We are living in times of rapid
change. Global and regional dynamics are transforming
global governance. A changing world will inevitably
change the United Nations. But we, the Members of this
great Organization, can influence the direction of the
change. In order to do so, however, we must set strategic
priorities. We should develop an agile multilateral
system for the twenty-first century.

The architects of the United Nations were in many
ways ahead of their time. The Charter, in its Chapters
VI and VIII, foresaw a world where the United Nations
should safeguard international peace and security, the
settlement of disputes and the promotion of common
interests at the regional, as much as at the global, level.
By 1945, however, there were few established regional
mechanisms. In other words, the Charter’s provisions
for regional arrangements were largely aspirational.

In today’s world, regional organizations and
arrangements are increasingly proving their relevance.
Economic, social and political integration is taking
place at the regional level. Cooperation is not only
about outcomes, but also about processes. Practical
cooperation can lay the foundation for strategic trust
and shared values.

It was only after the past century’s two horrific
wars that my own continent chose close integration.
That was instrumental in the creation of a peaceful
Europe. For that historic achievement, the European
Union was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo last
year.

The African Union (AU) has seen its continent
through 50 transformative years. Freedom came at a
high price. Yet, Africa has never been more prosperous
than it is today. We see economic growth, improving
governance and enhanced regional cooperation.

From Somalia to Mali, the African Union and its
subregional partners continue to prove their relevance.
The African Union is, beyond doubt, becoming one of
the United Nations most important regional partners. I
commend the AU for its dedicated efforts, and I want
to express my deepest condolences for the tragic loss
of life in the heinous terrorist attacks in Nairobi. We
must never allow terrorists to set the agenda. Hence
our efforts to work with the AU to promote peace and
stability in Somalia at this crucial moment must be
redoubled.

In recent years, Norway has worked with the people
of Colombia to lay the foundations for lasting peace
between its Government and the Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarias de Colombia movement. In doing so,
we have seen the strong commitment of Colombia’s
neighbours. There, as everywhere else, we have learned
that peace cannot just be established within one country
alone; it has to be rooted in a regional context.

In South-East Asia, the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN) is becoming the source, as
well as an architect, of regional stability. I commend
ASEAN for its constructive role in supporting the
democratic reform process in Myanmar. Myanmar will
even preside over ASEAN next year, which in many
ways is a testimony to the organization’s adaptability.

Organizations such as ASEAN have also taken
upon themselves the development of multilateral
responses to regional challenges, including those
pertaining to maritime security. Those strides are not
only of regional importance, but are important to us all.
The freedom and safety of the seas is one of the most
important public goods in an interconnected world.

Just like in South-East Asia, Norway and our
fellow Arctic States have built our deepened maritime
cooperation on one of the most salient organizing
principles of the United Nations — the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea. And regions reach
out to each other. Earlier this year, Norway acceded
to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast
Asia. Likewise, again during the spring, China,
Japan, India, the Republic of Korea and Singapore
all joined the Arctic Council as observers. In doing
so, they subscribed to the founding principles of the
Arctic Council, principles that, yet again, are a direct
reflection of a key a United Nations norm.

Where I live, we observe global warming at close
quarters. As the polar ice cap melts, we are reminded of
our shared responsibility for saving the planet’s climate.
Today, the Arctic Ocean is opening up to human
activities in ways hard to imagine only a few years
ago. Over the past decade, we have strived to develop
forward-looking strategies for the safe management of
the new maritime crossroads between Asia, Europe and
North America.

The emergence of regional institutions as a feature
of global governance is in fact good news for the United
Nations. We need a United Nations that can be a catalyst
that supports and encourages regional developments,
which — and as long as — they reinforce our common
global and multilateral agenda. We must acknowledge
that trend. We must revisit the Charter of the United
Nations, in particular its Chapters VI and VIII, and
seek to identify the opportunities and potential pitfalls
it represents for the United Nations.

The Middle East has yet to find an effective regional
architecture. It is also a part of the world that is causing
considerable concern these days. Israel and Palestine
are facing a moment of truth. This month marks 20
years since the signing of the Oslo Accords. We have
witnessed positive achievements on the ground. State
institutions have been built and are ready for statehood.
But for many years, a political horizon has been missing.
Time is running out for a negotiated two-State solution.

But now, as Palestinian and Israeli leaders have
returned to negotiations, hope is renewed. This
afternoon, in the Conference Building, I presided
over a meeting of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee
for the Coordination of the International Assistance
to Palestinians, the international donor group for
Palestine. The donors reaffirmed their commitment
to providing necessary assistance to the Palestinian
Authority through the current transition to statehood.

This may be the last chance — a chance we cannot
afford to miss.

As we speak the horrors in Syria are continuing.
Thousands upon thousands of children, women and
men are being killed and maimed. Millions are fleeing
their homes. The use of chemical weapons is utterly
unacceptable and is a grave violation of international
law. Their further use must be effectively prevented.
Those responsible must be brought to justice and the
case referred to the International Criminal Court.

The Syrian crisis as such can be resolved only
through a political solution. The Security Council must
now live up to the responsibility that we, the Members
of the United Nations, have entrusted in it. We must
seize the momentum created by the United States-
Russian agreement. Humanitarian access must be
ensured by all parties and to all areas. The bloodshed in
Syria must come to an end.

Frustrated by Syria, many have criticized the United
Nations for its inability to act. However, we should not
lose sight of the United Nations many achievements.
Every single day, the United Nations provides shelter
for refugees, vaccinates children, promotes maternal
health and stabilizes fragile States. Evolving norms
of human security have placed new issues on the
agenda. Children and armed conflict, women, peace
and security and the protection of civilians are recent
examples of the important normative role of the United
Nations.

Faced with a scarcity of resources accentuated by
a global economy under pressure, we should increase,
not decrease, the flexibility of the Secretariat and
the Secretary-General to run the Organization. In
autumn of 2012, the Assembly decided that the 2014-
2015 budget should be cut by $100 million. Reducing
the budget while increasing the number of tasks is a
recipe for a weaker, not a stronger, United Nations. The
Assembly must be coherent in its policies. The role of
the Assembly should be to provide guidance, not to
micromanage.

In conclusion, to meet the regional and global
challenges of our time, we, the Member States, must
work together to fulfil the aspirations and potential of
the Charter of the United Nations. The efficiency of this
great Organization depends upon its ability to innovate
and to adapt to changing circumstances.


It is a great pleasure for me to have
this opportunity to join my fellow Heads of State and
Government at the sixty-eighth session of the General
Assembly. We wish to offer our profound congratulations
and support to the President of the Assembly. We also
wish to express the Kingdom’s sincere appreciation to
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his entire staff
for their efforts and the role they continue to play in
improving the working mechanisms of the United
Nations and for being such a good host.

The United Nations has brought hope to those who
are suffering, which is one of the pillars of its Charter.
The fundamental purpose of the United Nations is to
promote tolerance among humankind so that nations
can live together in peace with one another. We are
pleased that the United Nations has always worked
hard to promote and maintain international security,
and it has further taken positive action to prevent and
remove threats to the peace that humankind so desires.
We are also cognizant of the fact that humankind is
facing a test of unprecedented proportions in hotspots
that continue to pose a huge challenge for the United
Nations to address.

We have been deeply saddened by the senseless
killing of innocent people that took place this week
in Nairobi. We condemn such acts of terrorism in
the strongest terms. We send words of comfort to the
Government and the families who lost loved ones
through that tragic and senseless violence. The world
needs to stand together and wipe terrorism from the

face of the universe. We call upon those who support
such activities to cease from doing so forthwith.

We are also extremely disturbed by the deadly
conflicts in countries such as Syria, where innocent
people including women and children, are dying on
both sides, with some displaced now living as refugees
in other countries. We encourage all of the people of
Syria to immediately cease fire and use dialogue as a
means of solving their differences, because using the
barrel of a gun to settle a score will not help them;
instead, it will leave the Syrian people divided and not
seeing eye to eye. Infrastructure and social services
will be destroyed, leaving increased problems that will
have devastating effects for a very long time to come.
We trust they will soon find a peaceful resolution to
their crisis.

The findings of the United Nations mission on the
use of chemical weapons in Syria should be used as a
basis to chart a way forward in pursuit of the dismantling
of these unconventional weapons of mass destruction,
which pose a serious threat to humankind. As long as
chemical weapons continue to exist in that country, it
remains at risk of similar attacks, where nobody will
own up to them. Therefore, it is only proper that the
dismantling process begin with immediate effect to
prevent a similar attack in the future.

It is important that whatever action takes place in
Syria, it must fall within the mandate of the United
Nations. The United Nations must act quickly on those
issues and take a leading role in making sure that those
episodes where life is lost through the use of such
weapons are prevented.

It is important for leaders and Governments to
maintain contact and be in constant consultation with
their people at all times to avoid situations where leaders
do not understand the aspirations of their people. It is
imperative to create forums where people will have
access to Government to express themselves, because
a lack of such communication and detachment leads to
either Governments or the people reacting in a violent
manner towards the other.

