I
wish to convey my greetings to the Secretary-General
and all the Presidents, Heads of State, delegations and
international organizations from across the world. I
convey also my special greetings to those attending this
annual general debate of the General Assembly.

We are here once again, as usual, to share
experiences relating to leadership and to work for the
sake of life, humanity, equality and social justice. But
we are also here to express our profound differences as
concerns life, peace and democracy. Over the past few
days I have been listening to the statements made by
certain Powers, which leave a lot to be desired in terms
of liberty, equality, dignity and sovereignty.

Thanks to the awareness of the Bolivian people, I
have now held the presidency for almost eight years. In
that time — despite the economic and financial crises in
some so-called developed, industrialized and, I would
even say, even exaggeratedly industrialized countries,
because some Powers industrialize simply to put an end
to life — we in Bolivia have an economic growth rate of
4.8 per cent, on average. Previously it was just over 2 per
cent under the economic policies of the free market and
neoliberalism. This year the economic growth rate is
estimated at 6 per cent, at least, so we are doing well.

I would like to point out that thanks to that economic
growth, in the context of the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) we have reduced poverty; we have met
the MDG of reducing poverty and extreme poverty.
United Nations data for 2011 indicates that that year
1 million Bolivian men and women entered the middle
class. Bolivia has 10 million inhabitants, so that means
that 10 per cent of Bolivia’s inhabitants improved
their economic status. The rate of undernutrition for
children under the age of 5 has decreased even more
than required by the related Millennium Development
Goal. The literacy-rate goal for people between 15 and
24 years of age was met, and UNESCO declared Bolivia
a country free of illiteracy thanks to the cooperation of
Cuba and Venezuela, which have been working with us
since 2006-2007.

The Goal on coverage in terms of maternal health
has been reached, and maternal and child mortality has
decreased. Thanks to that economic growth we have
been able to create vouchers for pregnant women and
for children under 2 years of age, which has made
possible a decrease in maternal and child mortality.
Coverage in terms of potable water has increased. For
example, we created a programme entitled “My water
(more investment for water)”. I must thank the Andean
Development Corporation and the Inter-American
Development Bank for their contributions. With their
funding we put together “My water” I and II, and we
are now on the third programme, with $300,000 per
municipality in rural areas. That has made it possible
for us to provide some municipalities with 100 per cent
coverage in terms of potable water.

I have just come from a major event in the department
of Santa Cruz, where I visited several municipalities.
In two of them, the mayors — who are not from the
party in power but from other parties — told me that
“My water” III will result in 100 per cent of the local
population having drinking water. We have made
advances in that area. Investment in water is a blessing
for life. It means minimizing disease, because potable
water helps people avoid contracting diseases.

I would like all here to know that we have been able
to achieve this thanks to a State that lives in conditions
of sovereignty and dignity. Why am I saying this?
Because previously, politically we were subject to the
American empire. The embassies of the United States
decided who would be minister. Economically, we were
subject to the International Monetary Fund. From the
time we arrived, we have said “Enough!” to submitting
to international organizations and to the United States
embassy. Previously, for any loan, the International
Monetary Fund set conditionalities, blackmailing the
various Governments. Those conditionalities involved
our giving up our natural resources to transnational
companies, so that Bolivia would privatize basic
services. But basic services are a human right and
cannot be private property. So when we freed ourselves
politically and economically, we started to do better.

One of the policies we adopted was to nationalize
hydrocarbons — gas and oil. I want the Assembly to
know, just to share a small experience, that previously
State contracts with transnational oil companies stated
that the bearer acquired the right to the land at the mouth
of the well. When union leaders asked Governments
why the gas and oil were not the property of Bolivians,
they told us that as long as they were underground they
belonged to the Bolivians, but once they were out of the
ground that was no longer the case. They invented this
title business for the land at the mouth of the well.

In addition, 82 per cent of the benefits went to
transnationals, especially in mega-oilfields, and 18 per
cent to Bolivians. It was looting, it was theft. But since
we nationalized hydrocarbons, I must say that we
have really begun to improve the economic situation
and the social conditions in our country. Just one
example: oil income in 2005, before I was President,
was $300 million. This year, thanks to nationalization
and the fight waged by social movements, oil sales will
total more than $5 billion. Last year we almost reached
$5 billion. That figure continues to grow with new
investments, and today we have reached the stage of
giving added value to those natural resources.

As the Assembly is aware, I am not an expert in
politics or in economic matters. But I am here at the
request of the Bolivian people, learning daily about the
needs, problems and demands of my people, the people
of Bolivia.

I would therefore also like to say that this joint work
with the social movements, which are the organized
representatives of the people, is going well. I would
like the United Nations and the Secretary-General to
know that we have issued a directive and are working
on the patriotic agenda for 2025. What exactly is that
agenda about? As Bolivia was founded in 1825, the year
2025 will be our bicentennial as a republic, while we
are now a plurinational State. We are working with all
social movements and authorities, be they local mayors
or provincial Governments, to establish a medium- and
long-term plan that will make it possible to guarantee a
future for the generations to come.

Besides local issues, there are also pending regional
issues, such as the one between Bolivia and Chile on
sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean. An invasion
began on 14 February 1879, which on 23 March of
the same year gave rise to a limited resistance. Who
invaded us? It was the Chilean oligarchy of the time,
along with British companies. We lost our access to the
sea, and many meetings have been subsequently held
on the issue. An unfair treaty was imposed on us, and it
was not observed.

I want the Assembly to be aware of the following.
In a number of meetings with former Presidents and
with the latest brotherly President of Chile, we have
tried to reach an understanding. However, there has
never been an official proposal to resolve the issue of
the Bolivian people’s irrevocable right to return to the
Pacific with sovereignty.

What did the President of Chile say in September
2010 when he addressed the General Assembly here
in New York (see A/65/PV.12)? He said that treaties
were inviolable and they must not be touched. On
28 January 2013, during the summit of the Community
of Latin America and the Caribbean States (CELAC)
in Santiago, President Piñera Echeñique said that of
course treaties could be perfected. First, he said they
were untouchable, and then he said they could be
perfected. That shows that this issue is on his mind and
that it needs to be resolved.

On 17 December 2012, Piñera Echeñique publicly
stated that Chile would ensure respect not only for the
treaties it had signed, but also its sovereignty, with
all the strength in the world. But in January at the
CELAC summit President Piñera Echeñique said that
sovereignty could not be touched unless economic
interests were at stake. On 22 September 2011, at the
General Assembly President Piñera Echeñique said
that there were no ongoing territorial issues between
Chile and Bolivia (see A/66/PV.15). However, on
2 February 2013, in an interview with La Tercera, a
Chilean newspaper, he recognized the following: Chile
has offered Bolivia autonomy in a territorial enclave. In
other words, he is trying to resolve the issue. But that
proposal has never been made official.

There is a fourth contradiction. On 11 November
2012, at the Ibero-American Summit held in Cadiz,
Spain, the President of Chile said that Chile would
demand that a valid treaty that was still in force — the
treaty of 1904 — be respected, and that any conversation
about the matter must be bilateral in nature: it did not
belong in a multilateral forum such as that in which we
are participating today.

What did the President of Chile say on 2 February
2013? He said that the possibility of a gateway to the
sea without sovereignty, north of Arica, will come to an
end if Peru won at The Hague. Another contradiction:
in June 2013, President Sebastián Piñera Echeñique
said that Chile had the right to defend its territory,
sea and sovereignty with strength and conviction and
that Chile was a country that would never bend in the
legitimate defence of its territory. In June, he said
that Chile would not cede to the Bolivian position
while President Morales continued to belittle him. On
7 September 2013, he said that, naturally, they would
respect the ruling from The Hague. When it came to
the ruling from The Hague, they were a country that
respected rulings.

I simply wanted to state that to avoid conflict.
Since its foundation as a plurinational State, Bolivia has
been by nature a peaceful State. With all due respect,
I would like to inform members that we have turned to
international courts. We have requested the International
Court of Justice to declare that the Republic of Chile
has an obligation to effectively negotiate, in a timely
fashion and in good faith, sovereign access to the Pacific
Ocean in order to re-establish Bolivia’s past, present
and future rights to the sea. I want members to be aware
that this request cannot and should not be interpreted as
an act of hostility. On the contrary, it is a demonstration
of Bolivia’s respect and confidence in the mechanisms
for the peaceful settlement of international disputes.

Members cannot imagine how much damage we
have suffered, economically and geographically, or the
damage that has been done to the people of Bolivia and
to our past and future generations, by the 1879 invasion.
Our grandparents continue to ask us when we are going
to go back to the sea, because Bolivia was born with an
outlet to the Pacific Ocean. So that everyone is aware:
we are seeking a peaceful solution to this dispute.

