but I’m sure you will allow me this repetition, I would like to, on behalf of all EU member states, thank you wholeheartedly for all your efforts guiding the discussions and steering us towards a consensus this week. And I’m happy with my current intervention that there’s likely no need to sweat about the three-minute rule here. Looking at the outcome of the discussions this week, we see before us a rich APR, an APR that includes a variety of views and proposals. Albeit with various levels of support, including from ourselves, the references to these proposals give every delegation room to further encourage discussion and reflection on how they, this proposal, will contribute to our common efforts to advance international peace, security, and stability in cyberspace. We will certainly make an effort to bring the debate forward, but moreover to contribute to concrete action, including through the cross-regional proposal for a Program of Action, advancing and adhering to the UN Framework for Stable State Behaviour. We might not like all that’s in this report, but we see value and strength in it for future work in the OEWG. We note, however, that the current draft is very delicate, and it does not include, as likely for other delegations, many elements that we would have liked to see in it. However, with all this in mind, answering to the request for flexibility and in full understanding of the importance of seeking consensus, in particular on these issues and in this moment of time where the need to strengthen multilateralism is greater than ever, the EU and its member states express their support to the conference room document as is, and are ready to not only adopt it by consensus right now, but moreover to continue the work with yourself and other delegations to take forward its implementation. Let me close, Mr. Chair, by congratulating you and your team for the work overall, as well as particularly this week, and by expressing my sincere hope that all delegations will join us in this. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, European Union, for your kind remarks, but perhaps at this stage, remarks of a congratulatory nature might be held in abeyance. We’ll see what happens at the end of our meeting, but the kind remarks are very much appreciated, Director, to me and my team. Thank you very much, European Union, for your statement. I give the floor now to Tonga, followed by Brazil.

Mr. Chair, the Tonga delegation would like to extend its sincere gratitude to you and the Secretariat for your round-the-clock work on this draft. As many have said before, while there are areas of improvement, we strongly believe that we should not make perfect the enemy of good. This text is a fair representation of the views in the room, and as such, Tonga is happy to support the text in its current format. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Tonga, Brazil, to be followed by South Africa.

Thank you, Chair. Mr. Chair, we take the floor this morning to reiterate Brazil’s appreciation for your work and that of your team, including the paths to consensus you just presented. We remain committed to this process and to having a report to consolidate the advances we reached this past 12 months in this OEWG, such as the POC directory. My delegation is ready to support this text. As suggested, Brazil will present a written statement to be annexed to the report regarding the section on international law. We look forward to our next cycle of broad, open discussions on all the proposals on the table. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Brazil.

Thank you, Chairperson. We recognize the time and effort that you and your team have invested in this document. The adoption of this Draft 2023 Annual Progress Report, contained in the CRP, would be an important step forward for countries interested in developing their cyber security infrastructure and maintaining an open, secure, stable, peaceful, interoperable, and accessible ICT environment. The text provides us with the two overarching confidence-building measures, the continued work of the OEWG, and the Points of Contact Directory. Discussion on the different formats for exchange of views between states on potential and emerging threats has shown us that we, the international community, can engage during difficult geopolitical times. We have endorsed the capacity-building principles agreed to in the first OEWG report in 2021. Our agreement on the way forward with the various stakeholders is a potential way forward in any future framework of regular institutional dialogue. And we thank the Chair for providing us with Section H of the report and Annex D, reflecting the broad participation of states in the OEWG at all levels. Chairperson, this process has always been about peaceful cooperation between states. We understand that delegations have expressed differing views on the nature of the framework for regular institutional dialogue. We can only underscore that not reaching consensus on the entire document would reverse the gains we have made in moving our discussion forward with concrete actions. It would also mean that trust and confidence between states is undermined. South Africa is not eager for further ripple effects in other areas of multilateral cooperation. South Africa has come to this meeting in good faith to ensure that the dialogue between states takes place under the auspices of the United Nations, a universal multilateral forum that promotes peaceful settlement of disputes. We are grateful for the opportunity to promote balanced perspectives on the cumulative and evolving framework on ICT security. Chairperson, we reiterate our commitment to work with the international community under the auspices of the United Nations to develop a framework that is inclusive, open, transparent, and effective. While we did not get everything we want and had to be flexible to accept proposals from other delegations so that we could move this process forward, South Africa stands ready to adopt the text as it is. I thank you.

Thank you very much, South Africa, for your statement. I give the floor now to Colombia.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We would once again like to express our gratitude to you for your endeavors, the work you’ve done to come up with an annual progress report, incorporating as much as possible the various proposals made, given the complexity of this task. We also welcome that there is Annex D, as you’ve indicated, reflecting the commitment and joint work shown by all delegations. We very much welcome the dedication you showed and that of your team. We trust that we will be able to recover some of the sleep you lost this week. As the Distinguished Ambassador of Costa Rica said, the perfect might stand in the way of what is possible. The text isn’t perfect because nothing is and because this is a process which is underway in construction. This is one more step forward. My delegation, like others, would have preferred the inclusion of additional language or some changes. However, we do realize that the text is one that achieves a delicate balance, and we fully support its adoption and we would urge all delegations to do likewise, considering how important it is to continue our dialogue, an action-oriented dialogue, which is vital on such an important issue for international peace and security. As most eloquently the Distinguished Delegate said from Vietnam yesterday, we congratulate you on your leadership. Lastly, I would like to say that we’re here today discussing this issue thanks to the initiative taken by states which tabled it and urged that it be considered. And we’ve managed to make progress over the last 20 years in our deliberations on specific issues and agree on a framework for responsible state behavior, thanks to the aid of all delegations and their will to continue with dialogue. Their understanding of the various points of view and to seek a common understanding. We join with what you indicated, sir, that is that this working group is indeed a confidence-building measure, and it has been recognized as such by several delegations, virtually all indeed. So the adoption of this annual progress report is an acknowledgment of the value of this working group as such. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Colombia, for your statement. Fiji, you have the floor, please.

Mbule Wanaka, Chair, and dear colleagues, Chair, Fiji would like to thank you, the Secretariat, as well as all delegations that are here today for their contributions. At the outset, Chair, we reaffirm our commitment and our support to you and to the work of the OEWG. Chair, you mentioned last night that once you have circulated the document, you would then pass the baton of responsibility to us member states. You also provided guidance earlier this week that in thinking about the future, we must not jeopardize the ripe fruits that can be harvested in the present. Chair, we have been actively listening, contributing to the discussions, and are excited about the ripe fruits that we have before us and which we can all enjoy and benefit from. With that being said, Chair, we would have liked to see progress in other areas that have also garnered a lot of support over the past year. However, we understand that this journey that we’re all on is a journey of multiple small steps. We hope to continue taking these small steps in the right direction and we look forward to building on our report in the future sessions. We also look forward to the dedicated inter-sessional meetings on existing and potential threats to the security and the use of ICTs, on how international law applies in the use of ICTs, on the Program of Action, and the dedicated global roundtable. We also look forward to the POC. Chair, if we hope to turn the tide on these global cyber incidents, continue to build confidence and trust among all states, we need to do the most with the ripened fruits that we can harvest at this meeting. It is in this light, Chair, that we would like to demonstrate our commitment and our support to you by supporting the text as it is. Vinaka vakalevu and thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much, Fiji, for your statement. India, please, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. Let me start by extending my delegation’s heartfelt appreciation to you, Mr. Chair, and to your exceptional team for the hard work put in and skill in drafting this very fragile draft Annual Progress Report. We understand compiling the APR is an extremely complex task, considering the diverse discussions that have been taking place in this working group. A very promising observation that we can make of this working group has been the increasing participation of Member States in this process. The number of statements from small and developing countries has increased substantially since the first substantive session in December 2021. In fact, we were thrilled to see this conference room packed with delegates on day one of this ongoing session. What it implies is that a very good number of Member States, including from developing countries, view this process as a key forum to express their thoughts and see how the matrix of opinions on various OEWG mandate topics is taking place. Mr. Chair, we have indeed seen the discussions progressing in a concrete manner. Many delegations have traveled from their capitals and have put in a lot of work on the draft APR. We have had a rich discussion on all the elements of the draft APR, and what we have before us is a very substantive, action-oriented report. Having said that, we also sincerely appreciate the limitations consensus puts on the language that goes into our annual progress report. A consensus report is not a perfect report, but a consensus report is a step towards progress, irrespective of how big or small that step is. A consensus report is a lucky coin in our pockets to keep our hopes alive for the forthcoming sessions of the OEWG. India would like to take this lucky coin back to our capital. I strongly believe many delegations here would like to do the same. We request all the delegations to show flexibility while fully recognizing that some of our ideas, proposals, or texts are not reflected the way that others would like them to be. We welcome the broad objectives that the APR aims to fulfill and suggest our next steps for the 6th, 7th, and 8th substantive sessions. We extend our sincere appreciation to the Chair and to all the delegations who would like to join us in giving their support to this conference room paper. Mr. Chair, we welcome the APR and are ready to adopt it as it is, as the Working Group’s second annual progress report. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, India, for your statement. Ecuador, please, you have the floor.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Ecuador reiterates the position that we have held during this fifth session, which has been consistent with the work that you have guided over this year, aiming at real actions within the framework of our mandate. We welcome and thank you for your endeavors to come up with a zero document for the second APR, the two documents, and lastly a conference room paper, which in the view of my delegation may be adopted by consensus today. Ecuador, therefore, is ready to adopt this. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Ecuador, Malaysia, please.