The domino effect of such situations can lead to
an international crisis, as the problems of one country
can easily spiral into problems for others, which may
need to intervene. Such strife causes countries, as well
as the United Nations, to divert resources from the
objectives of socioeconomic development and channel
them towards financing conflict situations instead of
the welfare of the people.

The Kingdom of eSwatini is committed to a
process of consultation with the people at the People’s
Parliament — Sibaya — and other dialogue forums.
That practice is democratic and participatory in
that everybody is involved in key decision-making
processes.

Before I came to attend the General Assembly,
the Kingdom of eSwatini held a very successful and
peaceful election, which proved to be one of the most
successful we have had over the years. Some 40 per cent
of the Swaziland population were eligible to vote, and
70 per cent of them registered to do so in the elections.
The primary and secondary elections were also very
peaceful, free and fair, without any undue influence.

In the past, there had been only one day of voting,
but this year we had to extend voting for two days
during the primary and secondary elections. Our
elections embrace our traditions and culture, whereby
people from communities nominate people in their
chiefdoms to compete at constituency level, which
we call Tinkhundla. The winners then go straight to
Parliament as a direct representation.

As a result, the people are happy to be part of
the Government formulation process, because they
can claim ownership of the people who constitute the
Government of the day. It is in that vein that we trust
that the new parliamentarians will work very well with
the people in shaping the future of the Kingdom of
eSwatini, with a view to meeting their aspirations and
attaining the objectives of the Millennium Development
Goals.

We also note with interest the increased number
of observers in this year’s election. Regional and
international observers were highly impressed with our
elections. We therefore call upon the world to embrace
our system.

We are aware of the fact that many countries do
not understand how our system of government works.
We are happy to define our system as a monarchial
democracy. Monarchial democracy is defined as a
marriage between the monarchy and the ballot box.
The ballot box represents the will of the people. The
people provide advice and counsel to the King, and
that ensures transparency and accountability. It is a
combination of power and empowerment. It means that

the monarchy of eSwatini guarantees the continuity of
stability, and the democracy of eSwatini guarantees the
shared power of the people.

Therefore, the monarchy is married to the trust of
the people, who believe that the King does everything
in their best interests. It is home-grown; it easily
accords with the norms and values of the Swazis and is
therefore easily understood by all Swazis.

To those who proclaim that democracy is the
answer to all nations and their development, we present
ourselves as testimony of a new democratic ideology
that works. It has a place in modern-day democracy,
and it complies with all structures of the United
Nations family. The Kingdom of eSwatini is committed
to the ideals of the United Nations just as much as it
is dedicated to protecting its history, its legacy and
its dignity, while at the same time embracing the
opportunities and possibilities for cooperation within
the community of nations.

It is therefore the Kingdom of eSwatini’s position
that it believes in democracy as an idea, but not as an
ideal, because things that are ideal to some may not be
ideal to others. The Kingdom of eSwatini will, however,
continue to embrace the opportunities, the technologies
and the mechanisms that create a modern society.

Our ultimate goal is to have achieved first-world
status by 2022, or at least visible signs that we are
heading in that direction socially, economically and
otherwise. In the past five years, significant progress
has been made in the Kingdom towards poverty
eradication, improving the health of our people, and
infrastructure and agricultural development. We are
confident that we will see much more progress in the
next few years.

The kingdom of eSwatini has been implementing
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which
became effective in 2000 and most of which have a target
date of 2015. Good progress has been made in the areas
of education, gender, the empowerment of women and
malaria control. Although the country has implemented
a number of initiatives aimed at addressing the other
Millennium Goals, there is still a need to accelerate
efforts to address the issues of poverty, HIV and AIDS,
infant mortality and maternal health.

In order to solicit views on the post-2015 development
agenda, the Kingdom of eSwatini embarked on an
intensive consultative process. It involved a cross-
spectrum of stakeholders, including traditional leaders,
young people, women, men, the business community,
people with disabilities, faith-based organizations, civil
society organizations and different regiments.

On the goal of eradicating poverty, the nation
agreed that poverty was still a challenge and that
greater efforts were needed to address it. The poor
performance of the economy in recent years due to the
global financial crisis has contributed to the situation,
and therefore a great deal still needs to be done in that
regard.

As to providing quality education and lifelong
learning, the country has made significant progress
towards achieving universal primary education.
However, there is a need to focus, with the support of
the private sector, on the quality of education and to
introduce more vocational skills.

The Government has invested significantly in the
health sector. However, the burden of disease continues
to exist; hence that goal remains very relevant for the
people of eSwatini. The country is still faced with
the problem of HIV/AIDS, and therefore, in the post-
2015 development agenda, the pressure to address the
scourge as well as other, non-communicable diseases
should be maintained.

Ensuring food security and good nutrition remains
a priority and should feature prominently in the post-
2015 development agenda. However, the issue of
climate change continues to be a drawback to many
of our developing countries. Our food production has
been seriously affected by climate-change patterns and
the related challenges.

The provision of adequate financial resources and
the transfer of environmentally sound technologies and
technical assistance to developing countries are critical
if we are to achieve our global objectives. We therefore
appeal to our developed partners to honour the pledges
they have made to the Green Fund and the sustainable
development programme as a matter of priority. We
strongly believe that this could add the required
impetus in the context of our objective of increasing
food production.

The goal of achieving universal access to water and
sanitation is also important for the people of eSwatini,
since water is a very basic requirement for agricultural
and industrial production, as well as for domestic use.
Remarkable progress has been made in the area of
supplying potable water to households; coverage has
reached 71 per cent nationally.

The creation of jobs, sustainable livelihoods and
equitable growth is critical for the development of any
country and is linked to the goal of ending poverty.
Emphasis should be put on value addition, technology
transfer and the development of entrepreneurial skills,
particularly for young people. As a country, Swaziland
is fully behind the post-2015 agenda, because it remains
a guideline for the international community in working
together for the sustainable development of our
respective countries.

The issue of the reform of the Security Council
remains a top priority for the African continent. We are
calling for a Council that will give equal opportunities
to all regions of the world to voice their opinions as
an international family on issues regarding global
conflict. We believe our proposal is just and fair so that
as a region Africa can have a voice in the affairs of the
Council as equal partners in this global Organization.

The United Nations should continue to play its
advocacy role to ensure humankind continues to live
peacefully with each other. All nations around the
world should be given equal opportunities to share their
expertise and experiences with the Organization.

The Kingdom of eSwatini is happy to note that,
with solid international support and cross-Strait
developments, the Republic of China on Taiwan has
increased its meaningful participation in United
Nations specialized agencies and mechanisms. We
will continue to encourage positive interaction in the
international arena between the two sides of the Taiwan
Strait.

Finally, I hope that this session will come up
with the desired results and tangible targets. We also
look forward to a post-2015 agenda that will create a
conducive landscape for all humankind to live in.


I am the newly elected Prime
Minister of Albania. This is my first month in office.
It is truly humbling to stand at this rostrum in the
steps and the shadows of some of the great figures of
history who have stood here and shaped our world, in
this forum, which, for all the criticisms of the United
Nations, is a living reminder that good must come from
bad and that the march of progress through time is
powered by debate, ideas, cooperation, argument and
agreement.

Albania is no great Power; it is a small country, but
with great potential. It has outstanding natural beauty
and good and hard-working people. My challenge is to

bring change so that this potential can be fulfilled. It will
take time. It will take a lot of effort and perseverance.
It will take understanding and support from friends and
partners. For my part, I will add leadership. We have a
long way to go, but it can be done.

I was reading a study recently that analysed every
country in the world, measuring the positive and
negative media coverage. Switzerland was at the top;
Albania was 161st. In truth, people around the world
may not know that much about Albania, but what they
think they know is not good. The film industry has not
been kind to us — Wag The Dog, Taken, Taken 2. Even
I was a bit scared to be in Albania after that. I hope one
day Liam Neeson, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro
can visit and see what a beautiful country it is and feel
the potential that I feel.

But I am not naive. Our problems are not all based
in Hollywood. Some are real and damaging, such as
corruption, which scars countries in the way the swish
of a blade can scar a beautiful face. It deters legitimate
investors from investing. It holds back progress. It
stops people from believing there can ever be fairness.
Corruption can and must be beaten if we are to build the
economic rule of law we need, get the investment we
need and attract the tourism that our scenery, heritage
and warm, welcoming people deserve. It will not be
easy, but it can be done, and we are fully committed.

The world has changed tremendously in the course
of recent decades, and it is changing now at an even
faster pace. We all expect the United Nations to follow
suit. United Nations reform is not only necessary; it has
become imperative. If we fail to agree and act on that,
the role which the United Nations is to play will remain
incomplete.

One of the important aspects of change is the
ongoing reform of the delivery of development
assistance. In the course of a few years, delivering
as one has proved to be a valuable achievement, and
it represents today an avenue for deeper reform. If we
want more effectiveness, better efficiency and coherent
action by various United Nations actors and if we aim
for better results on the ground and better value for
our money, delivering as one is the way to go. We have
pledged our support and will continue to do so as we
are convinced that is the right path.

The United Nations is beyond any doubt one of
the most important world bodies. We joined it in the
middle of the past century. But it is not alone; for us,
the European Union (EU), which represents the most
important political project the world has known to date,
is another. We aspire to join it. We know the changes
we have to make, and I am determined to make them.