We have heard the various statements made over
the past few days. One cannot listen to every single one
of them, but I want to say that, while we are working
to eliminate extreme poverty, we, the Heads of State
and Government, are also working for peace with social
justice. Nevertheless, a handful of Powers promote
wars, armed conflict and military intervention without
respecting even international organizations.

We have heard here statements about freedom,
democracy, peace, justice and security. As peoples
who have been the subject of interventions and have
been exploited, marginalized and robbed of our natural
resources by the empires of the time, we wonder what
democracy, what peace and what social justice some
Presidents who come here are talking about. We witness
Presidents and their retinues blocking airspace and not
providing guarantees of our attendance to this forum,
for example. How can they speak of democracy, when
the spy services of the United States violate human
rights and the privacy and security of other States while
using private companies? It turns out that they spy not
only on democratic Governments, but even on their own
allies, their own citizens and the United Nations itself.
Well, fine, let them spy on us anti-imperialist Presidents
and Governments. But spying on the United Nations?
Spying on their allies? I feel that there is a great deal of
overweening arrogance towards humankind.

That is why we continue to speak out. Not only
do they spy, they also hatch coups d’état. What peace
can we speak of when military spending sacrifices the
human rights of our peoples? I would like to ask the
people of the United States: How is it possible, when
there are so many people out of work, for their country’s
Government and President to spend $700 billion on
the military and espionage annually, when there are
so many of our brothers in the United States who are
homeless and jobless and without an education? One
cannot understand how that country can spend so much
money interfering with other countries while leaving
its own unprovided for.

They talk to us of human rights while torture is
being carried out in the prisons of Guantánamo and
on military bases in the Middle East, and while union
and political leaders who do not share imperialist
and capitalist views are also tortured. I would like to
say to the United States that it must not believe it is
master of the world. It is mistaken. Furthermore, it
signs agreements yet refuses to sign some of the most
important treaties in the world. It does not respect
United Nations resolutions.

The security of the empire and the fight against
terrorism have become the biggest excuse and tool
for unilateral military intervention. Terrorism cannot
be combated through more military spending and
interventions or the training of military forces. As
far as I know, the way to fight terrorism is with social
policies, not military bases; with religious tolerance,
more democracy, more equality of justice and more
education.

What country is free from problems? Of course
there are differences. The best thing to do is to provide
means, even if not all our Governments have the same
economic policies. Capitalism wants to emerge from its
crisis through war and armed intervention. We must ask
ourselves who benefits from the wars. Who distributes
the natural resources after an intervention? Whose
hands do they end up in, once countries are bombed?
Who is really governing in the United States, I wonder?
Is it its citizens, or the companies that promote wars?
From outside, at least — I am not an ambassador living
in the United States — what we see is that those who
finance political and election campaigns are bankers
and big businessmen, and they are the ones setting
policy.

Those who govern cannot be mistaken or confused
about the conflict in Syria. Naturally, we are against

the use of chemical weapons and weapons of mass
destruction. But who possesses the greatest nuclear
arsenal? Who invented chemical weapons? Who
industrialized those weapons that end human lives? In
my region, at least, things are perfectly clear. We know
whose hands they are in, where they come from and
who produces them.

Democracies do not wage war. What we are seeing
is that those who make the decisions about wars are the
arms industry, the financial system and oil companies.
Plutocracy has become a substitute for democracy. The
Government of the rich and powerful decides the fate of
the world. We are facing a new moment in the imperial
geopolitical disposition — and I do not wish to revisit
how Latin America and the Caribbean, like Africa and
the Middle East, were at one time carved up by various
imperial Powers, who were interested not in resolving
issues of poverty, democracy and equality but rather
in those countries’ natural resources — and now, once
again, those Powers wish to divide it all up through
military intervention and with military bases.

Another subject being debated is the colonization
of space, as we have seen in recent years. Those who
believe they are the masters of the world have told
us that their power has no limits and that they can
intervene wherever they feel like. Again, I wonder what
the United Nations is for. What do we have treaties and
conventions for? What use is multilateralism? Human
multilateralism we welcome; inhuman interventionism
will be combated by people all over the world. I believe
that as a union leader and as someone from one of the
most humiliated sectors in the history of Latin America,
the indigenous peasant peoples.

War is a business for capitalism. There can be no
peace without justice; there can be no equality as long
as the business of war has pride of place. It starts and
wages wars for its businesses. That is why I believe it is
important at this event to consider such issues in depth.

Another instrument of domination is the fight
against drug trafficking. But I have to say that despite
the efforts of the Bolivian people and Government,
there are certain Powers that do not shoulder their
responsibilities in combating the traffic in drugs,
because the drug market is in the capitalist countries.
Since we got rid of the Drug Enforcement Agency
(DEA) and launched our own national policy — and
thanks to some of our neighbours, such as Argentina,
Brazil and Chile, to which I am grateful for their joint
efforts — we have seen improvements and a better way
of fighting drug trafficking than the way imposed by
the DEA and the United States. I welcome the fact that
the United Nations has acknowledged the decrease in
drug trafficking in Bolivia, but it has not been certified
by the Government of the United States. Who should
we believe, the United States or the United Nations? I
leave it up to the Assembly.

I have felt somewhat insecure when it comes to
visiting the United Nations in New York, which is
why we should think seriously about changing the
location of the Headquarters of the Organization. The
Headquarters of the United Nations should be in the
territory of a State that has ratified all the treaties
adopted by the United Nations. As the Assembly is
aware, the Government has never ratified the treaties on
human rights or the rights of Mother Earth. They do not
guarantee us visas or overflights. I offer my solidarity
with my friend Nicolás Maduro Moros, President of
Venezuela. How can we be sure that a meeting of the
United Nations here in New York is secure? Perhaps
some of us do, but those of us who do not share the
views of imperialism and capitalism feel completely
insecure.

I would just like to say, though not out of fear, that
we should not be complicit in such an arrogant attitude
to the peoples of the world. How can we genuinely
believe in the United Nations if we do not respect
resolutions — for example, those ending the economic
blockade of Cuba. There are only two or three countries
that do not vote to end it. Most of us welcome it and
vote for the resolution every time. But if it is not
implemented and not respected, then why are we here
at the United Nations?

Furthermore, I wish to inform the Assembly
that everyone knows that the United States harbours
terrorists, criminals and the corrupt. They escape
from Bolivian justice and arrive here. The United
States Government is not assisting in the fight against
corruption. What kind of an agreement could we then
have in the fight against corruption?

Beyond that, the United States accuses the
Governments of other countries. It accuses Cuba, of
promoting terrorism. How can Cuba do that? Perhaps it
is due to such accusations that only 60 or 70 Presidents,
of the more than 190, have come here. I feel that such
policies scare off Presidents. Who will come next year
to vote, when resolutions are never respected?

That reason, and many others, should encourage us
to consider changing the Headquarters of the United
Nations. I do not expect it to be Bolivia, or South
America. There are countries that have ratified all of the
human rights treaties. That is where the Headquarters
of the United Nations should be located.

There is blackmail when it comes to visas. I had to
wait for a visa in order to come here, and then it was
for only four, five or six days — no more. What good
is such a visa? One has to watch the clock and when
to leave, because the visa will be taken from us. We
are being threatened, intimidated and blackmailed with
visas.

If the Assembly is here to seriously discuss the well-
being of humankind, perhaps my country can share
with some who are present here the idea of seriously
considering establishing a tribunal of the peoples,
including major international organizations that defend
human rights, to begin an investigation of the Obama
Government.

I was surprised by the words of United States
President Obama at the start of his term. It struck me
when he stated, “I was elected to end wars”. Those
were his words, found in newspapers, on radio and on
television. I said to myself, this fraternal President of
the United States originates from a family that suffered
from discrimination like me. We are going to agree and
we will put an end to war. I was deeply struck by that.
Now we are seeing the exact opposite. Perhaps it is due
to the Nobel Peace Prize. We congratulate him. In the
end, however, it is a Nobel Peace Prize, rather than a
Nobel war prize.

What is the basis for a trial? It certainly includes
crimes against humanity and the bombing of Libya.
I would like to know who owned the oil in Libya
beforehand? Who owns it now? Previously, at the least,
the people of Libya benefited from that oil, but how is it
being managed and used now? What happened in Iraq?
I am convinced that behind any war or intervention,
a plan is being devised on how to later seize the
natural resources. That was our experience in Bolivia.
However, we have recovered our natural resources
democratically, without bullets but with votes, not
with money but based on the awareness of the Bolivian
people.

As for prosecuting acts of international terrorism,
the financing of terrorist groups and the arming of
opposition forces — once I expelled the United States
Ambassador to Bolivia, I had no regrets. We are better
off now, politically and democratically. We are now
ending our cooperation with the United States Agency
for International Development, which had been plotting.
We want and welcome cooperation, so long as it is
unconditional and free of blackmail or preconditions
involving Presidents or the privatization of natural
resources and basic services.