Thank you, Chair. Malaysia expresses its appreciation to you and your team for your continued efforts on the draft second APR. We are mindful of the delicate balance which you have sought to strike, taking into account competing views expressed by Member States on particular issues. On the whole, Malaysia would like to join the others in supporting the adoption of the latest draft. We share your view, Chair, that this text is indeed a substantive, action-oriented package which sets out a solid basis for our work of this OEWG in the year ahead. Malaysia believes the adoption of the second APR is vital in ensuring continuity in the OEWG’s work across its mandate, through future substantive sessions as well as inter-sessional work. The OEWG has demonstrated the salience of multilateralism in the field of critical importance, particularly in times of heightened international tensions. As you have reminded us, Chair, we should carefully consider the implications for all Member States in the event we do not have a second APR. Delegations have repeatedly affirmed that the OEWG is itself a vital confidence-building measure. It would not inspire confidence if we cannot collectively adopt an APR to ensure sustained progress in our work. We hope all delegations will continue to engage constructively in this final phase of our present session to enable the adoption of the second APR by consensus. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Malaysia, for your statement. Egypt, you have the floor, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me also join other delegations in expressing our appreciation to you, your team, and the Secretariat for your efforts throughout this process and for developing this CRP version of the Second Annual Progress Report. I’ll be very succinct, as we underscore the importance of adopting a Second Annual Progress Report that keeps the momentum going of the OEWG and represents a step towards a successful conclusion of the OEWG’s work in 2025, which is, again, the only multilateral process tackling ICT-related issues under the UN auspices. We believe that there is room for improvement in future outcomes of the group. Moreover, we believe that the CRP version of the Second Annual Progress Report is not perfect and might not be addressing our full ambitions. However, we understand the challenges of elaborating a consensual outcome report, particularly during such an ongoing geopolitical situation. That, of course, requires, as we stated yesterday, compromises, collective efforts, and political will. In this spirit, we stand ready to join the consensus on this text and look forward to all delegations exercising maximum flexibility to achieve that. Thank you.

Thank you, Egypt. Bangladesh, you have the floor, please.

Mr. Chair, distinguished colleagues, good morning. My delegation joins others in expressing our heartfelt appreciation to the Chair and his team for presenting the latest version of the APR that requires a lot of hard work and dedication. Though my delegation is not entirely happy with the draft, as many of our proposals and language suggestions are not reflected, we, however, think that the APR we have before us adeptly navigates a delicate balance of diverse views, priorities, and competing positions that deserves our full support. Mr. Chair, as we move forward in our deliberations, let us be guided by the principle of mutual respect, openness, and flexibility in order to achieve the common good that interests all nations. Bangladesh firmly believes that unity and cooperation are the cornerstones of progress. My delegation expects that every delegation would rise above differences and join hands in adopting the annual progress report by consensus. By doing so, we demonstrate our commitment to dialogue, understanding, and compromise, which are essential elements for multilateralism. Distinguished delegates, let us seize this moment to set aside our divergent positions and work towards consolidating the gains made thus far and move forward with strong footing, harmonious, and collaborative decisions. Together, we can make a difference, and together, we can shape a brighter future for our generations to come. My delegation will support the APR as it stands now. I thank you.

Thank you for your statement, Bangladesh. Russian Federation, please.

Mr. Chairman, dear colleagues, we thank Chairman Burhan Gafoor for his tireless efforts on this draft annual progress report of the Open-Ended Working Group on security in the field of the use of ICTs. We note the attempts to improve certain parts of the report. At the same time, we must note with regret that the key concerns of the Russian Federation and a number of other states, which were expressed in the joint statement of the group of like-minded states on July 27th, have not been taken into account. The draft report continues to contain serious imbalances in favor of the implementation of rules, norms, and principles for responsible state behavior at the expense of a no less important priority area. Mr. Chairman, the issue here is not about preferences. It is about the mandate of the Open-Ended Working Group, which, as we recall, is contained in GA resolution 75-240 and is backed by the consensus of all UN member states in resolution 76-19. Attempts to rewrite and distort the mandates to fit the interests of a narrow group of states are categorically unacceptable. Moreover, the main part of the report continues to lack any mention of the collective initiative of a number of states, namely a concept for a UN convention on international information security, which was submitted to the OEWG and introduced as an official document of the 77th session of the UN General Assembly. Mr. Chairman, we are worried about the trend of eroding the OEWG mandate through issues that are not part of the group’s mandate. The OEWG is mandated to discuss a range of security issues in the use of ICTs, and on many of those issues, we are far from consensus, as discussions in recent days have shown. But instead of focusing on mutually acceptable solutions to these, we are discussing interaction with non-state subjects, human rights, and gender issues. All of this is hardly relevant to security in the use of ICTs in the work of the group. Mr. Chairman, the document in its current form, unfortunately, cannot serve as the basis for consensus. Nonetheless, we believe that it is possible to salvage this document. We propose continuing our work after lunch. We would also like to propose the following very targeted amendment to the text of the draft report. This is supported by the delegations of Belarus, Burundi, Nicaragua, Iran, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and China. Amendment 23B: We suggest changing the language to a direct quote from UNGA Resolution 76-19, which reads as, quote, “States reaffirmed that voluntary, non-binding norms of responsible state behavior can reduce risks to international peace, security, and stability, and do not seek to limit or prohibit action that is otherwise consistent with international law, but nonetheless to set standards for responsible state behavior, while also affirming that given the unique attributes of information and communications technologies, additional norms could be developed over time and separately, noting the possibility of future elaboration of additional binding obligations, if appropriate.” In paragraph 27, we suggest adding, “to further discuss the development and implementation of rules, norms, and principles.” And at the end of paragraph 32, we suggest adding a sentence which reads as, “In this regard, a concept of a UN convention was presented.” Mr. Chair, the group of like-minded states is still disappointed by the inclusion of language on human rights, international humanitarian law, as well as the overemphasis on gender issues, despite the clear disagreement of like-minded delegations. Such contentious topics should not have been incorporated without achieving a consensus. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you very much. Russian Federation, could I invite you to read again the list of countries who are putting forward these amendments you have suggested? I wanted to be sure I have the complete list. Thank you, Russian Federation.

Yes, Mr. Chairman. The amendments that I just voiced are supported by the delegations of Belarus, Burundi, Nicaragua, Iran, the Sudan, Syria, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Venezuela, and China.