If the EU has turned its attention towards our
region, particularly due to past conflicts, together
we — Albanians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Bosnians,
Macedonians and all the other peoples of the region
who have already joined the European Union — should
maintain our eyes and our focus on the EU for projects
related to our development for a better and more
prosperous common future.

Regional cooperation that is not grounded in
strategic projects serving the economic revival of all
our countries in the process of integration into the
European Union as a developed economic area would
be completely ineffective. We have neither the time nor
the luxury to engage in time-consuming, ineffective
projects. No country of the region can afford such a
luxury. Consequently, we should create new momentum
in regional cooperation by effectively combining the
objectives of the South East Europe 2020 strategy with
the projects of the Europe 2020 agenda. We should
not forget that successful regional cooperation has a
direct effect on meeting economic accession criteria.
Undoubtedly, meeting such criteria through intense and
fruitful regional cooperation is neither an easy nor a
simple task.

My vision for Albania is also a vision of the Balkans
working together, in defiance of our history of so much
war and conflict, although — let us say it loudly and
proudly — these are past wars and past conflicts. I want
to share my conviction that the remarkable agreement
between Kosovo and Serbia launched a new era in
South-East Europe. Their dialogue, which was an act
of courage and wisdom on the part of both Kosovo
and Serbia, with much-appreciated facilitation by the
European Union, challenges every country of the region
to mobilize its efforts in new and innovative forms of
collaboration and cooperation.

Not everything is easy or perfect. There are still a
few here and there who continue to think in the past. But
the prevailing truth is that Prime Ministers Thaçi and
Da.i. have shouldered their leadership responsibility to
bring their countries into the future they both deserve.

More than anything, in a world interconnected and
interdependent like never before, where space and
relationships are related and recreated in continuity, it
is crucial to live in the new time without prolonging the
old one of conflicts and nationalism.

In this regard, Albania is committed to peace and
prosperity in the region. This is why it is committed
to the irreversible independence of Kosovo, which is
already recognized by 104 Member States. This is why
it calls upon all countries that have not yet recognized
Kosovo to do so. They will not only help Kosovo and
its people, but they will join those who, by recognizing
Kosovo, have played an important role in strengthening
security and stability in South-East Europe.

To those who are sceptical, I say that the people
of Kosovo, like all the other peoples that now enjoy
fully recognized, independent republics following
the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, deserve the
recognition of their sovereignty, particularly as they
have demonstrated, more than any other people in the
region, their indisputable commitment to human rights,
minority rights, dialogue and peace. Without this
commitment, it would be very difficult for our region
to make progress towards integration into the European
Union. But their commitment is obvious and firm,
and the region has been making remarkable progress
towards its most important goal — integration into
the European Union. Croatia has joined the European
Union. We are waiting in the queue, as are Serbia and
Kosovo.

I have no doubt that, provided that each and every
country of the region replaces the politics of division
with the politics of cooperation, and provided that we
build shared values, beliefs and policies instead of
clinging to ancient enmities, we can show how much
we have changed and how quickly we can make the
further changes needed to take our place alongside
others in the modern European family of nations. It
will undoubtedly take time and perseverance. It will
take the understanding and support of European Union
member States. It will take leadership on the part of us
all, and as past practice and successful examples show,
it can be done.

This is a very serious commitment, and I would
like to state here that it is our firm intention to explore
every possibility to initiate a constructive debate,
develop a real dialogue and foster close cooperation in
every possible aspect with each and every country of
the region, including, notably, Serbia. Let the Balkans,
which have been known so long for war and bloodshed,
now be known for changing its ways and thereby change
the world for the better.

I wish that, in this statement of hope, I could avoid
having to speak about one of the most terrible human
tragedies of our times, which has been unfolding before
our eyes for two and a half years now. It has taken more
than 100,000 human lives. It is destroying an entire
generation and has brought a country to ruin. The
recent large-scale use of chemical weapons constitutes
a despicable crime against humanity that should not
and must not remain unpunished.

Yet even within such a bleak picture, there has
been a glimpse of hope. Yesterday, the Security
Council finally adopted resolution 2118 (2013), on the
removal and destruction of chemical weapons in Syria,
which we welcome. It must now be quickly and fully
implemented.

As I walked to this rostrum, I felt the extraordinary
sense of responsibility that the leadership of a country
implies. I felt the power of the historic forces pulsating
in this building. I felt the new world it has shaped,
the challenges it has met, the challenges it has failed
to meet and the challenges we, the family of nations,
struggle to meet today in this ever more interdependent
and complicated world.

I ran for office on the theme of renaissance, but
we all know that words spoken while campaigning are
the easy part. What is hard is turning those words into
deeds, actions, policies and projects that deliver change.
I am confident, but I am humble enough to know I
cannot do it alone. I have much to learn, and the United
Nations is one of those places where one always finds
people, individuals, groups and Governments who can
teach with experience and lead by example.

We need support. We need partners and friends
willing to be part of our journey for change. Renaissance
means a new Albania. Building the renaissance is
the challenge we face. It will take time. It will take
perseverance. It will take the understanding and support
of partners and friends. It will also take leadership,
which I am committed to. But I know it can be done.


The central theme of the sixty-
eighth session of the General Assembly is sustainable
development. With its three main pillars this constitutes
a comprehensive agenda, even more comprehensive with
all of its prerequisites: conflict prevention, bringing
peace and security to war-torn countries and bringing
perpetrators to justice through the implementation
of international law. Helping the weakest to help
themselves, shaping economies that pay focused
attention to social-agenda and environmental issues
and that effectively use e-technologies, protecting
human rights and supporting the rule of law and
democracy — these are all integral parts of sustainable
development.

The report of the High-level Panel of Eminent
Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda notes
that Governments bear the primary responsibility for
assuring sustainable development and for improving the
lives of people in their territories. Sustainability can be
truly implemented, however, only if we instil it in the
core thinking of Governments, societies, individuals
and the international community as a whole.

Let me start with what is clearly and without a
doubt the most unsustainable situation in the world at
the moment: the conflict in Syria. It has been repeated
thousands and thousands of times, and must continue to
be repeated over and over again, that the use of chemical
weapons is unacceptable under any circumstances
and requires complete and unreserved condemnation.
It is clear that chemical weapons must be destroyed
quickly and verifiably. Therefore the Organisation for
the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the Security
Council must — and I emphasize must — move forward
and agree on the legally binding terms to resolve that
issue, preferably under Chapter VII of the Charter, as
soon as possible.

Even without the use of chemical weapons, the
military actions and brutality which have occurred in
Syria have created suffering and a humanitarian disaster
of unimaginable proportions. More than 110,000
people have been killed, and millions of refugees and
internally displaced persons are scattered around the

This record contains the text of speeches delivered in English and of the interpretation of
speeches delivered in the other languages. Corrections should be submitted to the original
languages only. They should be incorporated in a copy of the record and sent under the signature
of a member of the delegation concerned to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service, room
U.506. Corrections will be issued after the end of the session in a consolidated corrigendum.

region. About 7 million Syrians are in urgent need of
assistance.

While there is no quick or easy fix to that complex
situation, we must keep doing what we can to ease
human suffering. Estonia is one of many countries that
have been focusing on helping those who have been
forced to flee from their homes and protecting the most
vulnerable members of society: women and children. I
would also like to praise the good work of UNICEF, the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
and humanitarian workers in Syria who often by risking
their own lives, have been able to organize and deliver
assistance.

Evidence collected by the Human Rights Council’s
Independent International Commission of Inquiry
indicates that war crimes, crimes against humanity and
gross human rights violations have been systematically
committed in Syria. Estonia is among the countries
that joined the Swiss initiative in January, asking the
Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the
International Criminal Court. It is the responsibility of
the international community to protect, if a Government
fails to do so.

In contrast, let me turn to a country and conflict
where hope has been restored recently. That presidential
elections in Mali were carried out in a peaceful and
transparent manner has paved the way for optimism.
The newly elected President has many important tasks
ahead, beginning with reconciliation between the
southern and northern parts of Mali. I wish Mr. Keita all
the luck and energy he will need to rebuild his country,
and I can assure him that Estonia stands among the
countries that will continue to help if needed.

I venture to say that another country whose
future looks promising is Afghanistan. I believe that
responsibility and ownership make people masters
of their own fate, and I can see the willingness of
Afghans to avail themselves of that opportunity. The
international community must continue to assist that
country in order to ensure that their efforts will bear
fruit. As a long-term partner of Afghanistan, Estonia
remains committed to assisting with the training and
financing of Afghan security forces after 2014, while
continuing to support educational progress, women’s
empowerment, the rule of law and health care.

It is also sadly true that conflicts can at times
be alarmingly sustainable. For years, Estonia has
emphasized that protracted conflicts around Nagorno
Karabakh and in Georgia and Moldova must not fall
off the radar screen of the international community.
Without the will of all the involved parties, no lasting
solutions can be found.

Every year, over half a million people die as a result
of illegal or irresponsible arms transfers. Enormous
amounts of money and resources are spent on arms,
often at the expense of far more vital needs. We view
the adoption in June of the Arms Trade Treaty, within
the framework of the United Nations, as a historic
milestone for the world community.

