I am grateful for the privilege of
speaking to the General Assembly.
 Last week, America and the world marked the
fifth anniversary of the attacks that filled another
September morning with death and suffering. On that
terrible day, extremists killed nearly 3,000 innocent
people, including citizens of dozens of nations
represented right here in this Hall. Since then, the
enemies of humanity have continued their campaign of
murder. Al-Qaida and those inspired by its extremist
ideology have attacked more than two dozen nations.
And recently, a different group of extremists
deliberately provoked a terrible conflict in Lebanon. At
the start of the twenty-first century, it is clear that the
world is engaged in a great ideological struggle
between extremists who use terror as a weapon to
create fear and moderate people who work for peace.
 Five years ago, I stood at this rostrum and called
on the community of nations to defend civilization and
build a more hopeful future. This is still the great
challenge of our time. It is the calling of our
generation. This morning, I want to speak about the
more hopeful world that is within our reach — a world
beyond terror, where ordinary men and women are free
to determine their own destiny, where the voices of
moderation are empowered and where the extremists
are marginalized by the peaceful majority. This world
can be ours if we seek it and if we work together.
 The principles of this world beyond terror can be
found in the very first sentence of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. This document declares
that the “equal and inalienable rights of all members of
the human family [are] the foundation of freedom,
justice and peace in the world”. One of the authors of
this document was a Lebanese diplomat named Charles
Malik, who would go on to become President of this
Assembly. Mr. Malik insisted that these principles
apply equally to all people, of all religions, in all
regions — including the men and women of the Arab
world that was his home.
 In the nearly six decades since that document was
approved, we have seen the forces of freedom and
moderation transform entire continents. Sixty years
after a terrible war, Europe is now whole, free and at
peace, and Asia has seen freedom progress and
hundreds of millions of people lifted out of desperate
poverty. The words of the Universal Declaration are as
true today as they were when they were written. As
liberty flourishes, nations grow in tolerance, and hope,
and peace. And we are seeing the bright future begin to
take root in the broader Middle East.
 Some of the changes in the Middle East have
been dramatic, and we see the results in this Hall. Five
years ago, Afghanistan was ruled by the brutal Taliban
regime, and its seat in this body was contested. Now
this seat is held by the freely elected Government of
Afghanistan, which is represented today by President
Karzai. Five years ago, Iraq’s seat in this body was