Imagine the damage inflicted on a country by
an economic blockade. It is the best tool of genocide.
Therefore, if we are truly responsible for the well-being
of humankind, if we are responsible for truth, justice
and peace, then we must organize to fight back so that
no president — from South America, the Middle East
or anywhere else in the world — will ever again cause
harm to life or to humankind.

Like previous debates here — on the financial,
climate, economic and food crises — the Assembly is
now addressing the issue of interventionism. As long
as imperialism and capitalism exist, peace, justice,
liberty, dignity and sovereignty for the people of the
world will never be possible. I am convinced of that,
because I have a little experience. We should therefore
contemplate a world free of oligarchies, monarchies
and hierarchies, and then consider the sort of human
order we would want for the world.

All of us possess sovereignty and dignity, whether
we are small and backwards — “developing”, as they
call us — or whatever our situation. What damages the
political class? Sometimes it is arrogance, the abuse of
power and corruption. As Presidents of Governments, it
is our obligation to fight against such policies that cause
so much harm to the political class. It is our obligation
to change the politics. In my experience, politics is not
about business or profits. It is about service, commitment
and extending the greatest effort for one’s people. If
anyone thinks that politics involves business or profit,
they are wrong. Such President or Government will not
go far. If a Government allows bankers, financiers or
multinational corporations to govern, it is mistaken.
A Government must be controlled by a President who
has been democratically elected by the people, with the
participation of society and for the well-being of the
majority of the people.

We welcome the fact that private property is
respected. However, it is something else when economic
policy and governing are considered in favour of the
few, rather than of the many. With my little bit of
experience, therefore, I call on all members to fight

against the economic policies that cause great harm to
humankind around the world.

I reiterate that as long as imperialism and
capitalism exist, the struggle will continue, the people
will continue to rise up, but there will be no justice.
Freeing ourselves from imperialism and capitalism will
certainly ensure peace and social justice and dignity
and sovereignty for our peoples.


We bring to this sixty-eighth session of the
General Assembly the fraternal and friendly greetings
of the people of Equatorial Guinea. We also bring our
fervent desire for peace and prosperity for all countries
in the world at this difficult time, when the international
community has to deal with major challenges that are
thwarting the aspirations of the peoples for well-being
and happiness.

May I also extend my congratulations to Mr. John
William Ashe of Antigua and Barbuda on his election
to preside over the work of the General Assembly at
this session. We wish him all the very best and every
success in his difficult task, and we assure him of our
support and cooperation. We would also like to thank
his predecessor, Mr. Vuk Jeremi., for the excellent work
he carried out and the dynamic style with which he
presided over the work of the Assembly at its previous
session.

This sixty-eighth session is beginning its work on
a tragic note, namely, the criminal and barbaric attack
against innocent people in Kenya. It was an attack on
a supermarket, a mall, which is a peaceful gathering
place for people, which reflects the criminality of the
perpetrators. Equatorial Guinea strongly condemns
the heinous attack against the freedom and dignity
of the Kenyan people, which also retards its national

development and violates its freedoms. I convey
our condolences and a feeling of solidarity to the
Government of Kenya and the families of the victims.
We also call on the United Nations to take severe
measures against crimes of that nature.

Although the international community has become
increasingly conscious of the importance of peace, we
still see, unfortunately, that the United Nations has not
yet achieved its main objectives, namely, a peaceful
and developed world, one ensuring the dignity and
well-being of all peoples in the world. Thus, despite the
major efforts that have been made over the past 68 years,
peace is still as yet an unrealized dream in many parts
of the world. The sovereign equality of all States can be
seen only in declarations of principles. Economic and
social development has not yet been achieved by most
States, and the principles of cooperation for mutual
benefit are being undermined in international relations.

At the same time, in addition to that disturbing
situation, we see an increase in natural disasters, wars,
terrorism and acts of violence, which take human lives
and force large groups of populations from their homes.
Hunger haunts almost three quarters of the world’s
population, and there are still major endemic diseases
that cause many deaths in less developed countries:
they affect in particular the most vulnerable segments
of society.

Against the backdrop of that difficult political,
economic and sociocultural situation around the world,
Equatorial Guinea would like to acknowledge the
efforts of the Secretary-General to preserve the noble
principles of the Charter of the United Nations and to
seek to achieve the goals set forth therein. However, the
almost incomprehensible ideological tenor of relations
among States creates almost a kind of cold war between
those that proclaim themselves moral authorities and a
majority that want freedom of action to determine the
futures of their peoples.

As far as the Republic of Equatorial Guinea is
concerned, questions of the peace and security of
States should be given full priority and consideration
by the United Nations, since without peace, there can
be no development, and without development it would
be difficult to ensure human beings’ dignity, integrity
and freedom. For that reason, we firmly support
the principle of the peaceful settlement of conflicts
through negotiation, mediation and arbitration. In
that connection, we would like to commend and
acknowledge the efforts of Mr. Tomislav Nikoli.,
President of the Republic of Serbia, for presiding over
the special session of the General Assembly held in
April of this year on the peaceful resolution of conflicts
in Africa.

Equatorial Guinea’s political, economic and
sociocultural situation is positive and encouraging,
because our country enjoys productive peace and
stability and harmonious political development and is
consolidating a genuine national democracy. All of that
has allowed us to carry out significant infrastructure
work, enabling the people to participate directly in the
country’s overall growth. The Government, together
with all the political institutions, is carrying out major
political reforms, thanks to the agreements reached in
the binding national political pact, which was signed
with all the country’s political groups and which
establishes standards for the political conduct of all
stakeholders and their participation in public affairs
administration. Happily, the people of Equatorial
Guinea are aware of the changes in the areas benefiting
them, and they recognize and support them.

At the international level, we are very concerned
about the negative effects of the so-called humanitarian
interference from the United Nations, which, far from
ensuring the human rights and well-being of the peoples
affected, is more focused on imposing political systems
and democracy based on unacknowledged interests. That
interference is being carried out in total disregard of the
sacred principles of national sovereignty and the dignity
of peoples. Democracy is indeed the ultimate expression
of natural law; it is also an act of the people’s sovereign
will. We have never seen any country in the world
accept democracy when it was imposed on it. And why
has it now become the excuse for intervening through
force in conflicts within self-governing countries? That
represents a provocation against our peoples, who are
being deceived in the name of democracy, while the
fundamental attributes of independence and national
sovereignty are disregarded, provoking civil disorder,
which leads to loss of life, social divisiveness and the
destruction of basic infrastructure, which is difficult
to rebuild. We see, therefore, that everything is easily
traced to the neocolonialist activities of certain parties
that wish to recover the resources that nature reserved
for our countries.

Equatorial Guinea understands and agrees that
security and development are an essential whole, and
we affirm that peace and security, development and
human rights are intrinsically bound together, which is

why we disagree with the argument that indiscriminate
destruction can be planned in order to then introduce
reconstruction and reconciliation at somebody else’s
expense. In that belief and in the face of such hidden and
complex plans, I am pleased to declare before this world
forum that Equatorial Guinea and its Government are
willing to host the next session of the United Nations
Standing Advisory Committee on Security Questions
in Central Africa, at a suitable date to be agreed on by
the parties.

Uncoordinated actions such as those I mentioned,
which worsen global insecurity, are being carried out
today, while the United Nations — whose role as arbiter
and conciliator is being openly flouted by special
interests — looks on, powerless. Let us be honest with
ourselves, because democracy, as a just and equitable
system, should prevail in all the organs of the United
Nations system, the epicentre of the international
community, aspiring to peace, order and development.
We therefore have no alternative but to reform those
organs, particularly the Security Council, in order to
make them more democratic, so that they can protect
the interests of every nation impartially.

Within the framework of efforts to meet the
Millennium Development Goals, the level of basic
infrastructure that has been created and the policy of
promoting social institutions in Equatorial Guinea have
resulted in a drop in the number of cases of malaria
and in infant and maternal morbidity and mortality; in
lower illiteracy rates; better technical and professional
training; the increased empowerment of women; the
gradual integration of persons with disabilities and a
rise in the well-being of the people. Equatorial Guinea
is contributing and collaborating actively with its
North American partners, Noble Energy, Marathon and
Sanaria, with a view to completely eliminating malaria
through the development of a vaccine that will be ready
for official use in 2017.

In order to work towards the main objective of
the theme for this session, which is “The post-2015
development agenda: setting the stage”, Equatorial
Guinea has adopted a development programme aimed
at reaching the goals of an emerging country by 2020,
which is now our priority. We therefore believe that
Equatorial Guinea should move up gradually from its
status as a least-developed country in order to achieve
that new rank in 2020.

While that is the central theme of this session,
to which we all must give our support, we also note
that the attention of the General Assembly should be
focused on the normalization of relations among States,
not only by adopting appropriate standards, but even
more by ensuring that our States apply them.