Thank you, Russian Federation. We’ll continue with the speaker’s list. I give the floor now to Israel, to be followed by Estonia. Israel, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning to all delegations. As we have arrived to Friday, I’d like to wish all of us Shabbat Shalom. Mr. Chair, the Israeli delegation joins others in our best wishes to express also our gratitude and commend you personally, together with your excellent hard-working team and Secretariat, for your hard work and relentless efforts leading us through the Open-Ended Working Group process and especially in crafting this final, very challenging, second annual progress report. It is with some disappointment we say that some of our reservations still remain unanswered and unfortunately not all our concerns were fully addressed in the final version of this OEWG report. However, in the spirit of consensus, wishing to express our positive will and in light of the constructive cooperation presented through the last few days by so many delegations, we understand the need for a certain degree of flexibility. Israel stands ready to join other delegations and support this report as it stands now. We can assure you that the Israeli delegation remains committed as you to working with other states and to continue to present a constructive and positive approach in our joint work to advance the dialogue in the framework of the Open-Ended Working Group. Mr. Chair, as we are here today to speak also about consensus, we must at this point also reiterate our position. Throughout this process, we have persistently made clear that it is imperative that all decisions on a regular institutional dialogue, whether in the context of a Program of Action or any other mechanism, be made based on consensus, applied both to the negotiation processes as well as to the decision-making process within it, be it in relation to substantive matters or procedural ones. Mr. Chair, in the spirit of flexibility, we are willing to accept the wording principle of consensus as were put in Para 56, and we understand them to reflect the application of consensus to both the procedural matters and substantive matters alike. And to be put in practice in the next phases of our deliberations on the creation of any future regular institutional dialogue, including a Program of Action. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Israel, for your statement. Estonia to be followed by Indonesia.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and special thanks to you and your team. I want to emphasize also your team here because the work that you have been doing has been tremendous. In order to join the consensus, and in a slightly bashful manner, let me refer to Estonia’s support for the current text with an example that is quite well known from our previous meetings. This report text is a well-blended smoothie, with not a perfect but an acceptable taste, and I do believe that we will all need this nutrition to take us to our further work because we have many valuable actions to take upon. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much, Estonia, for your statement and also for reminding me about the reference to a smoothie, which is beginning to make me a little hungry. A smoothie is shaken, a smoothie is stirred, a smoothie is put under immense pressure and rotated at great speed. We’ve gone through some of that pressure and being shaken and stirred, and I guess the question is, is the smoothie smooth enough? Let’s see, we have a list of speakers, and I’d like to listen to the list of speakers, and then I’ll offer some comments. Indonesia, please, followed by Argentina.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation wishes to once again convey our appreciation to you and your team for the hard work in preparing the CRP version of the second APR. Throughout this week, we have heard the positions of each delegation, and at this point, I believe that we have come to fully understand all the diverse positions. For us, the CRP that we have before us presents the balance that we all seek to achieve in this process, given the circumstances. What we all must strive for is to ensure that this document is adopted to carry forward the momentum for us to sustain this single-track, state-led, and action-oriented process that is open and inclusive. Substantively, my delegation is pleased and ready to support the CRP. The Capacity Building Section provides a robust and substantive cooperation that will be very beneficial for developing countries. The CBM Section helps outline and deliver the one tangible outcome that we anticipate from this process, in the form of the Global POC Directory. Under Rules and Norms, as well as the International Law Section, I believe that the current text and references throughout the sections have adequately addressed the concerns of parties. For us, it is important that we keep the possibilities open between implementing new norms and developing new norms, including a legally binding treaty. The content of the Regular Institutional Dialogue has also presented a balanced perspective that will ensure the sustainability of our effort to understand and better regulate cyberspace in the context of international security. And these are the big pictures of which we do not want to miss. As I believe that we all share the same views that strengthening our collective endeavor in regulating cyberspace is crucial, therefore I wish to appeal to delegations to exercise their utmost flexibility in approaching this document. It is essential that we continue to explore common ground, even if it requires some compromise from our respective positions. Let us reaffirm our commitment to the principle of consensus building and foster an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. And it is through these efforts and willingness to find common solutions that we are able to adopt the second APR through consensus. Let me reiterate once again that my delegation stands ready to extend our full support to the Chair and his dedicated team to facilitate this process. I thank you.

Thank you very much, Indonesia. Argentina, to be followed by the Philippines.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Over the last year, we’ve worked constructively on the six pillars of the group in order to achieve a real outcome in certain areas with immediate effects, such as the POC global directory and the building of capacities. These are vital issues for Argentina, and as much as the measures here would enable us to participate in cyberspace in a more secure fashion, they would also contribute to reducing the digital gap in a sustainable and effective fashion. We do realize that it’s been extremely difficult to arrive at this document, and we are grateful to you and your team, echoing what all delegations have said. The text, although it’s not perfect, does reflect real achievements and provides us with a good basis for the coming year’s work. So for Argentina, it’s very important to have an annual progress report this year, and in this way, we’ve endeavored to make constructive contributions over the last few months. We today believe that we should support this document, and in this spirit of consensus, Argentina is ready to accept the text as it has been circulated to it. We urge all delegations to show flexibility in order to achieve our aim. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Argentina. Philippines to be followed by Costa Rica.

Mr. Chair, the Philippines would like to extend its full support to the Chair of the Open-Ended Working Group in appeal for the consensual adoption of the latest draft of the Second Annual Progress Report. We understand that negotiations are complex, and meeting all the demands of Member States is an impossible task. As acknowledged by other States, we believe that the Chair has demonstrated unwavering dedication in capturing and delicately balancing the positions of all participating Member States. Moreover, we express our gratitude for Kenya’s flexibility regarding their proposal on a threats repository. While our delegation was prepared to support and push for this proposal, we are willing to compromise and endorse the current draft in the spirit of cooperation and flexibility. Throughout the process, we have observed the Chair’s meticulous approach and delicate balance in addressing contentious paragraphs related to norms, international law, and regular institutional dialogue. We sincerely hope that all delegations can exhibit their utmost flexibility and agree to the adoption of the current draft report. This would allow us to continue our collaborative efforts, deliberating on other points during our forthcoming sessions and inter-sessional meetings. It is essential to emphasize that our respective national and group positions are still well reflected in the document. As indicated in the conclusion, all our working papers and submissions are comprehensively captured in Annex D. As this meeting draws to a close, we fervently hope for a positive outcome with a consensual adoption of the Second Annual Progress Report. Let us build upon the achievements of the first report and remain committed to advancing it further through our future meetings. Together, we can continue fostering meaningful progress towards our shared goals. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Philippines, Costa Rica, to be followed by Iraq.

Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Costa Rica’s position is already well known, so I shall be brief. Costa Rica thanks you for the work you’ve done and all the efforts to achieve a consensus. We believe that under your leadership we are very close to coming safely to port. As we said yesterday, we believe the document is a tool which enables us to acknowledge the work that we’ve done and also allows us to continue working over forthcoming sessions. In particular, this document helps us to make progress on real issues such as the establishment of the POC directory. The adoption of this document would in itself be one more confidence-building measure. So, bearing this in mind, Costa Rica, feeling a great sense of responsibility here, joins with those delegations who have spoken previously, in voicing our support for the document. We are ready to approve it as it stands, as in session document CRP1. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Costa Rica, for your statement. Iraq, to be followed by Mexico.