9 06-52731

held by a dictator who killed his citizens, invaded his
neighbours and showed his contempt for the world by
defying more than a dozen Security Council
resolutions. Now Iraq’s seat is held by a democratic
Government that embodies the aspirations of the Iraqi
people, represented today by President Talabani. With
these changes, more than 50 million people have been
given a voice in this Hall for the first time in decades.
 Some of the changes in the Middle East are
happening gradually, but they are real. Algeria has held
its first competitive presidential election, and the
military remained neutral. The United Arab Emirates
recently announced that half of its seats in the Federal
National Council will be chosen by elections. Kuwait
held elections in which women were allowed to vote
and run for office for the first time. Citizens have voted
in municipal elections in Saudi Arabia, in
parliamentary elections in Jordan and Bahrain and in
multiparty presidential elections in Yemen and in
Egypt. These are important steps, and the Governments
should continue to move forward with other reforms
that show that they trust their people. Every nation that
travels the road to freedom moves at a different pace,
and the democracies they build will reflect their own
cultures and traditions. But the destination is the same:
a free society where people live at peace with each
other and at peace with the world.
 Some have argued that the democratic changes
we are seeing in the Middle East are destabilizing the
region. This argument rests on a false assumption: that
the Middle East was stable to begin with. The reality is
that the stability we thought we saw in the Middle East
was a mirage. For decades, millions of men and women
in the region have been trapped in oppression and
hopelessness. And these conditions left a generation
disillusioned and made this region a breeding ground
for extremism.
 Imagine what it is like to be a young person
living in a country that is not moving toward reform.
You are 21 years old, and while your peers in other
parts of the world are casting their ballots for the first
time, you are powerless to change the course of your
Government. While your peers in other parts of the
world have received educations that prepare them for
the opportunities of a global economy, you have been
fed propaganda and conspiracy theories that blame
others for your country’s shortcomings. And
everywhere you turn, you hear extremists who tell you
that you can escape your misery and regain your
dignity through violence and terror and martyrdom. For
many across the broader Middle East, this is the dismal
choice presented every day.
 Every civilized nation, including those in the
Muslim world, must support those in the region who
are offering a more hopeful alternative. We know that
when people have a voice in their future they are less
likely to blow themselves up in suicide attacks. We
know that when leaders are accountable to their people,
they are more likely to seek national greatness in the
achievements of their citizens, rather than in terror and
conquest. So we must stand with democratic leaders
and moderate reformers across the broader Middle
East. We must give voice to the hopes of decent men
and women who want for their children the same things
we want for ours. We must seek stability through a free
and just Middle East where the extremists are
marginalized by millions of citizens in control of their
own destinies.
 Today, I would like to speak directly to the
people across the broader Middle East. My country
desires peace. Extremists in your midst spread
propaganda claiming that the West is engaged in a war
against Islam. This propaganda is false, and its purpose
is to confuse you and justify acts of terror. We respect
Islam, but we will protect our people from those who
pervert Islam to sow death and destruction. Our goal is
to help you build a more tolerant and hopeful society
that honours people of all faiths and promotes peace.
 To the people of Iraq: nearly 12 million of you
braved the car bombers and assassins last December to
vote in free elections. The world saw you hold up
purple ink-stained fingers, and your courage filled us
with admiration. You have stood firm in the face of
horrendous acts of terror and sectarian violence, and
we will not abandon you in your struggle to build a
free nation. America and our coalition partners will
continue to stand with the democratic Government you
elected. We will continue to help you secure the
international assistance and investment you need to
create jobs and opportunity, working with the United
Nations and through the International Compact with
Iraq endorsed here in New York yesterday. We will
continue to train those of you who stepped forward to
fight the enemies of freedom. We will not yield the
future of your country to terrorists and extremists. In
return, your leaders must rise to the challenges your
country is facing and make difficult choices to bring
security and prosperity. Working together, we will help

06-52731 10

your democracy succeed, so that it can become a
beacon of hope for millions in the Muslim world.
 To the people of Afghanistan: together, we
overthrew the Taliban regime that brought misery into
your lives and harboured terrorists who brought death
to the citizens of many nations. Since then, we have
watched you choose your leaders in free elections and
build a democratic Government. You can be proud of
these achievements. We respect your courage and your
determination to live in peace and freedom. We will
continue to stand with you to defend your democratic
gains.
 Today, forces from more than 40 countries,
including members of the NATO alliance, are bravely
serving side by side with you against the extremists
who want to bring down the free Government you have
established. We will help you defeat these enemies and
build a free Afghanistan that will never again oppress
you or be a safe haven for terrorists.
 To the people of Lebanon: last year, you inspired
the world when you came out into the streets to
demand your independence from Syrian dominance.
You drove Syrian forces from your country and you
re-established democracy. Since then, you have been
tested by the fighting that began with Hizbollah’s
unprovoked attacks on Israel. Many of you have seen
your homes and your communities caught in crossfire.
We see your suffering, and the world is helping you to
rebuild your country and helping you deal with the
armed extremists who are undermining your
democracy by acting as a State within a State.
 The United Nations has passed a good resolution
that has authorized an international force, led by
France and Italy, to help you restore Lebanese
sovereignty over Lebanese soil. For many years,
Lebanon was a model of democracy and pluralism and
openness in the region — and it will be again.
 To the people of Iran: the United States respects
you. We respect your country. We admire your rich
history, your vibrant culture and your many
contributions to civilization. You deserve an
opportunity to determine your own future, an economy
that rewards your intelligence and your talents and a
society that allows you to fulfil your tremendous
potential. The greatest obstacle to this future is that
your rulers have chosen to deny you liberty and to use
your nation’s resources to fund terrorism, and fuel
extremism, and pursue nuclear weapons.
 The United Nations has passed a clear resolution
requiring that the regime in Tehran meet its
international obligations. Iran must abandon its nuclear
weapons ambitions. Despite what the regime tells you,
we have no objection to Iran’s pursuit of a truly
peaceful nuclear power programme. We are working
toward a diplomatic solution to this crisis, and as we
do, we look to the day when you can live in freedom
and America and Iran can be good friends and close
partners in the cause of peace.
 To the people of Syria: your land is home to a
great people with a proud tradition of learning and
commerce. Today your rulers have allowed your
country to become a crossroad for terrorism. In your
midst, Hamas and Hizbollah are working to destabilize
the region, and your Government is turning your
country into a tool of Iran. This is increasing your
country’s isolation from the world. Your Government
must choose a better way forward by ending its support
for terror, and living in peace with your neighbours,
and opening the way to a better life for you and your
families.
 To the people of Darfur: you have suffered
unspeakable violence, and my nation has called these
atrocities what they are: genocide. For the last two
years, America joined with the international
community to provide emergency food aid and support
for an African Union peacekeeping force. Yet your
suffering continues. The world must step forward to
provide additional humanitarian aid, and we must
strengthen the African Union force that has done good
work but is not strong enough to protect you. The
Security Council has approved a resolution that would
transform the African Union force into a blue-helmeted
force that is larger and more robust. To increase its
strength and effectiveness, NATO nations should
provide logistics and other support. The regime in
Khartoum is stopping the deployment of this force. If
the Sudanese Government does not approve this
peacekeeping force quickly, the United Nations must
act. Your lives and the credibility of the United Nations
are at stake. So today I am announcing that I am
naming a presidential Special Envoy — former
Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development, Andrew Natsios — to lead
America’s efforts to resolve the outstanding disputes
and help bring peace to your land.
 The world must also stand up for peace in the
Holy Land. I am committed to two democratic States,