While the African continent and other developing
countries strive to move towards sustainable
development, they are unfortunately diverted from
their efforts and forced to address man-made conflicts
that are fuelled by the surreal approaches to freedom,
democracy and respect for human rights in Africa that
certain Powers are promoting. We are not convinced
that the United Nations has adopted a particular model
of democracy that is applicable to all States. Africa is
more in need of special attention from the international
community to ensure its security, since it is now a
breeding ground for terrorist operations, mercenaries,
pirates and organized crime, due to the fragility of its
structures.

The United Nations should not cling to methods
and practices that do not resolve conflict or meet the
desires of the people — or even worse, are a burden
for them. We are referring here to the use of force and
embargoes, which always inflict great suffering on the
affected peoples and deprive them of their most basic
rights. That was not the purpose for which the United
Nations was established. We therefore call for the
lifting of the embargoes imposed on the Republic of
Cuba and the Republic of Zimbabwe, as they harm the
lives of their peoples.

With respect to armed conflict, the conflict between
the Israelis and the Palestinians has demonstrated the
inability of the United Nations to impose solutions
during armed hostilities. However, we believe that
politically influential countries of the Middle East
can and should play a prominent role as arbitrators
and mediators between the parties to the conflict. The
solutions have already been laid out by the United
Nations, and all that is needed is to implement them
by ensuring respect for the limits set in 1967, because
both countries must coexist and need clearly defined
borders.

Regarding the situation in Syria, we regret
and condemn the use of chemical weapons and the
escalation of violence fuelled by opaque interests that
are decimating a people because of alleged internal
problems. Wars have always bequeathed a negative
balance, and their victims tend to always be innocent
people. That is why we ask for an immediate cessation of
hostilities and the withdrawal of the countries involved

in the conflict, in order to honour and respect the Syrian
people and fulfil the United Nations responsibility to
maintain peace and security around the world. The only
interventions should be pacification and the destruction
of chemical weapons, which the United Nations must
demand of the Syrian Government.

Repetition implies concern, and indeed, in its
creation and in the framework of its Charter, the
United Nations is seriously committed to maintaining
peace and security in the world. It is also committed
to promoting economic development, moral, human
and material welfare, and relations of friendship, trust
and cooperation among nations. But far from achieving
these goals, we continue to experience the horrors of
war on a daily basis, and to allow people to go hungry
and nations to continue to live with the threat of
instability and espionage.

It is high time for us to stop this global misery in its
tracks and look to our past while moving forward in a
spirit of solidarity to forge a world that fulfils the hopes
of humankind for well-being and happiness.


I would like to congratulate Mr. Ashe, the
President of the General Assembly, and his friendly
country, Antigua and Barbuda, on his election as
President at the sixty-eighth session of the General
Assembly. I wish him every success in conducting our
work through his major and neutral role as President of
the Assembly, like that of his predecessor, who avoided
engaging the presidency in special political agendas.

Last year when I addressed the Assembly (see
A/67/PV.19), we were compelled to address many
events that had ravaged our country and our world. We
were full of hope that the scene would change for the
better this year. Unfortunately, the situation remains
the same, and in some parts of the world has even
deteriorated. Many countries continue to face political,
economic and financial crises that exceed their ability
to tackle them on their own. While the international
community looked forward to effective international
efforts to overcome those crises, today we bear witness
to exacerbated and intensified problems.

That exacerbation is due to the hegemony and
dominion that thwart peoples’ capabilities. Such
domination has escalated in a way that blatantly
contradicts the principles of the Charter of the United
Nations and the norms of international law. Instead of
settling regional and international conflicts by peaceful
means, some well-known countries continue to pursue
aggressive policies against certain nations. Political
hypocrisy allows them to intervene in the domestic
affairs of States under the pretext of humanitarian
intervention or the responsibility to protect. When
such aggressive policies do not prove beneficial for
the countries subjected, including my own country,
Syria, those well-known States reveal their true beliefs
and threaten blatant military aggression outside the
mandates of the Security Council and certainly well
beyond any international consensus.

Those same countries impose immoral, illegal
and unilaterally coercive economic measures. In
addition, they maintain paranoid policies aimed at
spreading sedition and turmoil within pluralistic,
harmonious national communities that had previously
lived for hundreds of years in harmony, unity and
understanding. Worst of all, those countries have
launched major, destructive wars under the pretext of
combating terrorism, even as they support terrorism
in my country, in contravention of all United Nations
resolutions and all human and moral values.

I ask the same question I posed last year: Is the
international consensus on combating terrorism a
serious commitment undertaken by States Member of
the Organization, or is it mere rhetoric, written down
but not put into effect by certain countries?

What is happening in my country has become clear
to everyone. Yet some countries do not want to recognize
that Al-Qaida, the most dangerous terrorist organization
in the world, and its many offshoots — including Jabhat
Al-Nusra, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant,
the Islamic Brigade and many others — are fighting
in Syria. While scenes of murder, manslaughter and
even the eating of human hearts were seen on television
screens worldwide, that did not affect the conscience of
those who chose to turn a blind eye. In my country, the
heads of innocent civilians have been grilled because
they violated some extremist ideology and held views
that deviate from those of Al-Qaida. In my country,
murderers have dismembered human bodies while
the victims were still alive and sent their limbs to
their families because those citizens were defending a
unified and secular Syria.

In Syria — as in those countries that daily violate
basic human rights to life, livelihood and their own
religious beliefs and political affiliations — any Syrian
citizen who does not belong to that obscurantist takfiri
ideology is doomed to be killed or maimed or to
witness female relatives taken as captives on the basis
of perverted concepts of religion that have nothing to
do with Islam.

There is no civil war in Syria. It is a war against
terror, which does not recognize values, justice or
equality and disregards all human rights and laws.
Therefore, confronting terrorism in my country requires
the international community to act in accordance
with the relevant resolutions on counter-terrorism,
particularly Security Council resolution 1373 (2001).
It must take all necessary and immediate measures to
compel those countries that are known to finance, arm,
train and provide safe haven and passage to terrorists
from different countries to stop doing so.

The city of New York and its people have witnessed
the devastations of terrorism. They were burned by the
fires of extremists and suffered bloodshed, just as we
are suffering now in Syria. How can countries hit by
the same terrorism that we now suffer in Syria claim
to be fighting terrorism throughout the world while
supporting it in my country? Claims of the existence
of moderate militants and extremist militants have
become a bad and senseless joke. Terrorism means only
terrorism. It cannot be classified as moderate terrorism
and extremist terrorism. What should we call those
who kidnap children in order to sell their body organs
outside the country? How should we describe those
who recruit children and prevent them from going to
school and instead train them to shoot and kill? How
would one describe those who spread perverted fatwas
concerning sexual or incest-related jihad?

We were the ones targeted by poisonous gases in
Khan al-Assal. We asked for an investigative mission
and demanded that its mandate include the ability to
determine who had used chemical weapons. However,
the United States of America and its friends the United
Kingdom and France prevented that and insisted that
the mission be limited to deciding whether or not
chemical weapons had been used. In Syria, we waited
five months for the mission to come. When it arrived,
it was withdrawn before the completion of its task
as certain States had begun to beat the drums of war
against Syria.

My country has accepted the praiseworthy
initiative launched by Mr. Vladimir Putin, President of
the Russian Federation. By acceding to the Chemical
Weapons Convention, Syria has proved its commitment
against the use of such weapons. Syria also calls on the
international community to shoulder its responsibility
against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction
in the Middle East. Syria is known for fulfilling its
obligations and commitments. Therefore, I assure the
Assembly of Syria’s commitment to fully implementing
the provisions of the Convention and to cooperating
with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons as a State party to the Convention.

One challenge that we all still face is not knowing
whether those who are supplying terrorists with such
weapons will abide by their legal commitments, since
the terrorists who used poisonous gas in my country
received chemical agents from countries of the region
and the West that are well known to all of us. They
are the ones using poisonous gas on our military and
innocent civilians alike.

Ending aggressive policies towards Syria is the first
appropriate step on the road to a solution in my country.
In the light of the continuing support being given to
terrorism, whether in the form of arms, funding or
training, any political solution will be misleading and a
mere illusion. Syria has repeatedly stated that it is open
to a political solution to its crisis. It is now up to those
who claim to support a political solution for Syria to
halt all practices and policies hostile to Syria and head
to Geneva without preconditions.

On the basis of their national right to self-
determination, the Syrian people have the
exclusive authority to choose their leadership, their
representatives, their future and a political system
that will accommodate every sector of Syrian society,
including those who have been deceived and beguiled
onto the wrong path. We in Syria place no bets on any
party but the Syrian people, all of whom are determined
to reject all foreign interference in their domestic affairs
and to defeat the advocates of sectarianism, extremism
and terrorism. In my country, State policies are firmly
tied to the aspirations of the people. Ballot boxes for
free and fair elections remain the only way for the
Syrian people to determine their own future, free from
the pressures of terrorism and foreign control.