Thank you, Mr. President. At the outset, we would like to express our thanks and appreciation for the efforts you have made and the patience you have exhibited, in addition to the flexibility and transparency you have exhibited, which have previously resulted in the adoption of several positive results, including the adoption of the first annual progress report with consensus. I also need to express my thanks for your efforts throughout the session. The adoption of the annual progress report in CRP-1 and the addition of the two annexes is also a positive addition, especially as they represent contributions on different states’ parts, and these contributions and ideas and opinions included in the annexes can be benefited from. This means that none of these will be neglected and that they can be built upon in future sessions. Mr. President, you are all well aware of the vital importance and the responsibility upon our shoulders here in the OEWG to have effective solutions to fight the looming dangers that are increasing day by day and that differ in different states. This is because developed countries have the expertise, knowledge, and resources that are necessary on the technical and legislative levels to face these threats. Nevertheless, there are other countries that do not have such expertise and know-how, and these threats target these countries not on a daily basis but moment by moment. This is why such countries look up to this OEWG and seek its success. Mr. President, there are several paragraphs that clearly have consensus and other ones that are controversial. But if we cannot have everything, then we should not choose to have nothing. Therefore, it is crucially important to move forward to adopt an annual progress report that addresses the challenges different countries are facing in this arena. Iraq has called time and again the different member states to show sufficient flexibility to achieve the aspired results of this working group and to move forward with concrete steps and focus furthermore on the Global Point of Contact Directory, which is considered one of the key cornerstones of confidence-building measures among states, especially in light of the increasing risks and threats. Our measures need to meet or exceed these threats, especially seeing as we are at the precipice of a major resolution in the sector of information and communications technology, which is artificial intelligence. The contribution, therefore, of stakeholders is also adding meaningful value to the group. In conclusion, we would like to express our support for the adoption of the annual progress report with consensus as it stands. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, Iraq, for your statement. Mexico to be followed by the Netherlands. Mexico, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mexico wishes to pay tribute to your leadership and commitment in order to bring forward, in a balanced fashion, the critical elements expressed by delegations. The text has a holistic approach and is based on particular requirements given the construction of agreements in various areas that are of interest to delegations, including capacity building. A specific step forward when it comes to CBMs, we would refer particularly here to the establishment of the directory of POCs. Moreover, this prepares the way forward to continue our discussions on the proposals submitted as we come to the next sessions. As we said yesterday afternoon, for Mexico, it’s clear that we’re halfway in a process. This will not be the final report of the group, but we have to reflect agreements reached at this point of work. For Mexico, it’s clear that we do have work ahead to arrive at common understandings that will lead to real outcomes. To this end, we wish to say once again that we are willing to continue to discuss matters with delegations on this. My delegation joins with those countries which spoke previously in order to lend our support to the text you’ve submitted to us. We call upon delegations to consider this document in a holistic manner and agree to its adoption by consensus. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mexico. Netherlands, to be followed by France.

Thank you, Chair. The Netherlands aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union and is also ready to join the consensus on this annual progress report. I join other delegations in thanking you and your team for all your work in preparing this document in such little time, no small feat. Chair, the text before us is far from perfect. Like other delegations, there are many elements that a delegation would have liked to see differently. The text contains a number of careful compromises that we can accept in a spirit of consensus and with a view to upholding and promoting effective multilateralism. While far from perfect, we believe the text constitutes significant progress, covering new elements and their threats, making a next step in the establishment of the POC Directory, strengthening capacity building, and setting us up for further dedicated discussions on regular institutional dialogue, all of which reflect significant contributions and broad engagement of member states in this process. This APR further advances the normative framework for responsible state behavior and reinforces the rules-based international order. Harnessing progress and making incremental steps as we are doing in this report is a task that we need to deliver on. In that spirit, we support this fragile and delicate balance that you, Chair, have so carefully crafted. We hope other delegations can support this text, too, and that we all walk away equally unhappy and equally exhausted. Finally, Chair, let me reiterate my delegation’s deep appreciation to you and your team for your tireless efforts and able leadership in crafting this document and hopefully shepherding us one year further into this important process. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Netherlands, for your statement. France to be followed by Vanuatu. France, please.

Mr. Chairman, like many other delegations, we would like to thank you and your team for your efforts throughout this week and the latest draft report that you disseminated overnight. My delegation believes that this document represents an imperfect compromise, but an acceptable one in its current form. We therefore stand ready to join the consensus. Mr. Chairman, since 2021, France has committed to participate in the work of this group in an active and constructive manner in order to achieve concrete progress in the development and implementation of an agreed normative framework. It is in this spirit that we participated in the discussions on this Annual Progress Report. We welcome the fact that this report contains tangible results such as a point of contact directory, an intergovernmental one. We look forward to further in-depth discussion on the applications of international law with regard to the use of ICT and the implementation of norms of responsible behavior. We would also like to stress that the support for this report required flexibility and a spirit of compromise on our part on a number of key points, whether that be the section on international law or the section on regular institutional dialogue. We hope that the roadmap envisaged by this new report will allow us to have even deeper discussions on the normative framework and support our efforts for its implementation. We also hope that this will reduce the digital fracture and strengthen our comprehensive security. Inclusive discussions during the next formal meetings and intersessional meetings on a future Program of Action will in this regard be a crucial step. Thank you.

I thank the representative of France, and I now give the floor to Van Aert. You have the floor, sir. Madame.

The Republic of Vanuatu is grateful to you and your team for your dedication in producing the best possible draft text. While there are some sections that could probably be strengthened, we do believe that this is the best possible report at this stage. Vanuatu echoes the statements made by our fellow Pacific Island states, Tonga, Fiji, and a few other states with similar gratitude. With that, I am sure you can appreciate the 48 hours it will take me to travel back home to Vanuatu. So, in the effort of keeping our intervention short, please be assured of Vanuatu’s support for this draft text. Thank you, Tomas.

Thank you very much, Vanuatu. I think it’s a fair point that many of us have traveled great distances, and I think that too is an achievement that we can be proud of, that we have representatives from very small countries, small island developing states, least developed countries, and countries from around the world. I think this is a richness that is a tribute to what we have created here in this Open-Ended Working Group. And I thank all of you who have flown from far distances. Forty-eight hours is indeed very daunting, and I thank all of you for being here and for being so committed to this process. We’ll continue with the list of speakers. It’s my intention to give as many people an opportunity to speak and express their views. So we now have Uruguay to be followed by El Salvador. Uruguay, you have the floor, please. Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We attach great value to the work that you and your team have done during this session. We know how hard you have striven, and we would like to express our deep gratitude. As we said at the beginning of this session of the Working Group, in previous sections, we constructively support what you’ve done on making progress in issues related to cyberspace and the multilateral arena. The document is not perfect. We would have liked to see some additions in certain sections. However, we are very pleased that many of our national proposals and other proposals made together with other countries have indeed been taken into account. For example, those on capacity building, confidence-building measures, and international law. Uruguay therefore supports the way forward, the consensus that you’ve presented to us, and we therefore wish to agree to the adoption of the report that you’ve submitted. As we said on several occasions this week, many occasions, this text is just one further step in the work of this group. It’s not a final outcome document, not at all. And we still have many issues upon which to agree and to discuss. But we can make progress, and therefore I join with other delegations who call for us all to be flexible so that we can achieve the consensus to which we all aspire so much. Thank you.

Thank you, Uruguay. El Salvador to be followed by Mauritius. El Salvador, please.

Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you for all you’ve done, for the work from your team, the support from the Secretariat, the UNODA. Salvador is ready to approve this version of the document. We agree with you in that this constitutes a fragile balance of positions. My country has played an active part in the process because we believe in it, and we welcome to see certain progress such as the global PSC, CBMs, and capacity building. We continue, we shall continue to make constructive contributions to come up with the language that we believe to be important looking at real and potential threats and international law. We urge all delegations to display the greatest possible flexibility in order to achieve adoption by consensus. Thank you.

Thank you very much. El Salvador, Mauritius, to be followed by the United States. Mauritius, please.

Chair, my delegation is supportive of this draft. Information security is an important area, and we believe that the work done so far is commendable and should not go in vain. The outcome of the OEWG will bring numerous benefits in this field. We would like to thank you for the effort and time put in to reach this draft. In saying so, Mercia wishes to extend its support and commitment in reaching a consensus in adopting the second version of this APR. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mauritius. United States, to be followed by Paraguay.