11 06-52731

Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and
security. I am committed to a Palestinian State that has
territorial integrity and will live peacefully with the
Jewish State of Israel. This is the vision set forth in the
road map, and helping the parties to reach this goal is
one of the great objectives of my presidency. The
Palestinian people have suffered from decades of
corruption and violence and the daily humiliation of
occupation. Israeli citizens have endured brutal acts of
terrorism and constant fear of attack since the birth of
their nation. Many brave men and women have made
the commitment to peace. Yet extremists in the region
are stirring up hatred and trying to prevent these
moderate voices from prevailing.
 This struggle is unfolding in the Palestinian
territories. Earlier this year, the Palestinian people
voted in a free election. The leaders of Hamas
campaigned on a platform of ending corruption and
improving the lives of the Palestinian people, and they
prevailed. The world is waiting to see whether the
Hamas Government will follow through on its
promises or pursue an extremist agenda. The world has
sent a clear message to the leaders of Hamas: serve the
interests of the Palestinian people, abandon terror,
recognize Israel’s right to exist, honour agreements and
work for peace.
 President Abbas is committed to peace and to his
people’s aspirations for a State of their own. Prime
Minister Olmert is committed to peace, and has said he
intends to meet with President Abbas to make real
progress on the outstanding issues between them. I
believe that peace can be achieved and that a
democratic Palestinian State is possible. I hear from
leaders in the region who want to help. I have directed
Secretary of State Rice to lead a diplomatic effort to
engage moderate leaders across the region to help the
Palestinians reform their security services and support
Israeli and Palestinian leaders in their efforts to come
together to resolve their differences.
 Prime Minister Blair has indicated that his
country will work with partners in Europe to help
strengthen the governing institutions of the Palestinian
administration. We welcome his initiative. Countries
like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt have made clear
that they are willing to contribute the diplomatic and
financial assistance necessary to help these efforts
succeed. I am optimistic that, by supporting the forces
of democracy and moderation, we can help Israelis and
Palestinians build a more hopeful future and achieve
the peace in the Holy Land that we all want.
 Freedom, by its nature, cannot be imposed; it
must be chosen. From Beirut to Baghdad, people are
making the choice for freedom. And the nations
gathered in this Hall must make a choice as well. Will
we support the moderates and reformers who are
working for change across the Middle East, or will we
yield the future to the terrorists and extremists?
America has made its choice: we will stand with the
moderates and reformers.
 Recently, a courageous group of Arab and
Muslim intellectuals wrote me a letter. In it, they said
this: “The shore of reform is the only one on which any
lights appear, even though the journey demands
courage, patience and perseverance”. The United
Nations was created to make that journey possible.
Together we must support the dreams of good and
decent people who are working to transform a troubled
region. And by doing so, we will advance the high
ideals on which this institution was founded.