There remain those who do not want a political
solution and always resort to aggression, either directly
or through their agents on the ground. That is what is
happening in Syria. As I mentioned, Syria is committed
to a political solution, but that does not mean allowing
terrorists to attack innocent civilians. It does not mean
watching our mosques and churches be destroyed, as
has happened in Homs and Aleppo and is happening
now in the town of Malula, the only place in the world
whose people still speak the language of Jesus Christ.
What is happening to the churches and mosques is also

affecting the entire historical and cultural heritage of
Syria and humankind.

Do those representing the Member States in
the Assembly know that terrorists from more than
83 countries are engaged in killing our people and our
army in the name of global takfiri jihad? Furthermore,
are some Member States entitled to demand that the
Syrian State ignore its constitutional responsibilities to
protect its citizens and preserve its unity, sovereignty
and independence? The war on terror is not only Syria’s
war. One day, those terrorists will return to their
countries, and then no country in the world will be
safe from that terrorism that recognizes no borders or
geography.

The events in Syria have created humanitarian
needs that continue to grow in several key sectors. The
immoral, inhumane and unilateral sanctions imposed
by the United States and the European Union have
worsened Syrian citizens’ living conditions at a time
when my Government is working with the United
Nations and international organizations within the
framework of a response plan to meet the basic needs
of citizens, particularly those who have been forced
to leave their homes. It should be noted that many of
our people have been forced to flee to neighbouring
countries in great numbers owing to the activities of
armed terrorist groups in border areas. Regrettably, in
some of those countries displaced Syrians have been
put in military training camps and places resembling
detention centres.

From this rostrum, I appeal to Syrian citizens to
return to their towns and villages, where the State will
guarantee their safe return and dignified livelihood,
far from the inhumane conditions in such camps. I
assure the Assembly of our readiness to make every
effort to deliver aid from international organizations
to all Syrian citizens without discrimination, wherever
they are, in compliance with resolution 46/182, while
respecting Syria’s sovereignty and independence.

The developments in my country should not make
us lose sight of Palestine and the Syrian Golan. The
Syrian Arab Republic affirms its natural right to full
sovereignty over the occupied Syrian Golan up to
the line of 4 June 1967, and emphasizes its rejection
of all measures taken by Israel, the occupying Power,
to change its natural demographic and geographic
features in clear violation of the relevant Security
Council resolutions, particularly resolution 497 (1981).
Syria also reaffirms its support for the legitimate and
inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, particularly
their rights of return and of self-determination, and
to establish an independent State on their land, with
Jerusalem as its capital.

Now that Syria has acceded to the Convention
on the Prohibition of the Development, Production,
Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on
Their Destruction, my country renews its call on the
international community to work to establish a zone
free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle
East. In that regard, we would remind the international
community of Syria’s initiative, taken at the end of its
non-permanent membership of the Security Council in
2003, and call on the Security Council to adopt it.

Syria stresses that establishing a zone free of
weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East will
be unachievable without the accession of Israel,
the only nuclear Power in the region, to all treaties
banning such weapons, and without its agreement to
put its nuclear facilities under the supervision of the
International Atomic Energy Agency. At the same time,
we emphasize the right of all countries to acquire and
develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, in
accordance with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation
of Nuclear Weapons. In that regard, Syria condemns
the fact that the United States and Israel continue to
block the holding of the international conference on
establishing a zone free of weapons of mass destruction
in the Middle East that was scheduled to take place in
2012.

My country calls on the United States, the countries
of the European Union and others to refrain from taking
immoral unilateral economic measures that contravene
the rules of international law and the principles of free
trade. We therefore call for the lifting of the blockade
that has been imposed by the United States on Cuba for
decades. We also renew our call for lifting and ending
all unilateral coercive measures imposed on Syria and
the peoples of countries such as Venezuela, Belarus,
Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

We hope that the United Nations will lead the
peoples of the world towards a better future, so that
they may achieve their aspirations for prosperity,
development and food self-sufficiency, free from all
forms of tension, confrontation and war, thus fulfilling
the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United
Nations, which upholds the sovereignty and equality

of all the rights and duties of all Member States. In
that regard, my country welcomes the efforts of the
United States and Iran to bridge the gap of mistrust
between the two countries, and hopes that this will be
reflected constructively and positively in the stability
of international relations.


It is my great honour
to address the General Assembly on behalf of the
Republic of Serbia and inform members about the
positions held by my country on some important global
issues, developments in and around Serbia and the
efforts that Belgrade has made with a view to reaching
a just solution to problems facing the country and its
neighbourhood.

First of all, I would like to thank the President of
the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session for his
excellent stewardship and organization of this debate
and the leadership he has demonstrated in his high-level
post. I wish him every success in the performance of his
duties as President of the General Assembly. I assure
him that he will enjoy the support of the Republic of
Serbia in the discharge of his mandate. He can count on
our assistance in bringing his ideas to fruition.

At the same time, I would like to congratulate His
Excellency Mr. Vuk Jeremic, former President of the
General Assembly, on his courage and impeccable
work in presiding over the Assembly for the past year
and on the understanding he has demonstrated of the
problems encountered all over the world. He represented
Serbia in a dignified manner while being an impartial
professional of high standing.

The Republic of Serbia attaches great importance
to the United Nations and the activities and cooperation
carried out within its framework. We remain true to
the Charter of the United Nations and the purposes and
principles enshrined therein. We will endeavour, to the
extent of our ability, to make a contribution to their
implementation.

We are also determined to participate in the new
initiatives being taken within the United Nations. I
welcome the well-chosen theme for this year’s session.
The post-2015 development agenda and the preparations
to be made in order to define a future global development
framework are important issues, and the General
Assembly is the right forum in which to hold these
discussions and, more important, come to agreement
on them. I am confident that the current Assembly
session will be successful in the consideration of the
agenda items highlighted by its President, namely, the
contribution of women, youth and civil society to the

post-2015 development agenda and human rights and
the rule of law in that agenda.

The deadline for the implementation of the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), to which
the Republic of Serbia fully subscribes, is fast
approaching, and the United Nations and today’s world
are at a crossroads. The process that has been initiated
is an ambitious and complicated one. Even the outcome
document of the 2012 United Nations Conference on
Sustainable Development (resolution 66/288, annex),
entitled “The future we want”, makes it incumbent
upon us to take action.

I hope that the work of the Open Working Group on
Sustainable Development Goals will be a success. The
Republic of Serbia appreciates the opportunity given
to it, as a member of the Group, to help in the drafting
process aimed at establishing sustainable development
goals. For our part, we will do our utmost to contribute
to defining sustainable development goals in clear
terms. We believe that the sustainable development
goals should be global in nature but, at the same time,
have the capacity to be implemented in all countries,
as countries differ so much in their capacity, level of
development, priorities and policies.

It goes without saying that, in identifying the
sustainable development goals, priority should be
accorded to energy efficiency, renewable resources
and climate change. Key development goals should
deal with sustainable economic development because,
without it, it will be impossible to achieve social
development, reduce hunger, poverty, unemployment
and inequality, prevent further wage level disparities or
protect the environment.

I expect that attention will also be focused on
implementing a global mechanism to prevent economic
shocks from developed countries from spilling over to
developing countries and destabilizing international
financial markets. As part of the process, voices
from both “have” and “have-not” countries should be
equally valued. Developing countries should highlight
the problems, and developed countries should act as
partners in resolving them.

As a new member of the Economic and Social
Council for the period 2014 to 2016, the Republic
of Serbia will participate in all Council activities
related to the MDGs and setting the stage of the post-
2015 development agenda. However, there can be no
development — sustainable, unsustainable, economic
or social — in war-torn areas.

Even today, at the outset of the twenty-first century,
it is unfortunate that many war zones exist throughout
the world. My country has participated in United
Nations-led peacekeeping operations for decades. In
many continents, memories of Serbia’s contributions to
peace efforts remain very much alive.

We will continue to apply lessons learned to find
solutions to specific problems in the field and to improve
our peacekeepers’ response capacities in terms of the
challenges they will face in carrying out their mandates
and with a view to achieving maximum performance.

Serbian service and police personnel are engaged
in multinational operations in the Congo, Côte d’Ivoire,
Cyprus, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti,
Lebanon, Liberia, Uganda, the Middle East and Somali
waters and soon in Mali as well. They all serve as
proper representatives of their country through actions
in favour of peace.

We are prepared to increase, in the coming period,
the size of our contribution and equipment in terms of
national contingents and to make use of the available
United Nations standby arrangements. In line with our
policies based on Security Council resolutions, we will
also promote the participation of our servicewomen in
peace missions.

Serbia’s engagement in United Nations missions
and other multinational operations represents our firm
contribution to the maintenance of international peace
and security. The Republic of Serbia has no ulterior
motive behind sending its troops to other countries,
other than to provide assistance. For that reason, we
would like to see the personnel of the Serbian armed
forces and the Ministry of the Interior welcomed and
accepted both by the Governments of the friendly
countries to which they are deployed and the local
populations and that they would be seen as supportive
partners, rather than as foreign troops and occupying
forces.