As a responsible member of the international
community, Estonia strongly supports and contributes
to the activities of the International Criminal Court
and the ad hoc tribunals established by the Security
Council. We continue to call for more States to ratify
the Rome Statute and the amendments to the Rome
Statute relating to the crime of aggression. Universality
is key to ensuring that the perpetrators of the worst
crimes of concern to the international community are
held accountable. Accountability and the prevention
of atrocities have been the priorities of Estonia as a
current member of the Human Rights Council. In the
Council, we also focus on the rights of women and
children and on their disproportionate suffering during
armed conflict.

The post-2015 sustainable development agenda
should transform the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs) into Sustainable Development Goals. In the
meantime, we have learned that the MDGs should
have focused more on reaching the poorest and most-
excluded groups in society. The main challenge of the
post-2015 negotiations will be to formulate and reach
global agreement on one concrete and measurable
set of development goals that would keep the three
dimensions of sustainability in its core and maintain a
strong focus on poverty eradication. The targets should
leave no one behind and be applicable and achievable
in every country.

In many societies, women and girls are the main
drivers of development. Not allowing them to fulfil their
potential through education, decent job opportunities
and essential health services is to disregard the
potential of one half of humankind. It is also important
to remember that persons with disabilities have been
one of the most excluded segments of our societies,
although they often have serious difficulties with access
to basic social services and decent job opportunities.

Official development assistance will continue to
play an important role in the sustainable development
of many countries in the future, but it cannot compete
with the flow of international private investment nor
with domestically mobilized resources. Therefore,
synergies between different sources of finance,
better policies and strong national ownership are
necessary. Nonetheless, the main drivers of sustainable
development are inclusive and responsible economic
policies. A key enabler of growth is the bold use of
modern integrated circuit technology solutions. They
promote better governance, access to public services,
job creation, transparency, accountability and civil
society participation.

That brings me to two issues of worldwide
importance: cybersecurity and Internet freedom. The
two are intrinsically linked and in no way incompatible.
Moreover, they will require a multi-stakeholder model
of Internet governance. Freedom of opinion and
expression, online or offline, is a cornerstone of every
democracy and constitutes a fundamental human right.
Last year, the Human Rights Council affirmed that very
same principle. I am glad that the United Nations Group
of Governmental Experts on Cyber Issues affirmed that
international law is essential in promoting an open,
secure and accessible cyberspace.

In our fight against cybercrime, it is essential to raise
awareness and to work on prevention by everyone, from
private computer users to large critical infrastructure
and cloud providers. Raising the awareness of political
leaders and national governments is equally important;
cybercrime may have serious consequences for national
security as well as national wealth. Yet the Council of
Europe’s 2001 European Cybercrime Treaty — renamed
the Convention on Cybercrime because participants are
from all over the world, and also known as the Budapest
Convention — remains thus far the only legally binding
international instrument that addresses cybercrime.
Needless to say, the more countries accede to it, the
more functional it will become. We find it odd that
those countries with the largest sources of cybercrime
have not acceded to the Convention, while in other
areas they stress the primacy of international law.

The United Nations has had and will continue to
have a leading role in making the world sustainable. Yet
Governments can do and must do their own fair share.
Estonia, for example, proudly continues to support the
initiatives of civil society in contributing to sustainable
development. Approximately one half of the world’s
countries have joined our 2008 initiative “Let’s Do It!”
to make people’s environments cleaner and our planet
environmentally happier.

Let us remain alert and tuned in to every single
detail that prevents us from advancing our common
well-being, be it in developed or in developing countries.
Let us be united in that common effort.


It is often
said that things always come in threes. Indeed, this is

the third time that I have had the privilege to address
the Assembly as President of the Transition of the
Republic of Madagascar. Here we are again, convening
as we do every year for the General Assembly. All
the leaders of the planet meet regularly to debate,
exchange views and share their experiences within the
framework of a process of consultations that belongs
to a long collective march towards peace, security and
sustainable planetary development. But each year, new,
ever more violent and more lethal conflicts are waged,
requiring that we respond with equal intensity. Shall
we limit ourselves to simply speaking about conflict
resolution, or shall we to challenge ourselves, analyse
the underlying causes and take the necessary measures
to preserve stability in the world?

As I add my voice to those who have spoken before
me, I warmly congratulate the President on the votes
that he won in support of his candidacy. Madagascar
will endeavour to provide him its sincere support and
cooperation.

Regrettably, over recent decades, when we speak
of Africa, we generally see States that are exposed
to permanent violence and the progressive loss of
democracy, States where wars, conflicts and crises
continually break out and there is more division than
consensus. According to Ambassador Jeremi., who
presided at the sixty-seventh session of the General
Assembly, humankind is facing an existential crisis,
with symptoms such as economic instability, social
inequalities and environmental degradation.

For my part, I would add that humankind may be
losing its forward momentum but that it is not giving
up. Yes, the news delivered by the media every day is
extremely worrying throughout the world. Whether the
country is developed, emerging or poor, no segment of
society escapes deterioration of various kinds, including
poor employment conditions, unemployment, declining
purchasing power, the total absence of any income at
all, lack of access to basic necessities in food, clothing,
health care and education, and, in addition, poverty,
deprivation and indigence. Those are all factors that
are the nurturing ground for intolerance, confrontation
and conflict, thereby helping to give rise to global
insecurity. I refer here particularly to recent events in
Kenya, Iraq, Pakistan and Syria, to name just a few. We
fully share in the pain and sorrow of the families of the
victims.

Some 800 days from the deadline of 2015, like
most African States and many developing countries,
Madagascar is finding it difficult to attain all the
Millennium Development Goals, despite the efforts
everyone has made. Given that situation, I have to
wonder what sort of contribution we, the leaders of our
nations, can make individually to that collective effort,
with a view to finding ways of improving the daily lives
of those who have put their trust in us and placed their
destiny in our hands.

In his statement yesterday (see A/68/PV.5),
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stressed the fact that,
in streets and squares across the world, people are
pressing those in power. They want world leaders to
listen. They want to know that we are doing everything
we can to secure a life of dignity for all. The popular
unrest in the context of the Arab Spring and the
movements of the outraged exemplify this observation
and reflect a legitimate aspiration. I fully support the
Secretary-General’s remarks and call upon all of us to
ensure that we clearly understand the demands of the
demonstrators.

Madagascar would also have wished to benefit
from such understanding when the Malagasy people
rose up against an unpopular regime to demand a better
life through the establishment of genuine change. But
that was not the case. On the contrary, Madagascar
encountered misunderstanding and the inflexibility of
an international community operating at various speeds,
not to mention the application of dogmatic texts, even
though popular uprisings elsewhere, in very similar
circumstances, had been viewed sympathetically and
with concern.

Efforts must therefore now be made to end the
unequal treatment of countries in crisis. We must
become aware of popular aspirations and realities on
the ground so as not to take the wrong decision. If it
is valid elsewhere, surely it is also valid in the case of
Madagascar?

All the conditions were in place in Madagascar.
The danger of a social explosion and a fratricidal
conflict was omnipresent, but fortunately — unlike
some countries that continue to experience unrest and
even armed violence, and despite all the economic
and social restrictions and the absence of support and
assistance from the international community from
which Madagascar has suffered in recent years — the
people of Madagascar did not fall into the trap of internal
conflict, which some would have taken advantage of.

It is with great national pride that I announce
from this rostrum that Madagascar was able to avoid
civil war. That required considerable sacrifice, self-
denial and humility, but we came through thanks
to our patriotism. I reiterate the fact that despite our
disagreements and our different points of view, we have
reached a settlement of our conflict using all available
negotiation methods. I would like to solemnly thank the
Malagasy people, who are a peaceful people and aspire
to peace and whose courage and patience have been
unmatched in the peaceful settlement of our political
crisis.

The Malagasy people deserve a better future.
Citizens will be able to freely express their choices
on their future leader through the ballot box at the
upcoming presidential elections, scheduled to take
place on 25 October this year, for which the electoral
campaign began yesterday.

Madagascar is now starting a new phase in its
history. I would like to warmly thank all those who,
throughout the process of Madagascar’s emergence
from its crisis, supported and assisted us during the
transition period, in particular, the Southern African
Development Community (SADC), the various
presidents of the SADC Troika, the African Union, the
European Union, the United Nations, the Organization
of Islamic Cooperation, the International Organization
of la Francophonie, and all friendly countries without
exception, without forgetting those who have already
demonstrated their willingness to provide international
observers for the elections. At the same time, I would
like to renew my appeal to the entire General Assembly
to join the ranks of our partners.

We are at a crossroads. The people expect specific
and tangible results. The question is, do we have the
courage and the wisdom to sacrifice ourselves for the
well-being of our people and to avoid conflict and civil
war, so that innocent people do not lose their lives, so
that those who are in power no longer use weapons and
so that no one resorts to violence?

As a leader, I realize that the exercise of power
requires an awareness of our humanity and our
fallibility. That is the message that Madagascar would
like convey as its contribution to this general debate
today. The world is changing very quickly, a new
generation is rising to replace the old one, and leaders
have the duty to meet the expectations of our people
and to find a solution to ensure their well-being.