Once again, we have convened
at this seat of the Organization of the peoples of the
world, representing the whole of humanity and coming
from all corners of the world. Our pilgrimage this year
is tinged with sadness, because we are also paying

06-52731 12

homage to one of the most outstanding servants of the
United Nations, a native son of Africa, Kofi Annan,
whose term of office will soon come to an end.
 The Group of 77 and China, as well as my own
country, South Africa, sincerely thanks the Secretary-
General for the selfless and dedicated work he carried
out during one of the most challenging periods in the
history of this Organization. In the midst of increasing
poverty and underdevelopment during an era of
unprecedented wealth accumulation and technological
advances, and as the river that divides the rich and the
poor zones of the metaphorical global village ever
widened, the Secretary-General never lost focus on the
imperatives of our time.
 We thank him for never losing sight of the fact
that poverty and underdevelopment remain the biggest
threats to the progress that has been achieved, and that
equality among nations big and small is central to the
survival, relevance and credibility of this global
Organization.
 We are only six years into the twenty-first
century. Those who populate the poorest of the regions
of the world — that is, Africa — have boldly declared
that it will be an African century. It is a century that
billions of citizens of the developing world and other
poor and marginalized people want to transform into a
century for all humanity.
 If the wishes of the majority of the world could
turn into reality, this would be a century free of wars,
free of internecine conflicts, free of hunger, free of
preventable disease, free of want, free of
environmental degradation and free of greed and
corruption. Indeed, we began the century with great
hopes for a better, peaceful and more humane world.
 Together, we crafted comprehensive plans and
bold declarations to defeat the scourge of poverty and
underdevelopment. Together, we committed ourselves,
with what seemed like renewed vigour, to transform
the United Nations to reflect the modern reality that is
defined by free, sovereign and equal nations.
 However, six years into the twenty-first century,
dispassionate observers might well challenge us to
achieve our noble and lofty objectives, pointing to the
terrorists’ acts that welcomed us into the new century.
They might emphasize the unilateralism that threatens
to negate the democratic advances of the last decades
of the twentieth century and draw attention to renewed
conflicts and wars that seem to compete with the
destructive fury of the conflicts of the last century.
 They would remind us that for a decade and
more, some of the developed nations have consistently
refused to implement the outcomes and agreements of
this world body that would help to alleviate the
wretchedness of the poor. Thus, Madam President,
when you correctly urge us to implement a global
partnership for development, we, the members of the
Group of 77 and China, who represent the poor people
of the world, understand you to be communicating a
message that we should give substance to the common
commitments we solemnly made at this supreme
Organization of the nations of the world.
 Yet, this common commitment for a global
partnership for development cannot be transformed
into reality when the rich and powerful insist on an
unequal relationship with the poor. A global
partnership for development is impossible in the
absence of a pact of mutual responsibility between the
giver and the recipient. It is impossible when the rich
unilaterally demand the right to set the agenda and
conditions for the implementation of commonly agreed
programmes.
 We who represent the poor know as a matter of
fact that these billions of poor people are increasingly
becoming impatient, because every year they hear us
adopt declaration after declaration and yet nothing
practical is done to assuage the hunger pains that keep
them awake at night. Only few and selected agreements
are implemented, with outcomes that are clearly
insufficient to alleviate the excruciating pain of their
children who cannot cry anymore because to do so is to
invite more pain.
 Those of us who were at the 14th Summit of the
Non-Aligned Movement in Havana heard this message
very clearly emanating from all the countries and
organizations that spoke. Those who are capable of
listening should take note of what that great son of
India and South Africa, Mahatma Gandhi, said on this
matter:
 “The test of friendship is assistance in adversity,
and that too, unconditional assistance.
Cooperation which needs consideration is a
commercial contract and not friendship.
Conditional cooperation is like adulterated cement
which does not bind.”