When seconding its personnel to multinational
operations, Serbia has no interest — military, political
or economic — but to help a friend in need and show
the other contingents contributing to the operation that
our troops may be counted upon to help.

Apart from wars, there is another omnipresent
global danger looming large over the core values of the

United Nations. That danger is terrorism, which poses
a threat to fundamental human rights and creates an
obstacle to business, thus undermining development as
well.

As a State party to most international counter-
terrorism conventions, the Republic of Serbia attaches
great significance to international activities aimed at
suppressing terrorism. And we are adapting our domestic
legislation to stem the scourge. We unequivocally
support the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism
Strategy and all of the relevant resolutions adopted by
the General Assembly and the Security Council.

Serbia, as a victim of terrorist attacks that have
even taken the lives of children — the most innocent
segment of its population — understands well the
need for regional and broader counter-terrorism
cooperation. Because terrorism knows no boundaries,
States Members of the United Nations must be ready to
cooperate without compromise, prejudice, or limitations
and without any exceptions or special cases allowing
terrorist actions against one’s own people under the
pretext of so-called “freedom fighting”.

In that context, it is of the utmost importance to
make progress on the adoption of a comprehensive
convention on international terrorism. Serbia strongly
condemns terrorism in any shape or form, without
regard to who the perpetrators may be, wherever such
acts may be committed or for whatever purpose.

On the other hand, no one has the right, Serbia
included, to limit itself to statements made in
condemnation. Victims of terrorist acts worldwide,
those injured in attacks or the families of victims have
the right to demand that persons responsible for such acts
be brought to justice and that any further recruitment of
terrorists or financing of their organizations end.

The Republic of Serbia attaches great importance
to the promotion and protection of human rights and
is striving to fully comply with the internationally
recognized standards in that area. Serbia has taken a
step forward regarding the enjoyment of human rights
by minority groups, particularly national minorities,
women and children and persons with special needs.

Serbia’s law on the protection of the rights and
freedoms of national minorities surpasses international
conventions in many aspects. The Constitution of
the Republic of Serbia unambiguously prohibits the
assimilation of national minorities and the undertaking
of measures designed to artificially alter the ethnic
structure of populations in areas where national
minorities traditionally reside in large numbers.

The Republic of Serbia is a multi-ethnic,
multireligious and multicultural country. Dozens of
ethnic groups and several religious communities live
there peacefully, and its tradition of living side by
side based on tolerance and respect of others has been
long, genuine and deep-rooted. Drawing upon our own
experience, we have wholeheartedly embraced the
Alliance of Civilizations initiative. We have actively
promoted intercultural and interfaith dialogue in
all domains and at all levels, as that is the best way
to overcome divisions caused by cultural, linguistic,
religious or any other diversity.

Generally, in the period under review, Serbia has
achieved considerable progress in the protection of
human rights, as noted in the presentation of the second
universal periodic review, in Geneva in January, and
during the visit to Belgrade by Ms. Navanethem Pillay,
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
We are ready to share our expertise and experience
in the human rights field with our friends around
the world. The Republic of Serbia considers such
cooperation a friendly exchange, not interference in the
internal affairs of other countries or as one-sided and
irresponsible preaching and tutelage accompanied by
conditions or blackmail.

The Republic of Serbia is a party to nearly all
international instruments and initiatives in the field
of disarmament, non-proliferation and arms control. It
fully complies with the obligations it has undertaken.
Serbia’s commitment to the Arms Trade Treaty, which
we recently signed, is based on the belief that the
establishment of legally binding international standards
in that field is a significant contribution to eliminating
the illegal arms trade, fighting international terrorism
and organized crime and promoting peace, security and
stability — in other words, the alleviation of human
suffering.

In accordance with its agreed commitments, my
country has counted and inventoried all weapons in
its possession and has made the information available.
It has also allowed the inspection of its arsenals. Our
partners know where each piece of Serbian weaponry
is located. Nothing is kept secret. We have done so
not only because we were bound to do so, but to show
and prove that Serbia is truly committed to peace and
cooperation with its neighbours.

Contributions to peace can also be made through
disarmament. Never in its history has Serbia fought
a war of aggression, and the weapons now in its
possession are only meant for its defence. Furthermore,
Serbia has never posed a threat to any country. It has
never possessed weapons of mass destruction and has
no intention of including weapons of mass destruction
in its visible, quantifiable and verifiable arsenal.

We are aware that progress on disarmament and
arms control hinges not only on us. Success is related
to developments carried out on a wider political and
strategic stage.

In the little more than one year since I took
office, I have visited almost all of the countries with
borders in common with Serbia. I have spoken with the
leaders of all of the neighbouring countries, including
at international events. In that manner, I wanted to
convey the message that Serbia has opted for regional
cooperation and working together with its neighbours
to address the problems we share in common.

On behalf of Serbia, I have made symbolic gestures
to effectively demonstrate that we wish to reconcile with
the peoples living side by side with us. I am confident
that those gestures will significantly contribute to
reconciliation and help to right the wrongs of the past.
We are now looking forward to the future. It is our
desire to foster good relations with all neighbouring
countries by building a network of roads, railway lines
and bridges; to try to make our mark on the international
market; to promote our energy systems; to protect the
environment; to cooperate in disaster relief; to develop
cross-border projects; to have trade links and; to expand
our cultural, scientific, educational, technological and
sports cooperation. Our common goal is to improve the
living standards of everyone living in the countries of
the region.

In comparison with our neighbours, we can
compete only in terms of seeking to attain more human
rights protection, whereas in all other respects, we will
cooperate and help encourage one another to perform
better. Serbia’s message to its European partners is
that the time for conflicts, distrust and disputes is now
behind us. Our country is looking forward to the future
and to becoming a member of the European Union. It
has been decided, and we trust that Serbia will start
negotiations with the European Union no later than
January 2014. I hope that Serbia will be able to inform
the next General Assembly session about the outcome
of those talks, which we believe will not last long or
continue indefinitely, as well as about Serbia’s ongoing
progress towards becoming a fully fledged member
of the European Union. At the same time, Serbia has
revived old alliances and forged new ones throughout
the world, creating strategic partnerships with countries
in the East, West, North and South.

Serbia has been active in all regional initiatives and
organizations, and has recently chaired some of them,
making a remarkable impression on other members. As
a result, the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE) has entrusted Serbia with its
chairmanship for 2015. The OSCE chairmanship, to
be held by Switzerland in 2014 and then by Serbia in
2015, serves as a good example of how to cooperate
within international organizations. It will give Serbia
an opportunity to make a constructive contribution to
the enhancement of the OSCE, especially since 2015
will mark the fortieth anniversary of the Helsinki Final
Act, one of the most important OSCE instruments. We
are confident that our activities on regional initiatives
and our forthcoming chairmanship of the OSCE will
make Serbia an ideal candidate for taking on greater
responsibility within the United Nations system,
consequently making it possible for it to be entrusted
with even more responsibilities and duties, when the
time comes.

The unilaterally declared independence of Kosovo,
in 2008, has been creating problems and undermining
a system established by the United Nations at its start.
The United Nations has never recognized an illegal
secession attempt by Kosovo’s provisional institutions
of self-governance, but a number of countries,
irrespective of the norms of international law, have
recognized Kosovo as an independent State. Under
constant pressure and through blackmail on the part
of large and powerful States, some other countries,
including Serbia’s traditional allies, have unfortunately
recognized Kosovo as an independent State.

Serbia has responded to such acts in a measured,
diplomatic and political manner, refraining from
any use of force, to safeguard its sovereignty and its
territorial integrity. Faced with a situation where its
vital national interests were at stake, a country would
rarely demonstrate such a degree of level-headedness.

We are convinced that such problems, including
the status of Kosovo and Metohija, should be resolved
peacefully. For that reason, we take heed of calls by
the General Assembly in 2010 to start negotiations with
representatives of the authorities in Pristina. Following

the efforts of Lady Catherine Ashton, European Union
High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security
Policy, we have made arrangements with the Albanians
of Kosovo and Metohija. Serbia has thus shown that its
intention was to protect the Serb community in Kosovo
and Metohija as far as possible, to ensure that all its
inhabitants in the southern Serbian province of Kosovo
could also lead normal lives on a day-to-day basis.

Let us underscore that Belgrade and Pristina have
only reached agreement over clearly defined matters,
such as local elections and the establishment of a
community of Serbian boroughs in Kosovo and Metohija,
and that the Republic of Serbia has not recognized the
independence of Kosovo in any shape or form. The first
agreement, which we promised to respect fully, does
not mean in any way that the Republic of Serbia intends
to approve Kosovo’s entry into the United Nations and
other international organizations, where membership is
the sole prerogative of sovereign States.