In my case, I did everything I could to overcome
the political crisis in Madagascar and maintain national
unity and the best interests of the Malagasy people.
I also decided that I will not be a candidate in the
upcoming presidential elections. It is on that note, and
with the well-known words of American theologian
and writer James Freeman Clarke, that I would like to
conclude: “A politician thinks of the next election. A
statesman, of the next generation.”


Let me first of all congratulate
you, Mr. President, on your election to the presidency
of the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session. We
wish you every success and assure you of our fullest
cooperation.

At a time when the world is facing multiple
challenges, there is renewed attention to the role of
the United Nations in advancing international peace,
security and prosperity. However, never has scepticism
about the capacity of the United Nations to do so been
higher, or the external environment less propitious for
multilateralism.

The nearly seven decades of work of the United
Nations hold one simple lesson: that we are most
successful when we adhere to the letter and spirit of
the United Nations Charter, basing our decisions on the
widest possible consensus and balancing equitably the
needs and responsibilities of nations at different stages
and levels of development.

In those seven decades, the world has changed in
fundamental ways. Asia and Africa are independent
and resurgent. Countries are now not only more
interdependent, but also face new, increasingly complex
challenges. For multilateralism to remain relevant and
effective in the future, multilateral institutions need to
be reformed urgently. The place to begin is right here.

The Security Council must be reformed and
restructured to reflect current political realities.
More developing countries should be included as both
permanent and non-permanent members.

The multilateral financial institutions should also
enable an enhanced voice for developing countries in
their decision-making structures. Multilateral efforts
must guide our quest for peace and security, wherever
they are threatened, and the centrality and contribution
of the United Nations system to development must be
restored.

Those objectives require the building of a new
international consensus suited to our time and rooted
in today’s realities. It is only such a plan of action that
will enable the United Nations to meet the twin tests of
legitimacy, and effectiveness and efficiency.

We commend your choice of the theme of this
session. Setting the stage for the post-2015 development
agenda is especially important as we deal with a
lingering global economic slowdown and continuing
volatility in financial markets. These have imposed
disproportionately heavy costs on developing countries
and the vulnerable groups within them.

Growth and inclusive development are naturally
important for all our countries. They require a
supportive international economic environment,
enhanced investment flows, including from multilateral
development banks, the transfer of technology, and an
open multilateral trading regime.

But the problems of the more than 1 billion people
living in abject poverty around the world need to be
attacked more directly. Poverty remains a major
political and economic challenge, and its eradication
requires special attention and a new collective thrust.
That priority should anchor the post-2015 development
agenda, which should be shaped by the Member States
so that it enjoys the broadest possible support and
acceptance.

Issues of peace, security, human rights and
governance are important and need to be addressed. But
we will fall short of realizing an ambitious post-2015
development agenda if we focus merely on governance
issues at the cost of robust economic growth. This
agenda should not be merely about reprioritizing
domestic spending, but also about fostering genuine
international partnerships between developing and
developed countries to bring about change. All of us
need the policy space necessary to set our own domestic
priorities.

No one knows the condition of developing countries
better than the developing countries themselves. It is
therefore important that the United Nations set clear and
concise goals and provide practical and well-defined
means of implementation, including an adequate flow
of resources and the transfer of technology, taking the
views of developing countries fully into account.

A meaningful post-2015 agenda must place equally
high priority on food and nutrition, health, education,
infrastructure, water, sanitation, energy and combating
discrimination against women. Especially critical is
women’s equal access to economic opportunities and
ensuring that they do not become victims of violence or
the targets of prejudice.

In India, we have sought to promote inclusive
development in multiple ways. Legislation has broadened
access to education and secured rural livelihoods. We
are now building the world’s largest programme for
food security. Digital technology is being harnessed to
improve the delivery of public services and benefits to
the people.

India is proud of its partnerships with developing
countries. Using modest resources, we have built strong
ties with Africa and the least developed countries. We
are committed to building 100 institutions in Africa
and have offered capacity-building support, including
thousands of scholarships, and made available over
$9.5 billion of concessional assistance. India and Africa
are engaging through the India-Africa Forum Summit
process. We also look forward to participating actively
in the third International Conference on Small Island
Developing States, to be held in Samoa in 2014, and to
contributing to its outcome.

Climate change is one of the defining challenges of
our times. We must summon the political will necessary
to craft a robust global response to climate change on
the basis of equity and the principle of common but
differentiated responsibilities.

We are deeply concerned about the future of West
Asia, a region with which India shares deep bonds of
history and one that is critical for our energy security
as well as the livelihoods of the nearly 7 million
Indians who work and live in the region. Not only is
the increasingly lethal conflict in Syria a tragedy for
the people of Syria, but it also threatens stability and
security in the region and beyond. It has been made worse
by the use of chemical weapons. The use of chemical
weapons, whosoever may have deployed them, must
be condemned in the strongest possible terms. India
strongly supports the elimination of chemical-weapons
material and equipment in Syria.There is no military
solution to that conflict. We must intensify efforts to
end the conflict and seek a political settlement. It is
essential that the “Geneva II” conference be convened
at the earliest opportunity.

We are encouraged that direct talks have resumed
between Israel and Palestine. India supports the early
realization of a sovereign, independent, viable and
united State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its
capital, living within secure and recognized borders,
side by side and at peace with Israel. We also remain
committed to the Palestinian quest for full membership
in the United Nations.

In our own region, Afghanistan prepares for a
historic political, security and economic transition.
The international community must support the people
of Afghanistan through this transition and beyond in
combating terrorism, preserving the progress of the
past decade and creating a stable, united and prosperous
Afghanistan.

Terrorism remains a grave threat to security and
stability everywhere and exacts a heavy toll of innocent
lives around the world. From Africa to Asia, we have
seen several manifestations of this menace in the last
few days alone. State-sponsored, cross-border terrorism
is of particular concern to India, also on account of
the fact that the epicentre of terrorism in our region is
located in our neighbourhood, in Pakistan.

From this rostrum yesterday, Prime Minister Nawaz
Sharif of Pakistan spoke of making a new beginning
(see A/68/PV.15). I reciprocate his sentiments and
am looking forward to meeting him tomorrow. India
is sincerely committed to resolving all issues with
Pakistan, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir,
through bilateral dialogue on the basis of the Simla
Agreement. However, for progress to be made, it is
imperative that the territory of Pakistan and the areas
under its control not be utilized for aiding and abetting
terrorism directed against India. It is equally important
that the terrorist machinery that draws its sustenance
from Pakistan be shut down. There must be a clear
understanding of the fact that Jammu and Kashmir is
an integral part of India and that there can never, ever,
be a compromise with the unity and territorial integrity
of India.

We need to renew our commitment, especially
here at the United Nations, to concerted, cohesive and
continuing global action against terrorism. There can
be no tolerance for States sheltering, arming, training or
financing terrorists. Nor can States absolve themselves
of the responsibility to prevent their territories from
being used to launch acts of terrorism.

The increasingly complex challenges to
international peace and security require a new
international consensus to be built, whether it is in the
field of cybersecurity, non-proliferation or terrorism.
This year, 25 years after Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi
put forward a comprehensive action plan for a nuclear-
weapon-free and non-violent world order, we must
strengthen efforts against nuclear proliferation and
pursue time-bound, universal, non-discriminatory,
phased and verifiable nuclear disarmament. We must
also guard against terrorists and non-State actors
gaining access to sensitive materials and technologies.

Two years from now, the United Nations will be
70 years old. Every new State born during that period
of 70 years has taken its place in the Assembly not just
with pride but also with hope. The year 2015 will be
a time to celebrate our successes and ensure that the
United Nations is ready for this century, by completing
much-needed reforms of the Organization and its
Security Council, developing an ambitious and balanced
post-2015 development agenda and demonstrating our
capacity to cooperate effectively for durable peace and
security in the world we live in.


I would
particularly like to congratulate the President of
the General Assembly and his country Antigua and
Barbuda, a member of the Group of Latin American
and Caribbean States and the Community of Latin
American and Caribbean States. It is an honour for all
Latin Americans that he is presiding over the General
Assembly at its sixty-eighth session.

I would like to begin by expressing our solidarity
with the victims of the attacks in Kenya and Pakistan,
and generally to all the victims of the terrorist attacks
occurring in various parts of the world. I say this not
out of formal sympathy or for reasons of protocol, but

because our country, Argentina, along with the United
States of America, is the only one on the American
continent to have suffered a terrorist attack — in
our case, on two occasions: in 1992, when the Israeli
Embassy in the city of Buenos Aires was blown up,
and two years later, when the Jewish community centre
AMIA in Argentina was bombed. Some of the relatives
of the victims are here with us, as always, and I can see
them from here. Clearly, we are talking about victims.
These were not soldiers or fighters. They were people
who were getting on a bus, perhaps entering a bar or
going to work, and who were surprised by an explosion.
They had not taken part in any war; they were not
combatants or soldiers; they had not chosen to go
and fight. So I am thinking of those victims and their
families, who deserve our solidarity and the strongest
possible condemnation of all forms of terrorism.