13 06-52731

 Precisely because of the absence of a global
partnership for development, the Doha Development
Round has almost collapsed. Indeed, because the rich
implicitly invoked the slogan of an over-confident
European political party of the 1960s, and directed this
uncaring declaration to the poor of today — “I’m
alright, Jack!” — we have not implemented the
Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development,
thus making it difficult for the majority of the
developing countries, especially those in Africa, to
achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),
and we have reduced the Johannesburg Plan of
Implementation to an insignificant, and perhaps
forgotten, piece of paper.
 Part of the problem with this unequal relationship
is the imposition of conditions on developing countries
and the constant shifting of the goalposts, whenever the
poor adhere to each and every one of those conditions.
 Among other things, we have recently seen an
outbreak of great social instability across Europe and
other reactions of the poor to their miserable conditions
in different parts of the world, which calls into
question the image of a seemingly harmonious well-
woven tapestry of diverse groups, because we continue
to fail to implement our own decisions as taken at the
United Nations World Conference against Racism,
Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related
Intolerance. Those who coined the slogan: “I’m alright,
Jack!” were communicating, whether consciously or
not, a message and an attitude that said “I don’t care
about my neighbour as long as my family and I eat
well and sleep peacefully” and that “It is not my
responsibility to ensure that my poor neighbour also
eats well and sleeps peacefully.”
 Today, the attitude among some of the rich also
communicates the same message to the rest of the
world, namely, “I’m alright, Jack!”, even when they are
acutely aware that many in their neighbourhood are
dying from hunger, preventable diseases and abject
poverty.
 This happens also in the cruelly ironic situation
where resources flow from those who have little to
those who have plenty. Although the rich and powerful
know the miserable life circumstances of the poor and
have solemnly committed themselves to the collective
effort to reverse those conditions, their attitude and
response resembles that of the Biblical Cain, who, after
he killed his brother, Abel, and the Lord asked him
“Where is Abel, your brother?”, replied: “I do not
know. Am I my brother’s keeper?”
 Perhaps, all of us, especially the rich, should heed
the words of one of the great sons of the United States
of America, who perished because of his belief in
equality and justice for all human beings and whose
civil rights movement is currently marking its golden
jubilee. Martin Luther King Jr. warned that
 “As long as there is poverty in the world I can
never be rich, even if I have a billion dollars. As
long as diseases are rampant and millions of
people in this world cannot expect to live more
than 28 or 30 years, I can never be totally healthy
even if I just got a good check-up at the Mayo
Clinic. I can never be what I ought to be until you
are what you ought to be. This is the way our
world is made. No individual or nation can stand
out boasting of being independent. We are
interdependent.”
 The majority of the human race is entitled to ask
the question whether the rich respond the way they do
because further impoverishment of the poor is to the
advantage of the rich, giving meaning to the old
observation that the rich get richer as the poor get
poorer. As the divide between the rich and the poor
widens and becomes a serious global crisis, we see an
increase in the concentration of economic, military,
technological, media and other power.
 Something is seriously wrong when people risk
life and limb travelling in suffocating containers to
Western Europe in search of a better life. Something is
wrong when many Africans traverse, on foot, the harsh,
hot and hostile Sahara Desert to reach European
shores. Something is wrong when walls are built to
prevent poor neighbours from entering those countries
where they seek better opportunities. Something is
indeed wrong when all these people, whose fault is
merely the fact that their lives are defined by poverty,
try desperately to reach countries where they believe
the conditions of their existence could improve, only to
meet hostile, and at times, barbaric and inhuman
receptions.
 In part, the United Nations is unable to fulfil
some of the objectives set by the founders in San
Francisco because, in truth, it does not reflect the
expansion of the global family of free nations. Because
this Organization of the peoples of the world has
grown to encompass the entire world, many had