The United Nations has been present in Kosovo
and Metohija for more than 14 years. We believe
in the United Nations, which was entrusted with
administering this part of Serbia in 1999. Therefore,
we ask that the mandate of the United Nations Interim
Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) remain
unchanged, that its staff not be downsized and that its
activities be reinforced. UNMIK plays an indispensable
role. It should coordinate the work of all international
forces present in Kosovo and Metohija within a neutral
framework, as stated in Security Council resolution
1244 (1999). That resolution defined the tasks of
the United Nations and reaffirmed that Kosovo and
Metohija is a province forming an integral part of the
Republic of Serbia.

We also support the work of the European Union
Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX). We request
that the European Union respect its own principles as far
as the province of Kosovo and Metohija is concerned.
We expect EULEX, by maintaining a neutral approach,
to continue assisting in the development of democratic
institutions within the province and in monitoring the
human rights of Serbs and other non-Albanians, since
only their fundamental human rights are under threat.

As far as Serbia is concerned, there is yet another
pending task before the United Nations weighing on
the conscience of its Member States, one which must
not remain unaddressed, so that neither we nor future
Presidents have to seek justice by repeating that a crime
remains to be resolved. We wish to recall that special
rapporteur Dick Marty, a Swiss senator, has shown, and
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
has confirmed, that some Albanian leaders in Kosovo
and Metohija organized the kidnapping and killing
of Serbs whose organs were then harvested and sold
illegally. We were not in a position to initiate legal
proceedings for those crimes, which were committed
towards the beginning of the twenty-first century,
crimes that have so far not occurred anywhere else in
the world. We still believe that it is necessary for the
United Nations to be included in investigating those
crimes, based on a report by the Council of Europe.
Serbia appeals for the support of friends in its efforts to
shed light on the truth behind those and other crimes so
that the perpetrators can be brought to justice.

In April, I spoke before the Assembly in the thematic
debate on the role of the international criminal justice
system in reconciliation and about the work of the
International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons
Responsible for Serious Violations of International
Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of
the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 (ICTY). We said
then that the ICTY had abused the mandate given to
it by the Security Council; that it had not helped the
reconciliation process in the territory of the former
Yugoslavia; that it had compromised the idea behind the
international criminal justice system; that it had acted
under political pressure; that it was not independent; that
it had acted differently in similar circumstances; that it
had acquitted some war criminals, in some instances
even failing to indict them; that it had humiliated Serb
victims of the secession wars of the former Yugoslavia;
and that it had attempted to paint a revisionist picture
of history. We continue to hold the same points of view.

By accepting the integrity of the Tribunal, we
have not only earned the right to criticize its work
but also to propose a solution. Nevertheless, while
its intention was not just to criticize this institution,
Serbia suggested certain measures that might, to some
extent, help redress the wrongdoings of the Tribunal.
We request the United Nations and the ICTY to find a
legal solution that ensures that Serb convicts are sent
to serve their prison sentence in Serbia, so that justice
may be done more effectively, primarily as a way of
helping them reintegrate into society. That does not
mean that we challenge the verdicts reached or that we
are minimizing the crimes committed by those persons.
We simply want to help those concerned return to
normal life, once they come out of prison, as part of the
Serbian community.

Serbia respects every State Member of the United
Nations and offers each and every one of them its
friendship and trust. We expect that to be reciprocated
in equal measure. The Serbia of today and tomorrow
deserves to be trusted.


I stand in the
Hall today as the leader of one of the smallest countries
in the world — small by size, population and resources.
I also stand here today with a proud heart and a strong
voice because my small country of Antigua and
Barbuda has produced a giant in the world’s geopolitical
sphere. He is among the finest and most accomplished
diplomats to have ever walked these great halls. The
Government and people of Antigua and Barbuda send
congratulations to His Excellency Ambassador John
William Ashe on his election as President of the General
Assembly at its sixty-eighth session. We are beyond
sure that he will guide this body through a successful
session. I offer congratulations also to his predecessor,
His Excellency Mr. Vuk Jeremi., on a job well done
and for his unrelenting service to the international
community.

Exactly five years ago today, I stood in this
hallowed Hall and stated that:

“We are all members of one body. The welfare
of the weakest and the welfare of the most powerful
are inseparably bound together. Industry cannot
flourish if labour languishes. Transportation
cannot prosper if manufacturing declines. The
general welfare cannot be provided for in any one
act, but it is well to remember that the benefit of
one is the benefit of all, and the neglect of one is the
neglect of all.” (A/64/PV.7, p. 32)
With the ever-increasing gaps in equality among
nations, the challenges for developing countries over
the years have remained vast. In trying to address
the issue of inequality and to diminish very basic
human challenges by 2015, world leaders adopted
the Millennium Declaration (resolution 55/2) and
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The
MDGs were described as a milestone in international
cooperation. With a 15-year timespan for their
implementation, the Declaration was widely expected
to inspire development and to directly improve the lives
of hundreds of millions of people. They are the people
who are struggling to survive in the most basic living
conditions and who are suffering from the effects of
poverty, gender inequities, ill health and environmental
degradation.

Thirteen years have gone by, and what do we, as a
global community, have to show in terms of concrete
results? No matter which side of the lens we look
through, something is appallingly wrong. With less
than two years to go before 2015, we must ask ourselves
as leaders why those commitments, related to the most
significant global declaration made to the world’s most
vulnerable people, are not being fulfilled.

It is important for me to be extremely clear. I am
not here to declare the MDGs dead, nor am I advocating
that they be interred. Rather, I remain convinced that
they can still be refocused, reformed, reshaped and
rebranded into a new mechanism post-2015.

We find ourselves standing at the precipice of 2015,
that crucial defining moment. The current moment
is captured by notable but uneven developments in
some crucial areas. Considerable gaps remain and new
challenges have emerged. As leaders we must therefore
acknowledge that now more than ever, through the
process of globalization, individuals and societies
from one corner of the Earth to another, from oceans
and continents, are intricately connected and more
interdependent than ever before. Therefore, a post-2015
development agenda must concede that fact and be
guided by that reality.

The deliberations for international collaboration
and development ahead of 2015 present the opportunity
to redirect previous notions of prosperity and
development among nations. Considering the current
world economic, social and environmental challenges,
that is indisputably critical.

We must concede that the current structure of the
internationally agreed development goals does not
provide satisfactory remedies to our universal problems,
which include an increase in global warming, the
escalating gap between the worlds’s rich and the poor,
the further deterioration of the world’s financial system
and the uneven roles that developed and developing
countries play in responding to and addressing issues
of universal importance and impact on our societies.
Taking into account some of those shortcomings, now
is the opportune time for setting the stage for a post-
2015 development agenda that is all-inclusive, effective
and pragmatic.

Of concern to Antigua and Barbuda are the failings
of the international community in fulfilling the aims
and objectives outlined in the Barbados Programme
of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small

Island Developing States (SIDS). The year 2014 will
mark the twentieth anniversary of the first Global
Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small
Island Developing States, which was held in Barbados
in 1994.

Looking back over the 20 years since that
Conference, we see that the international community’s
actions to address the unique and special circumstances
of SIDS have been lacking. It is my hope that the SIDS
conference in Samoa in 2014 will give the international
community the opportunity to correct the wrongs made
and to improve on shortcomings with regard to SIDS.
The conference will also present us with a third chance
to identify a set of concrete actions, which will be
needed for the further implementation of the Barbados
Programme of Action and the Mauritius Strategy for
Implementation and thereby regain momentum lost by
SIDS in the quest for sustainable development.

We welcome the decision by the United Nations
family to designate 2014 as the International Year of
Small Island Developing States. Antigua and Barbuda
pledges to highlight throughout 2014 the issue of SIDS
with the aim of reinvigorating the SIDS agenda.

My Government firmly believes in promoting
partnerships supporting sustainable development based
on the principles of mutual respect and understanding,
equality and a genuine desire to affect the social and
economic development of all. My Government has
deepened our integration efforts with our Caribbean
Community (CARICOM) brothers and sisters, focusing
on fully implementing the CARICOM Single Market
and Economy, as well as deepening the various
subregional regulatory frameworks.

As a member of the smaller grouping of the
Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS),
Antigua and Barbuda has fully joined and endorsed the
OECS economic union in an effort to build on the shared
tradition of our subregional integration arrangements
and to expand the areas of shared sovereignty in order
to survive and ultimately thrive. At the same time,
my Government has secured full participation in the
Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America
and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean
States, as we seek to further strengthen the integration
and development of Latin America and the Caribbean.

It is a recognized fact, but one worth repeating, that
small island States contribute the least to the causes
of climate change yet suffer the most from its effects.
We small island States have expressed our profound
disappointment at the lack of tangible action within
the negotiations on the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change to protect SIDS and
other vulnerable countries, their peoples, culture,
land and ecosystems. The responsibility for mitigating
climate change is shared by all nations, developed
and developing. However, developed countries
should shoulder their moral, ethical and historical
responsibility for emitting anthropogenic greenhouse
gases into the atmosphere. It is those actions that have
now put the planet in jeopardy and compromised the
well-being of present and future generations.