In the context of this sixty-eighth session of the
Assembly, we see the Syrian question as a common
thread. Almost in a premonition, only a short while
ago I was here at the United Nations, presiding over a
meeting of the Security Council, of which Argentina is
a non-permanent member for 2013-2014. On 6 August,
just about a month and a half ago, we proposed a
measure to reform the Security Council. We stated
that the functioning and the rationale of the Council
actually reflected another era, that of the Cold War,
when fear of nuclear holocaust had led to the creation of
the Organization, uniting the forces that had defeated
Nazi Germany, and then produced a bipolar world. That
fear of nuclear war resulted in a system with veto power
so that no one would be able to push a button and blow
up the world. The fact is that that instrument, which
worked in 1945, has now been shown to be dysfunctional
and completely obsolete — and not only as regards the
Syrian question, but also when it comes to dealing with
issues affecting peace and security around the world.

Incidentally, I would like to express my appreciation
for the fact that for the first time we have been given
the opportunity to speak at such a late hour of the day,
because it has somewhat interrupted the inertia of the
course of the meeting. There are times when we come
to these meetings with a format, almost a monologue,
that makes it difficult to present arguments or counter-
arguments that take into account the statements made
by previous speakers. I have listened very carefully
to almost all of the addresses given earlier today.
Obviously, I paid particular attention to those that touch
on the global decision-making system, and, of course,
because I am a staunch supporter of multilateralism, I
paid a lot of attention to the first address, by Secretary-
General Ban Ki-moon.

In many of those statements I heard mention of
21 August. On 6 August, we spoke of the need for
Security Council reform and of the fact that the right
of veto is no longer necessary. There should be a
system — such as those used by regional organizations
of the Americas, such as the Union of South American
Nations, Community of Latin American and Caribbean
States or the Southern Common Market and its
associated States — in which decisions are taken by
consensus. Why is that? Governmental administration
is different, as the power of veto is necessary in order
to govern. When dealing with conflict resolution
and management, if one party to the conflict, or
an interested party, has the right of veto, that right
necessarily becomes an obstacle to the resolution of
the conflict. We did not know what would occur 15 or
16 days later. Many have noted that the crisis in Syria
erupted on 21 August.

In fact, it is extremely difficult to understand
that the current crisis in Syria was only recognized
on 21 August, when we became aware of chemical
weapons. Syria has been caught up in that conflict for
over two and a half years. Over 150,000 people have
lost their lives and 99 per cent of them died as a result
of conventional weapons — not chemical weapons. I
remember that at the last meeting of the Group of Twenty
(G-20), during a discussion about Syria, I asked, “What
is the difference between a death resulting from bullets,
anti-personnel mines, missiles or hand grenades, and a
death resulting from chemical weapons?” Each is more
or less equally shocking. As it is not the first time,
why is there talk of chemical weapons as if it were the
first time that chemical weapons or weapons of mass
destruction have been used?

I recall a statement made by another leader
today with reference to the terrible gas chambers of
the Nazis, the gas in the trenches and the chemical
weapons used in other instances. I also remember
hearing about and reading about — as I had not yet
been born — the nuclear holocaust in Hiroshima and
Nagasaki and the consequences of using those weapons
on many generations of Japanese people.

I remember when I was much younger — the
President of Uruguay also recalled the time of his
youth, I was less than 20 years of age, and many others
will probably also remember — when napalm and
phosphorous were used during the Viet Nam War. That

was recorded forever in the Pulitzer prize-winning
photographs of naked boys and a naked girl. I remember,
as if it were today, that naked young girl running down
a road after having been hit by napalm in a bombing.

I also remember, in all fairness, the suffering of the
people of the United States when they saw the doors of
the planes open and they saw the corpses of the soldiers
who had gone to fight being removed, wrapped in black
plastic bags. I can imagine the pain of each girlfriend,
each sister, each wife, each daughter of the soldier
who had died, trying to understand why. Many did not
understand why the soldiers had had to lose their lives
many thousands of kilometres away from their country.
It is so irrational, so unjust. There are no just wars.
Only peace is just.

On 6 August, in the discussions on the issue of peace
and security, it was stated that peace and security are not
military concepts; rather, they are political concepts.
Today, I was pleased to hear the Secretary-General
mention that very concept, which we had referred to
in the Security Council — namely, that peace and
security are not military but rather political concepts.
Therefore, we welcome the fact that an agreement has
been reached on the question of Syria. My country
opposed direct intervention — bombing. It was quite
simple. The argument that, in order to avoid deaths, you
would cause even more deaths could not be sustained
by any reasoning or even common sense. We did not
speak out at that time only to speak. Furthermore, we
were not discussing just any country, but one with great
respect for the norms of international law.

My country, Argentina, has signed the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), making
Argentina one of the most advanced countries — if not
the most advanced country — in developing nuclear
power for peaceful and scientific purposes. We sell
nuclear power generators to Egypt, Algeria and
Australia. We also use nuclear energy for medical
purposes. We do not condemn the use of nuclear energy
for warfare while at the same time deploying nuclear
submarines. That has been our experience, for example,
in connection with the sovereignty dispute involving
our Malvinas Islands, since the United Kingdom has
militarized the southern Atlantic region and sent nuclear
submarines. We have no double standards. We are not
hypocritical. We have not only signed the NPT but are
also parties to the Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court (ICC), as was also mentioned by the
Secretary-General in his statement.

In other words, when we speak of condemning
dictators, we are actually parties to the Rome Statute and
can be brought before the Court. We are also members
of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
in Washington, D.C. It is curious that many who speak
of respect for human rights, the relevant institutions,
international law and the ICC and often refer to human
rights have not signed the treaties on the subject.

If one is to speak of human rights, Argentina
has accomplished a great deal. We were a founding
Member of the Organization and promoted the creation
of a human rights secretariat within the United Nations
and the International Convention for the Protection of
All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. I am joined
here by the head of the Asociación Madres de Plaza de
Mayo. She was also with me in Paris to sign the treaty,
of which we are a founding party.

I referred to human rights because there was
something said today about human rights in another
speech. It has been said here that if this is the world
in which people want to live, then they should say so
and be prepared to face the cold logic of mass graves.
Argentina too can speak of mass graves. Even today,
well into the twenty-first century, we continue to
come upon mass graves that hold the remains of the
thousands of prisoners and those who disappeared
under the genocidal dictatorship that began 24 March
1976, which was similar to the one that took power
on 11 September 1973 in our sister republic of Chile,
overthrowing the democratically elected Government
of Salvador Allende.

How wonderful it would have been, after all the
speeches condemning genocidal dictators, if someone
back then had come to the aid of the Argentine and
Chilean and so many other peoples of the American
continent who, in the midst of the Cold War, were the
sacrificial victims of murderous dictators. But it was
also said here that, if those who cared about human
rights were moved to act on someone’s behalf, perhaps
if that concern had at least coincided with the interests
of some great Power, they would have acted differently.
We have spoken of those things here, including the
need to put an end to that double standard, and we have
said that the resolutions and decisions of a multilateral
organization such as the United Nations must take place
on a level playing field for the weak and the strong, the
small and the large.

We have been waiting since 1965, when the
plenary and many resolutions of the Assembly and

the Committee on Decolonization required both
Argentina and the United Kingdom to sit down to
hold a dialogue — another word that I have repeatedly
heard in every speech. There is a dispute over the
matter of sovereignty over the Malvinas, and yet,the
United Kingdom has turned a cold shoulder. And so
we continue with double standards, which some people
do not like to hear mention of. But hypocrisies are like
witches; evidently, they exist.

I have also heard — I should add that I have heard
with pleasure, so not everything has to do with double
standards — that there has at last been recognition, as
an essential basis for beginning to untie the Gordian
knot that the matter of the Middle East represents, of
the need to recognize the State of Palestine and the
right of the State of Israel to live securely within its
borders. Moreover, I think it has quite rightly been said
that it is impossible to achieve security for the State of
Israel unless there is also recognition of the existence,
and support for the viability of the physical existence
of, the State of Palestine. We can do no less than agree
on that characterization.

I have also heard the new President of the Islamic
Republic of Iran, and I have heard the comments that
the great Powers have made about that change of
Government. If I understood correctly, there appears
to be a kind of new expectation of change in the face
of the new authorities in the Republic of Iran, with
which, as the Assembly knows, we have a disagreement
that stems from — a cause of mine — a formal case
by the Argentine judiciary against five Iranian citizens
in connection with their participation in the bombing
of the Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina. It has
now been 10 years since, for the first time, on 25 May
2003, then President Néstor Kirchner called in this
same Hall for the Islamic Republic of Iran to cooperate
in clarifying the facts of that case. Year after year
until 2007, he continued to do so, and from 2007 until
today I myself have also continued to do so. A little
over a year ago, we received a reply from the then
Foreign Minister of Iran offering to initiate talks and
reach an agreement on cooperation. Why? For a very
simple reason. Because the case has been stalled for
19 years. Nothing has moved. If there are five Iranian
accused, the only one with whom I can and must speak
so that the judge can take a deposition from those five
citizens is obviously the Republic of Iran. That seems
very obvious, but often in this peculiar world, even in
my own country, which is also a bit peculiar, obvious
things have to be explained.