06-52731 14

thought that it would be logical that this custodian of
global democracy would itself serve as a beacon in our
continuing quest for democracy in all our countries.
 Clearly, for the United Nations to continue
occupying its moral high ground, it has to reform itself
urgently and lead by practical example, showing what
it means to be democratic. Even as we face the cold
reality of the indifference of many among the rich and
powerful, this Organization of the peoples of the world
has continued to offer hope and the possibility of the
fulfilment of the aspirations of the majority of the
peoples of the world.
 All of us, including those who hesitate to
implement the commonly agreed positions, agree that
this Organization has entrenched the correct
understanding that development is a right and is central
to the advancement of humanity. All of us, individually
and collectively and as Members of the United
Nations, must do whatever is necessary to develop and
implement policies and strategies aimed at the
achievement of sustainable development. It is
important that international organizations such as the
Bretton Woods institutions, the World Trade
Organization (WTO) and others should, without any
equivocation, seriously embark on the implementation
of all the commitments that we have made as the
international community.
 This Organization of the peoples of the world
cannot merely note the unacceptable situation that
Africa will not achieve the Millennium Development
Goals by 2015. We need further programmes, focused
and concrete, to accelerate development in Africa and
avoid the possibility of that continent sinking further
into the morass of poverty and underdevelopment.
 Because we are our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers,
we have the responsibility to end the rhetoric and
implement programmes that ensure that all human
beings live decent, humane and prosperous lives.
 On behalf of the Group of 77 and China, as well
as my own country, South Africa, I take this
opportunity to thank His Excellency Mr. Jan Eliasson,
for the great work he did in steering this Organization
during this past year as President of the General
Assembly.
 We are honoured to welcome Her Excellency
Sheikha Haya Rashed Al-Khalifa as President of the
General Assembly at its sixty-first session, and we
wish her well in her important work. Madam President,
we pledge to do whatever is necessary to make your
work easier, so that through your efforts, the poor can
regain full confidence in the ability of the United
Nations to improve their conditions of life.
 Every day the masses cry out in pain, frustration
and anger. Every day they ask whether there is
anybody who stops to hear their voices, anybody who
listens and who is ready to respond to their heartfelt
plea for the restoration of their dignity.


Let me begin by
congratulating you, Madam, on your election to the
presidency of the General Assembly at its sixty-first
session. Your election is a demonstration of the trust
and confidence placed in you and your country, the
Kingdom of Bahrain, by the international community.
 I would also seize this opportunity to pay tribute
to your illustrious predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Jan
Eliasson of the Kingdom of Sweden, for his sound
leadership and achievements during the sixtieth
session.
 Additionally, let me commend the Secretary-
General, His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan, for his
decade of devoted and selfless service to humanity.
This great son of Africa, with his visionary leadership
of the United Nations, has provided, and continues to
provide, the embodiment of our collective aspirations
to achieve a more peaceful, just, equitable and
prosperous world. He is indeed Africa’s great gift to
humanity.
 Within the next five days, Botswana will mark 40
years of its existence as a democratic, independent and
sovereign nation.
 When the first President of Botswana, the late Sir
Seretse Khama, addressed the Assembly on
24 September 1969, he described Botswana, in part, as
a country faced with a problem of underdevelopment
of classic proportions.
 Botswana had to contend with the harsh realities
of its history and geographical position. We were
completely surrounded by oppressive, aggressive and
racist white minority regimes. As a small, weak and
poor country, we had to begin the process of building
national institutions and laying the foundation for
social and economic development in a very hostile
environment. The United Nations and its Member
States served as a pillar of strength and gave us
political and diplomatic support.
 Standing here today, we express our deep
gratitude for the support and assistance extended to us
over the years. It has been a 40-year journey of
determined and sustained effort to achieve human-
centred development.
 It is a journey we have travelled with
development partners from all continents. This has
enabled us to achieve some measure of progress in
improving the human condition. At 40, we are an adult
nation and have assumed full ownership of and
responsibility for our own development. We have
adopted policies, legislation and practices aimed at