Chair, first, I want to express my thanks to you and your team for your efforts this week and throughout the year. We appreciate your tireless work to find consensus. The latest text you distributed was never going to be loved. That is the nature of compromise and what we do here at the UN. Indeed, the United States is disappointed to see the changes to the norms section, in particular the removal of hard-fought consensus language in favor of prominent placement of non-consensus text from the mandate, as well as the weakening of language supporting more focused discussion on the implementation of the consensus norms. As our discussions over the last year demonstrated, we fully expect our conversations in the next year to dig deeper on how states should be implementing their commitments to the framework, particularly on norms, and we look forward to those discussions. In addition, we believe the text should reflect the fact that, while a very small minority of states called for new legally binding obligations, many others, if not the majority, expressed the desire to further explore how existing international law applies in cyberspace, and believe discussions of new obligations to be premature. The number and range of states that took the floor to share their views on international law over the past year shows that states need and want to talk more about international law and would benefit from further in-depth discussion of how international law guides state behavior in cyberspace and provides accountability for states that fail to abide by their existing international obligations. We are disappointed that the text does not fully reflect the success we have had this year in facilitating these discussions, which we look forward to continuing in future meetings. Finally, we are disappointed that repeated requests by states, including Estonia, Uruguay, Colombia, El Salvador, and Australia, to include a complete reference to Article 33 and Chapter 6 of the Charter with respect to peaceful settlement were ignored. There is longstanding consensus that the Charter in its entirety applies in cyberspace, and we do not understand why this consensus is not reflected in the APR. Despite these concerns, the United States is prepared to join consensus on this text because we recognize that this APR as a whole can guide the group towards progress in the next year, particularly regarding the launch of the POC Directory, the implementation of the consensus framework that guides all our work, and regarding the proposed Program of Action. The United States recognizes that the Chair has made every effort to craft a document that, in his assessment, stands the best chance of gaining consensus. We also recognize the value to all of us in seeking consensus in the face of particularly difficult geopolitical times, and thus are willing to join the voices in support of this final draft as is in order to adopt it by consensus. Let me underscore that we are prepared to adopt the report as is. If the text is reopened, we will have many edits to propose, in particular, given the comments we’ve heard this year from the Russian Federation implying outrageously that there could be no accountability until a lengthy treaty process is concluded. It would be necessary to affirm that existing international law guides state behavior, reaffirm that the law of state responsibility applies and provides accountability for states who violate their obligations, and also reflect that international humanitarian law, including its principles of humanity, proportionality, and distinction, apply in cyberspace. At this point in our negotiations this week, we are not convinced a reopening of this text would result in an improved product. On the contrary, it would likely unravel all the progress we’ve made. Chair, we are in your hands. Thank you.

Thank you very much, United States. I give the floor now to Paraguay, to be followed by Peru.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Paraguay wishes to thank you and your team for the dedication you’ve shown in this session, and we very much appreciate your efforts in endeavoring to recognize the various points of view and achieve a balance in this document. Therefore, we agree with what several delegations have said, and we recognize that CRP1 does provide a basis for us to continue to build further in the future. Therefore, my delegation joins with the consensus. However, I do wish to underscore that it is vital to continue to exchange points of view in the future on issues such as capacity building in order to reduce the digital divide affecting us today. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Paraguay. Peru, to be followed by Kenya.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Peru firstly wishes to thank you and your team for the work you’ve carried out in order to conclude this fifth substantive session of the OEWG on security and use of ICTs. The CRP-1 is a balanced document which brings together the positions of various countries and elements on the basis of work, looking at a PR-1 and the contributions of delegations. We therefore support this document. It will certainly enable us to continue to make progress in security and use of ICTs. We trust that it will be possible to arrive at a document based on consensus. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Peru. Kenya, to be followed by the Dominican Republic.

Mr. Chair, Kenya joins in commending you and your team for your tireless efforts in ensuring a substantive and forward-looking APR. We are ready to support the current version. Annex D, in particular, is indeed a factual representation of Member States’ initiatives within the OEWG. As you have indicated, Chair, this is integral to capture the overall and balanced discussions of this OEWG, and critical in cooperation and capacity building efforts going forward. We support its inclusion in its entirety. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Kenya. Dominican Republic, to be followed by Germany.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The delegation of the Dominican Republic wishes to join with many other delegations in once again voicing our congratulations and thanks to you and your team for maintaining the delicate balance in this second annual report. We are aware that it’s far from being perfect and that there’s a wish list from all delegations. However, knowing that, like all delegations, or at least the great majority, we are unhappy with it, we do recognize that its current wording does provide us with an opportunity to continue building upon it in future sessions of this committee so that we can gradually achieve what we all desire. We support the content of AAC 292-2023-0.1 as it stands, and we do not wish to reopen the document to incorporate delegations, other delegations who we as well want to see. We are willing to be flexible in order to achieve consensus. We agree with all delegations that we should adopt this by consensus in order to have a consensus adoption for the benefit of all. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Dominican Republic. Germany, to be followed by Malawi.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Germany recognizes the overall balance of the report and is ready for adoption. Germany would have liked to see considerably more substance in the sections on threats and international law in particular. But we also see that this report has considerable substance. Capacity building is being taken to an operational level with a whole set of concrete activities, which are outlined by the report. We are also about to agree to start a new form of cooperation with the establishment of the POC directory as a first CBM. CBMs have been elaborated through many years of UN working groups. This group is now about to take the first step towards actually implementing these CBMs. This is a significant step at a time when cyberspace is often described as a zero-trust environment and when substantial differences remain in this group on key topics of our agenda. Germany is mindful of the careful balance this report seeks to strike. This balance should not be touched by inserting changes that might unsettle this balance. Germany invites the Russian Federation and their like-minded group of states to consider that the amendments that have been put forward at this very late hour touch on points that are already included in substance in this report, though not in the exact wording and the exact terms that the Russian Federation would like to see. This is a situation where showing flexibility for wording and terminology would be commendable in the spirit of consensus to allow this group to conclude its work and to pay tribute to the long distance we have traveled together. Thank you.

Thank you. Germany, Malawi, to be followed by Switzerland.

Thank you, Chair. As we are taking the floor for the first time, we commend you and your team for the good work done to this point. We commend the dedication and commitment that has gone into this work. We wish to affirm our unwavering commitment and full support to the essential work of the OEWG. We firmly believe that through collective efforts and cooperation, we can effectively address the challenges before us and make progress towards our shared goals. While we acknowledge that the current text might not be perfect and might not entirely align with the views of every participant, we believe it is a fair balance of the diverse perspectives presented during the deliberations. We are quite happy with the inclusion of capacity building and confidence-building measures. It would therefore be very remiss of me not to express gratitude to the UK and the other sponsors of the Women in Cyber Fellowship for making it possible for some of us to be part of these crucial cyber conversations. With this in mind, and in the spirit of concessions, we proudly stand alongside Tonga, South Africa, Colombia, Fiji, Malaysia, and others in expressing our readiness to support the adoption of this text as it stands as the second APR report of the OEWG. Once again, we extend our gratitude to you, Chair, and to the rest of your team. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Malawi, for your statement. Switzerland, to be followed by the Republic of Korea.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In joining other delegations, I would like to thank you, Chair, and your team for all the efforts and leadership as you guided us through this week and helped bridge the differences in our positions. The report is not perfect, as others have stated before, but it strikes a delicate balance. The report contains elements that are problematic from our point of view, and several of the points that are important to us were not included. We would, for example, have liked to see a more ambitious international law section that reflects the focused discussions and progress we have made in this group. But, and this is crucial, the report also reflects the great and active engagement of so many Member States in the formal sessions and informal meetings of this group. NXT is proof of this, and we should harness the progress made. In the spirit of compromise, Switzerland therefore supports the report in its current form and welcomes it as a solid basis for the future work of this OEWG. So let’s not jeopardize the progress we have made and the work of this group. The overwhelming number of delegations that took the floor today showed this flexibility. We therefore call on all delegations to show flexibility and to adopt this report, which will allow us to continue working constructively together in the upcoming sessions. Thank you.

Thank you. Switzerland, Republic of Korea, to be followed by Croatia.