Vulnerable developing societies such as ours are
also victims of the globalization of crime, notably
in the havoc wrought by handguns in the possession
of criminal elements, by narcotrafficking that is
essentially targeted at markets in developed countries
and by the deportation of criminals to our shores. We
urge the international community, in recognition of
the link between globalization and crime, to provide
greater support for the efforts of small island States
such as Antigua and Barbuda to address the escalation
of crime and strengthen the rule of law in combating
international drug trafficking. We further call on our
developed partners to reduce the practice of deporting
violent criminals to our shores. Most of those deportees
have neither connection nor familiarity with our
countries.

Antigua and Barbuda is proud to be among
the growing number of States that have signed and
ratified the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The Treaty
will, among other things, assist Antigua and Barbuda
in enhancing its capacity to tackle the scourge created
by the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons
and their ammunition, which is associated with other
transboundary crimes, such as drug trafficking. We have
emphasized throughout the process that such crimes
have had a negative impact on the socioeconomic well-
being of our societies. Antigua and Barbuda stresses
the importance of the early entry into force of the ATT
and will continue to work energetically with Member
States to ensure its entry into force.

Another threat to the sustainable development of
small island developing States such as Antigua and
Barbuda is the rise in non-communicable diseases
(NCDs). The situation is at an alarming stage, as
hundreds succumb annually. For Antigua and Barbuda,
the prevention, care and treatment of non-communicable

diseases continue to be a challenge. Heart disease,
diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease and chronic
respiratory diseases continue to be the leading causes of
death in our region. Our health-care system, economy
and population are heavily burdened by NCDs; it is for
that reason that my Government has become even more
proactive in addressing the issue. Health care continues
to be basically free for Antiguans and Barbudans, and
the Government often helps citizens seek treatment
abroad when our facilities at home are unable to provide
it. I ask the Assembly to continue to keep the issue of
NCDs high on its agenda.

My small developing nation of Antigua and Barbuda
has sought to ensure that the trade rules agreed to by a
majority of members of the international community,
including the United States of America, are adhered
to. I take this opportunity to once again draw the
Assembly’s attention to a trade dispute between my
country and the United States of America that has been
ongoing for a decade and which has been submitted
to the dispute settlement system of the World Trade
Organization (WTO). I draw the Assembly’s attention
to the dispute because I believe it has the potential to
damage the credibility and undermine the utility of
the WTO’s dispute settlement system and of the WTO
itself.

My Government won the case at both the original
and appellate levels and yet, a decade later, the end
is not in sight. It is a case that pits the world’s largest
economy against one of the smallest, and despite our
best efforts, our patient negotiations with the United
States of America have borne no fruit. The United States
of America has neither removed the offending laws nor
agreed on a fair settlement with Antigua and Barbuda
that would compensate for the wanton destruction of an
entire economic sector. We believe that it is a blow to
the credibility of the WTO to allow the world’s largest
economy and the WTO’s most powerful member to
ignore the lawful decision of its dispute settlement
tribunal without consequences. The international
trading system will not long survive such a profound
challenge, and we call on the United States to correct
past wrongs and come to the table with meaningful
proposals that can bring the matter to a just conclusion.

Although my Government has until now
exercised strategic patience, we intend, through the
only mechanism that the WTO has provided, to seek
compensation for the thousands of jobs lost, the
companies collapsed and the general devastation of the
second-largest sector of our economy after tourism.
More than jobs are at stake here. The WTO must be
seen to deliver justice to its members, especially one
of its smallest constituents. If not, its credibility as the
arbiter of international trade disputes will bleed into
the dust and hollow out its noble intentions.

As a part of the Caribbean and a member of the
CARICOM family, Antigua and Barbuda supports the
preservation of the sovereignty of every nation. We are
therefore very proud of our long-standing relationship
with the Republic of Cuba. My Government condemns
in the strongest possible terms any discriminatory or
retaliatory policies and practices designed to prevent
Cuba from exercising its right to freely participate
in the affairs of our hemisphere. Today, I once again
reiterate my Government’s firm condemnation of the
unilateral and extraterritorial application of coercive
laws and measures contrary to international law, the
Charter of the United Nations and the principles of
free navigation and international trade. Antigua and
Barbuda therefore urges the United States of America
to respect and take note of the unceasing call by the
Members of the United Nations that it immediately
lift the unjust economic, commercial and financial
blockade imposed on the Republic of Cuba. These and
other associated measures serve no other end than to
hinder the socioeconomic development and well-being
of the people of the Republic of Cuba.

Antigua and Barbuda also affirms its long-standing
stance and commitment towards combating terrorism
in all its forms and expressions and condemns any
action which goes against international law, resolutions
of the United Nations or principles of human rights
protection. We therefore condemn the recent terrorist
acts in Kenya and express our profound sympathy to
the Government of President Uhuru Kenyatta and the
families of those who lost loved ones. We also in the
strongest sense condemn acts of terrorism in other
parts of the world.

Antigua and Barbuda also expresses its concern
about the inclusion of the Republic of Cuba on the list
of State sponsors of terrorism published by the State
Department of the United States of America. We reject
the unilateral elaboration of blacklists accusing States
of allegedly supporting and sponsoring terrorism,
which is inconsistent with international law. We request
the United States of America to put an end to that
unilateral practice.

Antigua and Barbuda welcomes the launch of the
design for a permanent memorial to honour the victims
of slavery and the transatlantic slave trade, an initiative
that was championed by CARICOM. We also look
forward to its full erection in the coming months.

One year ago, I stood here and reiterated the need
for serious dialogue on the topic of reparations. Today
I am proud that the members of CARICOM, at its
thirty-fourth Regular Meeting of the Conference of
Heads of Government, held in Trinidad and Tobago in
July, agreed to support the establishment of a regional
reparations commission to begin laying the groundwork
for a process of engagement and conversation on the
issue of reparations for native genocide and slavery.

I am equally pleased that the first regional
reparations conference was held in St. Vincent and the
Grenadines earlier this month, with proposals for the
formalization of a regional reparations commission.
Antigua and Barbuda therefore conceptualizes the
call for reparations as an integral element of our
development strategy and believes that the legacy of
slavery and colonialism in the Caribbean has severely
impaired our development options. We therefore assert
that reparations must be directed towards repairing the
damage inflicted by slavery and racism.

We have recently seen a number of leaders
apologizing to the African diaspora, to indigenous
peoples and to former colonies for past wrongs and
injustices. I salute those leaders who have demonstrated
such enlightenment and strongly encourage others to
do so and equally match their words with concrete and
material benefits to the descendants of genocide and
the brutal enslavement of their ancestors.

My country, while developmentally focused,
is mindful of other global issues, particularly with
reference to peace and security. The continued unrest in
the Middle East, particularly in Syria, is heartbreaking.
The images of innocent women and children being
displaced and killed tug at my consciousness. Antigua
and Barbuda gives its unconditional support to the
preservation of the role of the United Nations and other
organizations in working towards stabilization and
peace in Syria and other conflict-ridden countries.

In the same vein, we call on those leaders to
protect civilians at all costs and move quickly to
devise diplomatic solutions to the conflicts. Wilful
and deliberate attacks upon civilians should be taken
seriously by the international community, and the
international courts should move to act in a manner
consistent with international laws and norms.

War, or even the threat of war, should be an
absolute last resort and should have the full support
of the international community at all times. Unilateral
prescriptions will never solve a problem.

We cannot successfully achieve a post-2015
development agenda if world leaders stand idle and
see the tears and desperation on the faces of the many
children who are hungry. We cannot successfully
achieve a post-2015 development agenda if world
leaders allow easily treatable illnesses and diseases to
destroy our populations.

We cannot successfully achieve a post-2015
development agenda if world leaders sit back and allow
the lines of class divisions and insurmountable social
barriers to increase.

We cannot successfully achieve a post-2015
development agenda if world leaders continue to
allow the imbalances of economic growth, destructive
trade barriers and protectionism from developed to
developing countries to persist.

We cannot successfully achieve a post-2015
development agenda if world leaders do not act to save
our environment and stop the pollution of our air and
oceans and the wanton destruction of our forests and
lands only for the benefit of a few.

When the founders of the United Nations formulated
this great institution, it was not envisioned as a stage or
a repository for eloquent speeches. The United Nations
was conceptualized as a place where our challenges
would be discussed, solutions cultivated and action
taken.

It is for those reasons that our leaders gathered here
today should work towards a fundamental, impartial
and sustainable social, economic and environmental
post-2015 development agenda that is far-reaching and
all-inclusive. Anything less would be unacceptable
and would be a travesty for millions of the world’s
inhabitants, for whom we are required to act and do so
courageously and decisively.