I have also heard today about imperfect choices.
I liked that expression, which was used by one of
the Presidents. I think that when Argentina spends
10 years asking for cooperation and then suddenly
someone finally says “Fine, we are going to talk; we
are going to cooperate”, there was no other possible
choice except to sit down together. That issue used was
internally in our country to attack us politically, and
here too in the United States by the vulture funds to pit
us against the United States Congress and say that we
were reaching an agreement, a treaty, with Iran. But
on what? Nuclear weapons? No. On a strategic alliance
to attack the West? No. On an agreement to convert to
Islam? No. The agreement was simply to unblock the
procedural impasse in order for the Argentine judiciary
to take depositions from the accused, while at the same
time ensuring due process through a commission of
international jurists who would be neither Iranian nor
Argentine and whose actions would not be binding.

The treaty was approved in my country nine months
ago. I could almost say that the baby is about to be
born, if I were to put it in biological terms or in terms
of childbirth. It was approved by all the appropriate
organisms, including the Parliament. It was published
in the official bulletin. The world knows that Argentina
has duly complied with that treaty. To those who found
it so convenient for Iran — after nine years with no
news or notification or agreement from the Iranian
authorities, I wonder if we were not right ourselves
when we affirmed and said that it was a way to unblock
the issue.

The fact is that there is now a new Government to
whose speeches I listened attentively, and a President
who declared in statements I read that he in no way
denied the Holocaust. That is very important. At least
it is important to me and to many citizens around
the world. Even today, he specifically declared that
through the recent election, by displacing a leader
whose positions we have all heard, so there is no point
in repeating them, Iranian society had proved that it
wanted more moderate positions. We have heard, from
this very rostrum and these very microphones, that there
is a will to agree, to talk, to be an open and peaceful
democratic society, and to act in goodwill.

The President of France referred to the nuclear
case as the important matter pertaining to Iran; I
would like to speak about the issue of the Asociación
Mutual Israelita Argentina as the other major issue.
They said they would make gestures by opening up to

negotiations, and that they did not want weapons for
military use. In other words, as I understood it, they
were saying that they would adhere to what we support,
which is non-proliferation. Now we wait to be told if
the agreement has been approved, or when it will be.
Moreover, we await the announcement of the date for
the establishment of the commission, as well as a date
for the Argentine judge to travel to Tehran — yes, to
Tehran; we are not afraid and we will go there.

We believe in the goodwill of people, and there is
no reason for us not to believe that they actually want
peace. Everyone who has spoken here has said they
wanted peace and that they loved one another, so we
believe everyone. But we also hope to see everyone
acting consistent with their words and actions. I
therefore wanted to put this specific question on the
table. I have no doubt that, if the words we have heard
here are true, we will see a positive response. I say that
to avoid any misunderstanding as to our deep conviction
and belief in the rules of international law, and also
to make it clear that our patience does not mean that
we are naive or even foolish. We think that more than
enough time has gone by, and we think answers are now
needed. The victims deserve this. The Islamic Republic
of Iran deserves that too, if it really wants to show to
the world that this is a different Government and that
its actions are also different. I trust that this will be the
case. I have no reason to think otherwise.

As for other matters that I wish to discuss, let me
say that we are “serial abiders” when it comes to the
norms of international law. We are also “serial victims”
of other unwritten rules that are nevertheless very
important in today’s world of finance and economics.
They are norms not written by the major international
financial centres or the risk-rating agencies or those
that speculate, like the vulture funds, when it comes to
dealing with countries that, like Argentina, defaulted
on their debt, in the case of Argentina in 2001.

There has also been talk here of poverty and the
need for children to have access to education. I wish to
read out two paragraphs of the address by the Secretary-
General. The first has to do with weapons, wherein he
speaks about poverty and points out that

“at a time of pressing human need, spending on
weapons remains absurdly high. Let us get our
priorities right and invest in people instead of
wasting billions of dollars on deadly weapons.”
(A/68/PV.5, p. 3)
For the record, Argentina does not produce any
chemical weapons, or even sell conventional weapons.
It would be interesting to find out — as I mentioned
at the G-20 — who supplies weapons to the rebel
groups that are fighting the Syrian Government. It goes
without saying that the Government of Syria possesses
the weapons of a State. We would like to know who
supplies the weapons to those who fight the Syrian
Government. This is not about taking any sides; rather
it is just about putting forward something that is quite
logical, for the weapons trade is today a real business.

Did we really have to wait for 1,000 people to die
as a result of chemical weapons to realize that 150,000
others had died before them? Why was an arms
embargo not declared two years ago to prevent so many
deaths? Well, that should be answered by those who sell
weapons. We do not sell them and therefore cannot give
an answer to that question — although we suspect what
it would be.

I would also like to read out another very significant
passage in which the Secretary-General talked about
the economic situation. Although the question of Syria
has been the common thread running through the
whole Assembly, it is clear that the economic crisis that
started here in the United States with the bankruptcy of
Lehman Brothers in 2008 still, despite all speeches and
things we have seen and heard, continues to generate
volatility and fragility. The latter is a term that was
often invoked, and not just in the G-20.

We see millions of people unemployed around the
world, a situation that very much reminds us of that in
Argentina in 2001 when we defaulted on our own debt.
This is linked to the fact that we are also serial victims
of the unwritten rules of the lobbyists, of risk-rating
agencies and of those who trade in financial derivatives
and speculate like vultures hovering over countries in
default, buying securities at very low prices and then
attempting to make millions. That is the Argentine
case, but it could be the story of any other country, very
soon in fact.

Since the Government of former President Néstor
Kirchner first took office, on 25 May 2003, Argentina
began to explore how to emerge from its debt, which
accounted for 160 per cent of our country’s gross
national product. We had 25 per cent unemployment,
a poverty rate of 54 per cent and more than 30 per cent
in extreme poverty. Many countries could perhaps see
themselves mirrored in that state of affairs.

In 2005 we organized the first restructuring process,
which was accepted by 76 per cent of our creditors.
During my own Government in 2010 we reopened the
debt-restructuring process and managed to secure the
approval of 93 per cent of our creditors. Consider that, in
any country that has insolvency laws, when companies
go bankrupt the law requires the agreement of at least
66 per cent of the creditors in order for the bankruptcy
judge to make the remaining creditors accept the
terms — at least, that is the case in Argentina. I think
the number is the same in the United States, that is,
66 per cent. In addition, here in the United States even
municipalities can declare bankruptcy, and a judge may
decide that, if the sustainability of the municipality is at
stake, an even lower figure is acceptable.

The fact remains that in 2010 Argentina reached
agreement with 93 per cent of its creditors. Since 2005,
Argentina has consistently and in a timely manner paid
each and every one of its debt maturities, so much so
that the last payment was made only a few days ago.
That involved a bond subject to Argentine domestic
law, payable in Buenos Aires. We paid $2.07 billion,
and today our debt to gross domestic product ratio is
a little under 45 per cent, down from 160 per cent, as I
mentioned before. Much of the debt is actually public-
sector debt. The foreign-currency-denominated debt of
Argentina is only 8 per cent of gross domestic product,
due both to national and foreign private holders. I
would reiterate, however, that we have been in strict
compliance.

In 2008, seven years after Argentina defaulted
on its debt, the vulture funds, as we call them,
swooped in. The United Nations is caught between the
vultures of debt and the hawks of war. It is worse than
Hitchcock’s The Birds, since Hitchcock, at least, was
a good director. But what is certain is that bonds were
purchased for $40 million, and they now wish to collect
on that while disregarding the creditors’ agreement to
certain arrangements and extensions. The creditors,
like any group of creditors, wanted to be repaid and
so approved certain arrangements and extensions. But
the vulture funds want to recover the whole nominal
value of the bonds, without arrangements, extensions or
delay. From the $40 million that they initially bought in
the so-called self-regulated markets, they will recover
$1.7 billion. So from 2008, we are talking about a yield
of over 1,300 per cent.

I would like to ask the Secretary-General where
we can find businesspeople devoted to creating jobs,
innovating and investing in production if, in this kind
of casino economy, somebody can buy $40 million in
defaulted bonds and then secure a court decision that
enables them to collect $1.3 or $1.7 billion.

This is not only an Argentinian problem; this is a
problem that involves the whole world. This is why we
wish to thank the Republic of France for having gone
to the United States Supreme Court and presented itself
as amicus curiae. We also thank the former head of the
International Monetary Fund, Anne Krueger. She is not
and has never been a very good friend of Argentina’s,
but she also did that.

We also remember the former United States
Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O’Neill, who, when it
was decided to leave Argentina to its own devices in
2001, amidst a social and institutional crisis that left
30 people dead as a result of violence in the streets,
said that American plumbers should not have to pay
for an Argentine fiesta. Today, I say that the millions
of Argentines who went back to work, the millions of
Argentines who can once again entertain hopes and
dreams, the scientists who returned to the country and
the children who once again have access to education
do not have to pay for the lobbyists’ fiesta. These
lobbyists, by participating in political campaigns and
contributing money to the politicians’ campaigns here,
have the lobbying power they need to destabilize the
international financial system. Is that not remarkable?
And such a short time has elapsed between Paul
O’Neill’s assertion and what we are saying today.

