Statement by Aivis Kļavinskis, Political Coordinator of Latvia at the Arria Formula Meeting on “Upholding the Sanctity of Treaties for the Maintenance of International Peace and Security”
New York, 30 January 2026
Mr. Chair,
I thank Pakistan for convening this timely Arria-formula meeting on Upholding the Sanctity of Treaties and I also thank the briefers for their thoughtful contributions to this discussion.
In our view, rebuilding trust in international agreements requires more than drafting new texts, it demands unwavering commitment to good-faith implementation coupled with consequences for persistent non-compliance.
Pacta sunt servanda, as codified in Article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, is nt an abstract legal concept. As the International Court of Justice has repeatedly affirmed, it is a structural rule of international relations, essential to legal certainty, predictability, and peaceful coexistence.
In this context, I would like to make three points.
First, the obligation to perform treaties in good faith is itself binding rule of international law. Pacta sunt servanda requires not only formal compliance with treaty provisions, but also a conduct that preserves the object and the purpose of an agreement. When obligations are implemented in a matter that defeats that object and purpose, compliance becomes an illusion.
Against this backdrop, calls for new legal instruments or binding commitments, whether in traditional security domains or emerging technologies, cannot be separated from the question of credible compliance. Treaties cannot function when obligations are treated as tactical tools, rather than binding legal commitments.
Second, respect for treaties is not an abstract ideal - it is a proven political choice that delivers peace. The European Union stands as one of the most successful peace projects in modern history precisely because States that once fought devastating wars chose cooperation over confrontation, binding themselves through treaties, shared rules, and good-faith implementation of common obligations. By anchoring relations in law rather than force, former adversaries have built trust, stability, and prosperity over generations. This experience demonstrates that respect for treaties does not weaken sovereignty - it strengthens security and makes peace sustainable.
Third, the international system rests on the equality of sovereign states and compliance with the UN Charter. When treaties are violated repeatedly and without consequence, they cease to be instruments of peace.
One recent historic example is a case in point. Under the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, Ukraine relinquished its nuclear arsenal in exchange for security assurances, including the obligation by Russia to refrain from the use of force against the territorial integrity of Ukraine. This obligation was breached by Russia in 2014 and resulted in the occupation of Crimea and partial occupation of Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine.
Subsequently, the Minsk I and Minsk II agreements established commitments to a full and immediate ceasefire. Presented as goodwill measures for de-escalation, they were repeatedly violated by Russia - in fact, it took over twenty ceasefires before Russia started its full-scale aggression in 2022.
We welcome the on-going peace talks, as we seek peace on our continent and an end to the killing – just as Ukrainians do. But Ukraine’s request for robust security guarantees and accountability is entirely justified to put an end to a repeated non-compliance of agreements by the aggressor.
Dear colleagues,
Today’s discussion therefore reinforces a critical reflection: respect for treaties is neither optional nor selective. It is the foundation of international peace and security. The United Nations, including the Security Council, the Secretary-General, General Assembly and international courts, has a responsibility to uphold this principle consistently, call out violations, and strengthen mechanisms for monitoring, transparency, and accountability.
I thank you.