Tomorrow morning (14 October), the Security Council is expected to vote on a draft resolution renewing the sanctions regime on Haiti for one year. The draft resolution was authored by Panama and the US, the co-penholders on Haiti.
Background
On 21 October 2022, the Security Council adopted resolution 2653, establishing a sanctions regime on Haiti comprising targeted travel ban, asset freeze, and arms embargo measures. Resolution 2699 of 2 October 2023 expanded the arms embargo to cover the country as a whole. The regime and the Panel of Experts (PoE) assisting the 2653 Haiti Sanctions Committee were subsequently renewed and strengthened, most recently through resolution 2794 of 17 October 2025, which also added two individuals to the sanctions list.
The Committee most recently met on 3 September to discuss the PoE’s final report, which covers the period from October 2025 to July. While acknowledging efforts by Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and the US to address illicit weapons flows, the report states that these efforts “remain insufficient given the scale of the challenge”. It warns that “[d]iversions from national stockpiles – from Haiti and, to a lesser extent, from the Dominican Republic – continue to replenish the arsenals of gangs and other non-State armed actors”. The PoE further notes that, despite limited security gains, gangs remain highly resilient and continue to benefit from networks of political, economic, and security actors. It therefore stresses that sanctioning these “enabling actors” remains essential to the effectiveness of the sanctions regime.
The report also warns that “the recruitment of children by gangs in Haiti continued to rise at an alarming rate”, noting, among other things, that casualties suffered by gangs during security operations triggered additional child recruitment. The report further documents growing levels of sexual and gender-based violence, excessive use of force during security operations, collusion between gangs and Haitian police officers, kidnappings by gangs and extortion for revenue generation, and the continued illicit exploitation and trade of natural resources, particularly elvers (baby eels).
Negotiations on the Draft Resolution
Panama and the US apparently circulated an initial draft of the resolution on 6 October, inviting comments on the draft until the morning of 8 October, ahead of an informal negotiation meeting on the same day. On 9 October, the co-penholders circulated a revised draft text and placed it under silence procedure until yesterday (12 October). Silence was broken by China, supported by Russia, which also had separate amendments. Today, the co-penholders put a second revised draft directly in blue.
The draft resolution in blue renews the Haiti sanctions regime for one year—including the arms embargo and the travel ban and asset freeze measures—and the mandate of the PoE for 13 months. Unlike resolution 2794, the current draft resolution in blue does not contain an annex adding new individuals to the sanctions list. Nor does it appear that the 2653 Haiti Sanctions Committee is currently considering additional listings.
Following a proposal from Latvia, supported by other members including Denmark and France, new language on misappropriation, embezzlement, and diversion of public resources that pose “a risk to peace, security, and stability of Haiti” was added to the first revised draft. It seems that this proposal was intended to create a new designation criterion targeting corruption in Haiti. Among other things, this new provision underscores that individuals who “directly or indirectly” engage in or support criminal activities and violence involving armed groups and criminal networks that “promote violence”, or who engage in activities that “destabilize Haiti through the illicit exploitation or trade of natural resources”, may be listed for travel and financial measures.
It seems that Russia proposed some edits to this paragraph, including revisions to specify that it would not create a new stand-alone designation criterion. For instance, Russia apparently suggested adding a clause stating that the measures described were to apply “on the basis of criteria set out in paragraph 16 of resolution 2653”, which contains most of the existing listing criteria under the Haiti sanctions regime. These proposals were apparently not incorporated in the draft resolution in blue. At the same time, the draft text in blue no longer contains language that was initially included in the same paragraph expressing concern at reports of lack of oversight and financial governance of public resources, which Russia had suggested deleting.
Other points of contention during the negotiations emerged as a result of the streamlined initial draft circulated by the penholders. While the shortened text preserved the structure and content of the sanctions regime and the PoE, the co-penholders deleted some language from resolution 2794 emphasising the importance of implementing the arms embargo by, for instance, urging member states to strengthen its implementation. It seems that China proposed restoring some references to this issue, including language urging member states to take measures to ensure the full and effective implementation of the arms embargo and to take steps to prevent the trafficking and diversion of arms, particularly at their source. These proposals were not included in the first revised draft, which apparently prompted China to break silence.
It seems that the co-penholders partially accommodated China’s proposals in the draft resolution in blue, which urges member states to take urgent and decisive measures to “fully implement” the arms embargo and requests that member states inform the PoE and the 2653 Haiti Sanctions Committee of the actions that they have taken to “fully implement” the resolution. However, the proposed language on steps to be taken to prevent the trafficking and diversion of arms and related material, “in particular at their source”, was not included.
In their initial streamlining, the co-penholders had also deleted language from resolution 2794 regarding due process and the importance of ensuring clear and fair procedures for delisting individuals and entities, and noting the adoption of resolution 2744 of 19 July 2024, which enhanced the mandate of the Focal Point for Delisting. Following a request from Denmark, supported by members such as Latvia, it seems that this language was reinstated in the first revised draft, with the addition of a reference welcoming the appointment of the Focal Point for Delisting. (The Secretary-General appointed the Focal Point in June, approximately two years after the adoption of resolution 2744.
The draft resolution in blue also contains some new language put forward by the co-penholders in the initial draft. This includes provisions encouraging the Haitian government to adopt a decree regulating the exploitation of elvers and related trade, and calling on the Gang Suppression Force (GSF) to report “any diversion of weapons and ammunition, including through loss and theft”, to the PoE. The draft resolution in blue also contains new language urging the Haitian authorities to brief the 2653 Haiti Sanctions Committee annually on sanctions implementation progress, as well as “attendant challenges”.
Additionally, the draft resolution in blue modifies a provision concerning the enhancement of the capacities of the Haitian security forces to manage weapons and ammunition, which appeared in resolution 2794. This resolution referred to measures—such as effective management, marking, recordkeeping, and monitoring—to be applied to “national stockpiles of weapons and ammunition, as well as seized weapons and ammunition”. The draft resolution in blue calls for the strengthening of the weapons and ammunition management capacity of the Haitian security forces only with respect to their national “seized” stockpiles of weapons and ammunition.