We are not asking for anything. We just want to
be allowed to pay. It is remarkable. We started by
defaulting on our debt and now they will not let us
pay it back. It seems almost absurd, in a world that is
grappling with debt restructuring involving millions of
men and women. Even here in the United States, there
are men and women who are unemployed and have lost
their homes, not to speak of the devastation we see in
Europe.

Obviously, Argentina and many of the countries
represented here today do not have the good fortune
of being countries that issue reserve currencies, but
we have expressed our willingness to honour our
commitments. I think this should be recognized,
unless the idea is to use a country like Argentina as an
example, because it was able to climb out of the hole, to
create jobs and generate growth, and to pay its creditors
without applying the prescriptions that the International
Monetary Fund tried to impose upon it.

Incidentally, there is also a need for global market
regulation and market interventions. Wonderful
statements have been made in the Group of 20 regarding
tax havens, ratings agencies and capital flows, but what
is certain is that the world needs global laws for global
governance. Just as we ask for Security Council and
General Assembly resolutions to be respected, we also
ask for rules and for respect for the sovereignty of
countries, especially those countries like ours that wish
to honour their commitments.

Finally, I would like to address the Assembly on
this very special day. Today we see war, human rights
violations and other violations intertwined. Perhaps
some are of a more subtle nature, such as losing one’s
job, one’s rights, one’s livelihood or one’s hope. I think,
at the core, our duty as world leaders is to build a truly
different history.

Many of those who have already spoken have made
somewhat ambivalent statements. Some have been
encouraging, while others have been disillusioned as a
result of not having been able to do what they wanted,
almost as if their desire to do something had just been
a whim, and when they were not allowed to, they grew
frustrated. I believe that the one thing we cannot do
when we have the responsibility of governing and
when we might be able to govern a country with a lot
of power is to lose our temper or, even worse, make
mistakes. Making mistakes is the one thing we should
not do, because mistakes are not paid for by the leaders
who make decisions or imperfect choices. Mistakes are
paid for in human lives, not only if we are talking about
war, but also if we are talking about the economy. In
that case, they are paid for in terms of unemployment,
lack of access to health care, education, housing and
security.

There is cheap labour available for drug trafficking,
which we talk so much about fighting. One of the keys
to fighting drug trafficking is to put an end to cheap
labour in emerging and underdeveloped countries. We
must also put an end to money-laundering for drug
trafficking in central countries, because the money
is not laundered in the countries that produce the raw
materials. Money-laundering takes place in the central
countries. It is right to say this, because we hear so
much talk about drug trafficking and other things.

I would conclude with a phrase by the Secretary-
General that I really liked. I thought his invitation was
most appropriate. It was specifically an invitation to
turn hope into action through hard work, commitment,
dignity and integrity. He ended with the words “with
passion”. I am a person with a lot of passion. Some say
that I am sometimes a bit too passionate and a bit too
forceful in my statements. “With passion”, he said, but
above all with compassion. He said that we can build
a future that the people want and the world needs with
passion and compassion.

It is not the first time I have heard this word. I must
confess that I heard it many years ago, and very often,
in my own country. Perhaps I did not understand it at
the time, this passion. It was used then, and is still used
today, by a cardinal from Argentina who is today Pope
and whom I would also like, as a Christian, to thank
for the key role he played in dealing with the question
of Syria. Compassion and passion — that means the
passionate embrace of hope, of the future, of the things
that are yet to come, and compassion for those who are
less privileged, for the most vulnerable, for those who
are waiting for so many things, who have done nothing
to deserve extreme poverty and be Godforsaken, and
compassion for all those who are victims — of war, of
unemployment, of extreme poverty and misery — in
other words, of our own failures as world leaders.


It is an honour to join the Assembly
today. I congratulate President Ashe on his election and
sincerely thank the Secretary-General for his always
invaluable work.

Global security will long be shaped by what is
happening right now in the Middle East. Our region can
be and must be a house of peace and prosperity, with
strong pillars of good governance and wide-open doors
to opportunity, especially for our young people. That is
Jordan’s blueprint, and we are not alone.

But no house can be built when its city is burning.
And today, the region’s fires cannot be ignored. All the
world is in their path. To protect the future, our world
must respond. The Syrian crisis is a global humanitarian
and security disaster. Escalating violence threatens
to hollow out the rest of that country’s economic and
political future. Extremists have rushed to promote and
exploit ethnic and religious divisions. Such a dynamic
could crush regional renaissance and put global security
at risk. We have a duty to reject those destructive forces.

Last month, Jordan hosted more than 100 eminent
Muslim scholars from around the world. Their work
affirms the true teachings of Islam and builds on
Jordan’s long-standing interfaith and intra-religious
initiatives: the Amman Message, A Common Word,
and World Interfaith Harmony Week.

The scholars said that there was no single prescribed
model for an Islamic State, but they affirmed that the
modern Islamic State should be a civic State, founded
on institutions and with an inclusive constitution based
on the rule of law, justice and freedom of opinion
and faith. The modern Islamic State should uphold
equality across the ethnic and religious spectrum.
The scholars decisively condemned the incitement of
ethnic and sectarian conflict, known in Arabic as fitna.
They recognized that evil for what it is — a threat
to the Muslim world, the Ummah, and indeed to all
humankind. Jordan has called upon the Organization of
Islamic Cooperation to adopt those recommendations,
which are critical guiding principles amid the turbulence
and transformations across our region.

This month, we in Jordan also convened an
international meeting to address challenges to Arab
Christian communities. They are an essential part of
our region’s past, present and future. Jordan has been
a historic model of coexistence and fraternity between
Muslims and Christians. We will continue to do our
utmost to protect our Arab Christian communities and
minorities, and we call on all countries to join us in our
stand for diversity, tolerance and mutual respect.

The truth is that respect for each other is the way
forward for all of us. The historic transformation
going on in my region today will not be achieved by
formulas; it will come when all of our citizens feel
truly represented. Jordan seeks a house of the future
that includes all. We are building our future on the solid
foundation of majority consensus, minority rights, a
democratic culture of active citizenship and peaceful,
evolutionary change.

The Syrian people must also have a future. And
for that, the international community must act. It is

time to fast-track a political transition in Syria, end
the violence and bloodshed, neutralize the threat of
chemical weapons, restore security and stability,
preserve the unity of Syria and its territorial integrity,
and engage all — all — of its people in building their
country’s future.

Syria’s future will depend on the Syrian people, but
the world has the duty, the interest and the power to help.
And help must come soon. The damage and dangers
are mounting. The flow of Syrian refugees into Jordan
already equals one-tenth of our own population. It could
reach 1 million, some 20 per cent of our population, by
next year. These are not just numbers; they are people
who need food, water, shelter, sanitation, electricity,
health care and more.

Not even the strongest global economies could
absorb such demand on infrastructure and resources,
let alone a small economy and the fourth water-poorest
country in the world. Jordanians have opened their arms
to those in need, as we have always done, but I say here
and now that my people cannot be asked to shoulder the
burden of what is a regional and global challenge.

Let me acknowledge, with gratitude, the generous
response to date by the United Nations and regional and
international donors. But we can all see the reality on
the ground; the need is outracing the response. More
support is urgently needed to send a strong signal that
the world community stands shoulder to shoulder with
those who have borne so much. Those who are suffering
in Syria also need the world to be resolute: the Syrian
parties must abide by international humanitarian law
and principles, and allow humanitarian access, into and
within Syria, to reach those in need.

Our international community must also work
together for a speedy resolution of the region’s core
crisis. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict consumes
resources that are needed to build a better future and
feeds the flames of extremism around the world. It is
time to put this fire out.

The talks that began in July show that progress
can be made, with willing parties, determined United
States leadership and strong regional and international
backing. We commend the President of Palestine and
the Prime Minister of Israel for the bold decision to
resume final status negotiations. We urge them to
stay committed to reaching an agreement within the
established time frame. Let there be no actions that
can derail what is still a fragile process. This means
no continued settlement construction and no unilateral
actions that threaten the status quo in East Jerusalem
and its Muslim and Christian holy sites. Such threats
would be a flashpoint for global concern.

We know the right way forward. And the goal
can be reached. It includes a just and final two-State
settlement, based on international legitimacy and the
Arab Peace Initiative; for Israel, real security and
normal relations with 57 Arab and Muslim countries;
for the Palestinian people, at long last, the rights they
deserve in a viable and independent Palestinian State
on Palestinian national soil, based on the 1967 lines and
with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Let us keep the focus on what we are
building — communities safe for families to lead
normal lives; a Middle East of many houses, working
together in region-wide cooperation; the ultimate
security for our future.

The future is ours to build, not in the Middle
East alone, but in global partnership. Those who are
working to do the right thing need the whole world’s
support. With every country that is more prosperous
and free, with every neighbourhood that is safer, with
every person who has more reason to hope, the entire
house of humankind grows more secure. Let this be our
promise, not only for future generations, but for those
we serve today.