Thank you, Chair. The Republic of Korea would also like to express its sincere thanks to you and your team and the Secretariat for preparing CRP-1. We appreciate your leadership and efforts to balance the text, which indeed must have been a difficult task. We still believe that the revised text may further be improved with the proposed amendments that we have made or supported. But in considering the importance of this body producing a consensual outcome and the achievements we have made collectively, notably the establishment of the global point of contacts and the initial list of voluntary global confidence-building measures, the Republic of Korea is ready to support the CRP as presented. Having said that, Mr. Chair, allow me to make a brief comment on the threat section of the document. As we all recognize, the ICT environment is rapidly changing, and new types of threats are emerging constantly. So we believe it is important for this working group to be able to identify and address these new threats in our deliberation. In this regard, we believe that this document would be more relevant and impactful if it had incorporated the topic of cryptocurrency theft in the text. My delegation would like to continue our discussion on this important issue in future cycles of meetings of the OEWG. In closing, let me once again express our sincere gratitude to you and your team for bringing us the document that we believe deserves consensual support. I thank you.

Thank you very much, Republic of Korea. Croatia, to be followed by Singapore.

Thank you, Chair. You and your whole team and the Secretariat deserve applause for your hard work, long hours, and dedication to the process. But you also deserve acknowledgment by Tom Cruise for accomplishing a mission impossible and providing us with a good and carefully balanced annual progress report. Croatia aligns itself with the intervention of the European Union and agrees that we need to preserve a fragile compromise where everyone is equally happy or, how we’d call it last year, UN-happy. We welcome an action-oriented document with clear guidelines for our future work, especially in the area of capacity building, and look forward to future discussions on different proposals which will strengthen confidence building and trust among states. We understand that not all amendments could be included in the text, but we can show flexibility and hope that other states will do the same, because the final goal, a balanced APR that includes concrete steps such as the POC directory, is also to showcase how states accurately reflect global developments and display readiness to find sustainable solutions, as well as make progress on important topics. With our deepest appreciation to you and your team, but also to all colleagues in the room and in capitals, for their engagement and readiness to advance peace, security, and stability in cyberspace, we join numerous states in supporting the text as it is. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Croatia, for your statement. You’re right that this is Mission Impossible. Alas, I’m no Tom Cruise, neither am I a maverick, and all the top guns are on the other side of the podium. So this is really Mission Impossible times two. But let’s continue to hear each other. A list of speakers, and we’ll continue with that. Singapore, to be followed by Botswana.

Chair, thank you. We would like to thank you and your team and Secretariat for your hard work and efforts in putting together the final draft of the second APR. We appreciate the challenge and understand that you have, to your best efforts, reflected the views of Member States in this final draft of the second APR in a balanced manner. While Singapore would have liked to see the inclusion of language on threats related to developments in technology, such as quantum computing and artificial intelligence, we understand that not all proposals and initiatives can be taken in. In the spirit of consensus, we are prepared to show flexibility. We believe that the draft before us is balanced and substantial enough to allow us to advance discussions on responsible behaviour in cyberspace, and will serve as a useful roadmap for our future work. This is important. We are ready to support the conference room document text as is, and we look forward to the APR being adopted by consensus. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much, Singapore, for your statement. Botswana to be followed by Ghana. Botswana.

Thank you, Chair. Botswana reinforces its appreciation for the stellar work that you and your team are doing in order to get the report to a consensus. We appreciate that you and your team have worked tirelessly to consolidate the competing positions and the competing visions to get to this document. We agree that it is a substantive package of the outcomes of our discussions for the past year and a good basis for the continued discussions of the upcoming sessions. Botswana acknowledges that the report as revised may not reflect all proposals as were made by States individually and in groups, but we, however, find that the report is reflective of a delicate balance of opinion and that it is good enough to enable the achievement of a consensus. Mr. Chair, Botswana takes the floor to offer her firm support to the current version of the report as is, and it is our hope that other delegations follow in the same spirit. Thank you, Chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Botswana. Ghana, to be followed by Belgium.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for giving me the floor. My delegation thanks you and your entire team for your tireless efforts in putting together such a fragile document, ensuring that there are action-oriented outcomes in the second APR, and acknowledges that this process has been underpinned by cooperation and strong multilateral engagement under your able leadership. Mr. Chair, although my delegation would have liked to see progress in other areas of the text, we welcome all the actionable items that contribute significantly to the advancement of the objectives of the OEWG, such as the POC, amongst others. We further acknowledge that this OEWG has been a consensus-building measure in itself, and that not all states will have their views reflected in the final document. We therefore wish to reiterate our appreciation for the effort you and your team have made in bringing together a wide variety of views and proposals. Ghana believes that the APR is a good working document that can further be built upon in future sessions, and it plays a vital role in the goal we have to encourage responsible state behavior in the use of ICT in the context of international security. Mr. Chair, my delegation remains committed in our support to you and the OEWG process, and in the spirit of flexibility, we stand ready to join consensus in the adoption of the current text. I thank you.

Thank you very much, Ghana. Belgium to be followed by the Lao PDR. Belgium, please.

Mr. Chairman, many metaphors have been used during our work this year, in particular, that of the tree in the forest. Dante Alighieri began his Divine Comedy with a quote where he said, in the middle of his life path, he found himself in a dark forest as he had lost his path. Thanks to your tireless efforts, you have guided us through this dark forest, and my delegation is grateful to you for this. In my country, trees and forests have been used for centuries to build cathedrals, cathedrals that have now existed for more millennia, and that is the wish that we all express for our work, to build a solid foundation for edifices of our future. This present report reflects the richness of our work and reflects a variety of visions and proposals. While some of them benefit from varying levels of support, references to these proposals will provide each delegation with the opportunity to continue dialogue and to deepen our common understanding in order to promote peace, security, and international stability in cyberspace. We all have a list of elements that are lacking or that need to be improved, and we all hope to bring some improvements to the text, but for the benefit of consensus, we prefer not to seek perfection. Rather, we look for operationally meaningful results, such as the repertory of a point of contact, and we want to focus on next year. We’ve had an opportunity to develop our proposals, in particular on the Program of Action (POA), and other aspects that are important to us, and we will continue doing so in future sessions. To continue with metaphors, we can compare this report to a rose. It is very spiny. However, it is also based on a fragile balance, as fragile as a rose indeed. Modifying it could lead all of its petals to drop, and in order to appreciate its beauty, one needs to take a step back and to look at it, as you have said, holistically. We read the present APR in a cumulative perspective as something that comes on top of last year’s report, which retains its validity in a number of aspects, especially when it comes to the institutional dialogue framework. In the face of current geopolitical challenges, it seems equally important to us to strengthen multilateralism. Our capacity to engage in dialogue and seek consensus is a sign of support for this. However, seeking consensus should not be interpreted as a right of veto by some. While it reflects an imperfect compromise, like the EU and other delegations from a number of regions, my delegation can accept the report as it stands and calls on all delegations to demonstrate flexibility in the interest of the common good. I thank you.

Thank you very much, Belgium, for your comments. Allow PDR to be followed by New Zealand.

Mr. Chair, my delegation would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to you and your team for putting together careful values, proposals, and positions in this report. We understand the complexity and challenges involved in drafting such a report, and we believe you have navigated them admirably. The Lao PDR recognizes the importance of ICT security in an increasingly interconnected digital world. As we navigate this digital age, safety, security, and trust in our global digital infrastructure are significant. To this end, the Lao PDR reaffirms our unwavering support for the negotiations under the OEWG, based on the principles of consensus, inclusivity, non-discrimination, and multilateralism. This process ensures all voices are heard and all states, regardless of their size or technological advancements, are treated equally. In this new era of digital diplomacy, we believe that every nation should be given an equal opportunity to contribute to shaping the global ICT security framework for multiple benefits. As a small developing country, we would like to highlight our strong support for a single-track approach to the ongoing negotiations and avoid any other duplicating processes. We believe this streamlined approach is particularly beneficial for developing countries, which continue to face constraints in capacity, resources, and expertise in the field of ICT. A single-track approach will further ensure that all states can center all their efforts on a shared objective, so as to ensure that no country is left behind. In the same vein, we support the draft report that will lead to negotiating a concrete foundation and common understanding of the future mechanism’s roles and responsibilities. This can further ensure that all perspectives are taken into account and that mechanisms remain responsive to the diverse needs and challenges faced by member states. Importantly, the mechanisms should foster dialogue and cooperation, rather than create competition and confrontation. For this mechanism to be effective, we believe that it must be built on consensus. Within the realm of ICT security, one state’s success should not come at another’s expense. Only through collective effort and with mutual respect can we create an ICT security landscape that is safe and beneficial for all. In closing, we would like to join others in welcoming the draft, and we are confident that with your continuous stewardship, we will be able to adopt the delicate and balanced report. I thank you.

Thank you very much, Lao PDR. New Zealand to be followed by Antigua and Barbuda.

Thank you, Chair, and kia ora everyone. Chair, in te reo Maori, we have a well-known whakatauki, a proverb or saying, which is, a problem is solved by continuing to find solutions. In respect to challenges, this refers to the need for creative thinking, adaptability, and perseverance. Today, I join my Pacific colleagues and many other states to confirm that although the report does not fully reflect everything that we would have liked to see, it does capture elements of progress made, including some practical measures for implementation. Aotearoa New Zealand stands ready to join consensus on this text and adopt the report. We look forward to continuing discussions in forthcoming sessions of this OEWG and inter-sessional meetings. Chair, we acknowledge and thank you and your team for helping navigate us to this point. Thank you.

Thank you very much, New Zealand. Antigua and Barbuda, to be followed by Japan.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Antigua and Barbuda have followed the proceedings this week with keen interest. Chair, on behalf of my delegation, I would like to extend our appreciation to you and the Secretariat for your tireless work on this draft report. We know that this document is not perfect and might not be the ideal version everyone in this room was hoping for based on their national positions. But we believe that it is important for this OEWG to demonstrate progress. And so, in the spirit of consensus, Antigua and Barbuda gives our support for the adoption of the report and urges delegations to exercise flexibility. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much, Antigua and Barbuda. Japan, to be followed by Portugal, please.

Mr. Chair, thank you very much for giving me the floor. On behalf of our delegation, I would like to express our delegation’s sincere gratitude to you for the patient manner with which you have guided us during the week, and to your team for all their efforts and work. Like other delegations, we would have liked to see improvements, but we are mindful of the fact that this report, as it is, is the best available outcome which struck a delicate balance. Therefore, for the sake of consensus, I would like to express Japan’s support for the adoption of CRP-1 as the annual progress report of the OEWG. It is time to go forward. This report, which has actionable substance, will give us a good foundation to continue our discussion in the future years. We would also like to request all other delegations to exercise the maximum flexibility to join consensus to support the text as it is. I understand that some delegations would like to see further improvements, but as the Chair has stated, we are in the middle of a journey. Those who have issues of concern will have opportunities to raise their issues of concern in future discussions. I sincerely hope all delegations will join in adopting this report as it is by consensus. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Japan. Portugal, to be followed by Cuba.

Mr. Chair, the three APR versions which you have competently drafted to account for our work since last year have not included the recognition of standards of state behavior in cyberspace that, for a large plurality of member states, are paramount, four of which I had the occasion to point out yesterday. The omission of what is so important for so many states whose systems and networks are permanently under attack from state-sponsored malicious cyber actors was the price we accepted to pay for the sake of working constructively under your able chairmanship towards a safe cyberspace which enables the world to continue to benefit from digitalization. As the new delegate announced before, we have therefore decided to support the conference room paper which you have drafted last night after extensive consultations and for which we commend you and your team. And while wishing you a deserved rest next month, we look forward to the agenda which you have proposed for our work in the coming year. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, Portugal. Cuba, to be followed by Poland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I shall be very brief. First of all, we’d like to pay tribute to the work done by both you and your team throughout these days, and we would really like to see solutions being found to cater for the concerns voiced by the delegation from Russia on behalf of a group of countries with similar ideas. We support all efforts to achieve consensus. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Cuba. Poland, to be followed by Libya.

Thank you, Chair. Your personnel and the whole team behind you are making the impossible possible, as we can watch in front of our eyes. So I keep my fingers crossed for the final success because, with the text version of the APR, we are close to achieving this final success. Poland fully aligns with the statement of the European Union. There are many elements that we wished for not covered in the way we wanted. So the text is not ideal. But it was a very, very long time ago that I learned, with disappointment, that ideals perhaps do not exist. An ideal is a vision we are chasing, we are aiming for, but perhaps never reaching. Perhaps the closest to an ideal I came across in my life is my wife, but even she is not fully ideal. But she is the best approximation I know. And the text you proposed for all of us is the closest approximation to the consensus we can achieve without wasting all our work done so far. I lost count of how many countries, small and big, from all continents and all regional groups have expressed their support for the text as it stands now. Calling this huge majority of countries a narrow group of states is factually false. More importantly, this current text, no matter how imperfect it is, does not close a path to work in the future on any element or any topic that various countries presented here on their wish list. And Germany has pointed out clearly before, threats and challenges coming from cyberspace will not wait for this group to finish moving commas around the text of the APR. Therefore, each and every delegation in this room shall accept the current draft. Otherwise, it will take responsibility for slowing down not only our work here but, first of all, moving on with the implementation of the instruments we have at hand now and towards activities helping the safety and security of the great number of the countries in need, which constitute a huge majority of this UN family. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Poland, for your statement of support, but I also hope for your own safety that your wife has not been watching UN Web TV. I do wish you a safe passage home at some point. Let me say that everyone is ideal in this room, but we are trying to achieve a collective ideal, and that’s the challenge. Let me get back to making some closing remarks, but I still have a few more speakers, and I’m wondering whether I can finish it by this morning. Libya, to be followed by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Thank you, Mr. President. At the outset, I would like to express my gratitude to you, your team, and the Secretariat for the efforts that have been made over the course of this process. My delegation would like to emphasize the importance of adopting the Second Annual Progress Report for the Working Group, which is considered a step forward in its path. This would support its processes and form a roadmap for future discussions for this Working Group. We would also be able to adopt our procedure reports and procedures to be made in terms of capacity building. Therefore, we would like to express our readiness to join the consensus on this report. Thank you, Mr. President, once again.

Thank you very much for your statement. I give the floor now to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Thank you. Thank you to you, Mr. Chair, your team, and the Secretariat for developing and distributing CRP-1. We would like to emphasize the importance of consensus, as many others have highlighted during this session. Mr. Chair, we are disappointed that our suggestions, which are based entirely on technical considerations and thoroughly presented, have not been included in the document, so we cannot consider it as balanced and factual. In response to this view that we have, we were told that there was no consensus on our proposals, leading to not incorporating them in the text. If this is the overarching approach, we are fully entitled to expect that the same approach will be applied to other suggestions as well. For instance, in the section on international law, some like-minded countries express individual or collective objections to references to human rights or international humanitarian law. However, they have been included in the text. Having said that, and in light of Russia’s proposed tweaks on behalf of the like-minded group, we extend our support to these suggestions. We wish to draw attention to the fact that these minor modifications only concern five specific points in paragraphs 23B, 27, 29A, 29B2, and 32. We are against portraying any proposal as either majority or minority positions, because this process should be consensus-driven. Our hope is that our proposals will be considered with the aim of achieving consensus, and we will continue to advocate for our positions throughout the process. We invite the other delegations to consider our proposals based on their technical merits, rather than through purely political lenses. Let’s work together to find common ground and foster a cooperative environment. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Islamic Republic of Iran, North Macedonia, to be followed by Czechia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving the floor. We would like to thank you and your team for the effort in drafting the Second Annual Progress Report. To effectively tackle the ever-changing cyber-threat landscape, we must continually adapt technical and operational cyber-security incident detection and response capabilities. These necessities will equip operational structures and other technical, human, and financial resources, fostering cooperation with counterparts in other states. As a state, we must adhere to the UN framework we have agreed upon. Only through a collective approach can we achieve our goals. To ensure cooperation, the structures and processes governing interactions between states, institutions, and other stakeholders must undergo constant evaluation, proactive assessment, allowing us to identify and overcome barriers that may impede effective collaboration and joint efforts in safeguarding our cyber domain. States have traditionally built trust in their bilateral and multilateral exchanges by prioritizing open communication, continuous dialogue, and transparency. And in the conventional context, confidence-building measures serve as a vital mechanism in fostering trust. North Macedonia placed significant emphasis on cyber ICT security, recognizing it as a pivotal concern. In the OSCE chairmanship in 2023, the country has made cyber-security challenges a primary focus, reflecting its dedication to addressing this issue. In a step forward, bolstering cyber-security efforts, North Macedonia will host the CIO Cyber ICT Security Conference in October this year. The conference’s central topic will revolve around capacity building and fostering the implementation of confidence-building measures among relevant stakeholders, encompassing both political and technical aspects. Finally, Mr. Chair, we would like to express our deep gratitude to the Women in Cyber Fellows, and we give our support in reaching common consensus. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Give the floor now to Czechia, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Czech Republic fully aligns with the statement of the European Union. Mr. Chair, I highly appreciate the effort you and your team have made. It’s clear that it’s not a really easy job. The new revised text is composed of many very sensitive and interlinked compromises. In the spirit of compromise, the Czech Republic is ready to support the text as it is. At the same time, I would like to very strongly urge all other delegations to also support the compromise proposal as well. I strongly caution against opening the text because it would mean opening a Pandora’s box. There are many points the Czech Republic would like to have in the report as well, among them the strengthening of language on human rights and international humanitarian law, which I have already mentioned so many times, but I have no doubt there are other delegations that have their own points as well. So I strongly warn Russia and related countries that opening the text of the Chair’s latest compromise proposal, which so far has supported so many countries, entails a strong risk of failure of the world’s open-ended working group process this year. They all should be responsible. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, Czechia. I have five more speakers, and I’m looking at the time, and we won’t have interpretation since we are approaching lunchtime. I wanted to share some reflections. First, I’ve listened very carefully to all the different remarks and statements that have been made, and I hope that each one of you has also listened to the statements that have been made. We are in a predicament. That should have been clear to all of you from this morning’s discussions. I sense very broad support for the document CRP1. It is also my sense that we are close to consensus. It is also my sense that a substantive outcome adopted by consensus is within grasp. But it is also clear, and this morning has shown that, that we are not across the finish line. This morning, many of you have said how the draft annual progress report in CRP1 does not contain everything that you wanted, everything that you would like to see, and everything that, from your point of view, should be included. So there was a common refrain that the document we have in CRP1 is not perfect. And that indeed is what I had told you, that it is not a perfect document. This morning, we also heard that many of you are prepared to demonstrate flexibility and to adopt the document as it is. I am encouraged that so many of you have said you are prepared to demonstrate flexibility. And many of you have also called for others to show flexibility. Many of you have also appealed to each other to show flexibility. Now, in that spirit, I wanted to ask the working group whether there is any room for flexibility. Now, I said right at the beginning that the document in CRP1 is a very fragile balance. The document in CRP1 is a very fragile balance. And I had strongly advised all of you not to reopen the document. But we have heard a group of countries put forward some amendments. We have also heard others saying that if we open the text, there will be other proposals and other amendments. And that will bring us back to square one. And as one of you put it, we will be opening the Pandora’s box. Given the many calls for flexibility, I want to put a question to the delegation of the Russian Federation, which had spoken on behalf of a group of 10 countries and put forward amendments. I’d like to ask the Russian Federation whether, having heard the calls for flexibility and appeals of delegations around the room for flexibility, whether the Russian Federation and the group of delegations for which it spoke would be ready to open the Pandora’s box? We would consider withdrawing the amendments and join consensus on the document as is, on the understanding that we will give all delegations the option and the opportunity to make explanations of position after the adoption of the document. And that these explanations of positions would be compiled in a compendium and circulated as an official document of the working group. So, Russian Federation, I do not mean to put you on the spot, but I would like you to ask and let us know whether there is flexibility on your side, whether your delegation and the group of delegations, the 10 countries you mentioned, would be ready and willing to withdraw the amendments on the understanding that we take note of your concerns. We will continue the work of this working group. We will acknowledge your explanation of positions. Russian Federation, you have the floor.

Mr. Chairman, the delegations participating in the 5th session of the OEWG have spent a great deal of effort, energy, and time this week, often sacrificing sleep and meals. So the Russian delegation would like to return to your question after the lunch break.

Russian Federation, would you be flexible about your lunch break and give us at least a sense as to whether the Russian Federation and the group of countries, the 10 countries for which you had spoken, would at this point be prepared to consider adopting the document but registering its reservations and the text of the amendments as you had proposed it, on the understanding that these explanations of positions will be captured in the records of the Working Group and will be circulated as an official document of the Working Group? So, Russian Federation, please give us any indication that you might be able to do so on behalf of your group. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, the Russian delegation takes into account your request. However, in order to answer your question, or even give any indication or a hint, we first need to carry out a series of consultations with our like-minded partners. So, as I proposed earlier, the Russian delegation would like to come back to this question after lunch.

Thank you very much, Russian Federation. As you consider this question, Russian Federation, over lunch, together with members of your group, who are all countries I respect, whose representatives I know very well, I’d like to ask you to reflect on what you’ve heard this morning. You’ve heard this morning how there is so much commitment to producing an outcome. You’ve heard this morning how there is so much commitment to achieving consensus. You’ve heard this morning from representatives of small nations who have traveled very long distances, with so much hope and faith in the working group, in the Open-Ended Working Group. And they have so much expectation that it will deliver very substantive outcomes. So I’d just like to appeal to the spirit of flexibility on the part of the Russian Federation and the group of 10 countries who have put forward the amendments this morning, to reflect very carefully on what they have heard. And as chair of this process, I remain committed to working till the very last hour possible today to do whatever I can to find a way forward. My sense remains that a consensus outcome is within grasp. It is beginning to slip from our fingers, but it is still within grasp. And I think it’s important that all of us consider that and do what we can to find a solution. Second point I want to make to all of you is that it’s almost 1 p.m. and we don’t have the luxury of time. We don’t have the luxury of time. I’m not even sure if we have the luxury of a lunch. It’s important that we do whatever we can between now and before we no longer have conference facilities to find a solution. Now, before I suggest a way forward, in terms of process, I’d like to ask if there are any other comments from any delegations in terms of any suggestions that they might have for a way forward, given the situation we are facing. Well. South Africa, please. Okay, all of you in the room, all of you. South Africa, please.

Thank you, Chairperson. From South Africa’s side, we are prepared for informal consultations if there is a need. If so, we request a break in proceedings, as our Russian colleagues have stated. For the relevant states to engage in informal consultations, we are available to participate in consultations if such are called.

Thank you very much, South Africa. Clearly, we are in a situation where we are not across the finish line, and we still have some time left. What I suggest is that, at this point, please allow me to undertake informal consultations with delegations, and I would like delegations to be back in this room at 3 p.m., which will give me and my team some time to reach out to different delegations to explore a way forward. That’s the first point. The second point is that when we return here at 3 p.m., we will lock the doors. We have to be prepared to be here this evening, late into the evening if needed, in order to find a way forward. But at the same time, I also want to say, and this is my last point, please do not take the approach that the Chair will produce a miracle solution. I said yesterday that I will put the responsibility back to you. We’ve heard this morning that we are not able to proceed because a group of countries are not ready to join consensus as of now—a group of 10 countries, I should add. And so you cannot assume that the Chair will produce a miracle solution, and therefore I urge each one of you who are committed to producing an outcome, who want an outcome, to reach out to each other and to talk to each other. And if you have any ideas on how we can move forward, please reach out to me. I have no magic wand. I have no cards in my pocket. I’ve done all that I could, me and my team, and we have put forward a document that is now before you. But we have not been able to proceed to adoption this morning because of what we have heard from a group of countries. So if you have any specific suggestions on how we could move forward, please reach out to me, please reach out to each other, and please talk to each other. Because that will immensely help this process find a way forward. As New Zealand said, a problem is solved by continuing to look for solutions. And that is what I intend to do over the next two hours. Lunch is not a priority for me, and I’m available if anyone wishes to reach out to me or my team to have any further discussions. So we meet again here at 3 p.m. and be prepared to be here as long as possible until we arrive at a consensus outcome. The meeting is now adjourned. I thank you very much for your attention.