06-53341 2

creating an environment conducive to economic growth
and development.
 Many milestones have been achieved in our
national development effort. Today, Botswana is a
middle-income developing country, but we still face
enormous challenges for which we need assistance. In
this regard, the decision of the 2005 World Summit
should be implemented to ensure that small middle-
income developing countries such as Botswana do not
fall back into the doldrums of poverty and
underdevelopment.
 Botswana has been blessed with one of Africa’s
major natural resources: diamonds. It must be stated
that 65 per cent of the world’s diamonds, worth
$8.3 billion per year, come from African countries. I
am pleased to state that diamonds have done, and
continue to do, good in Botswana. The diamond
industry in Botswana has been at the cutting edge of
human development and is transforming lives for the
better, in all fields of human endeavour.
 We continue to prudently manage the revenue
from the sale of diamonds and to effectively use such
revenue to educate our people, provide potable water
and health care and build an infrastructure network,
including roads, telephones and rural electrification.
This is the good that diamonds have done and continue
to do.
 As a participant in the Kimberley Process
Certification Scheme, of which we currently hold the
chairmanship, Botswana is strongly committed to
working alongside other participating countries to
maintain the credibility of the Scheme and the
legitimate diamond trade. The Kimberley Process
Certification Scheme is one of the best examples of
global cooperation. The Scheme is the embodiment of
global consensus, unrelenting political will and the
determination of members to do the right thing,
underpinned by strong support and the resolutions of
the Security Council. That is important, because about
10 million people globally are either directly or
indirectly supported by the diamond industry. In
southern Africa, more than 28,000 people are employed
by the industry.
 We are also here to reaffirm our commitment to
the Charter of the United Nations and our strong belief
in the Organization as the only vehicle by means of
which the enduring peace and prosperity of the human
race can be assured. We welcome the opportunity for
the nations of the world to meet here annually to
exchange views on matters which are central to our
common destiny.
 There are many challenges which we must
address. But chief among them is ending the evil of
war. It is deeply regrettable that, although the human
species left the jungle many, many years ago, the
jungle remains in human beings. As a matter of fact, if
the beasts of the jungle acquired language, they could
actually claim some superiority over the human race.
While animals may fight and brutally kill each other,
they never spend time planning how to destroy one
another or thinking about how to produce weapons of
mass destruction.
 Be that as it may, we still have hope and
confidence in the human spirit to do good. As human
beings, we have a shared destiny and we are therefore
our own saviours.
 The responsibility to save the human species
from the scourge of war cannot be passed to anyone
else. It is for that reason that we consider that this
Assembly provides a rare opportunity for the
international community to move beyond platitudes
and to squarely address the critical challenges of our
time.
 An atmosphere of international peace and
security is essential for human development.
Experience has repeatedly shown that we cannot
realistically hope to pursue a meaningful global
development agenda under conditions of war, conflict
and insecurity.
 Conflicts in our world today should therefore be a
matter of grave concern to all of us. In 2000, at the
dawn of the new millennium, we gave an undertaking
that, above all else, the twenty-first century should be
an epoch of peace and prosperity. We consciously made
a commitment to reduce by half by 2015 the number of
the world’s poor. If we are to achieve that objective,
war should certainly be the first casualty.
 Botswana is particularly concerned about
conflicts in Africa. Regrettably, Africa is the only
continent that is facing the bleak prospect of failing to
achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
Can we really afford the resources for war in the midst
of poverty, disease, deprivation and
underdevelopment? The answer must obviously be a
resounding “No”.

3 06-53341

 Today, Africa is host to the largest number of
refugees, displaced persons, global poor and people
infected with and affected by HIV/AIDS. Yet, sadly,
we have the lion’s share of the world’s conflicts.
Ending conflicts is therefore as much a calling as it is a
moral and political imperative.
 We should all be concerned about the atrocities in
the Darfur region of the Sudan. The perpetuation of
that conflict, in defiance of the collective will of the
international community and the Charter of the United
Nations, is totally unacceptable. Worse still, the
carnage of daily killings is an affront to the sanctity of
human life. This undermines our humanity.
 We call on all parties to the conflict to comply
with and respect the Darfur Peace Agreement. Those
who have not signed the Agreement must do so as a
matter of urgency. It is only through dialogue and
mutual accommodation that durable peace can be
attained. War can beget only misery and anarchy.
 The United Nations has expressed its desire to
help, through the deployment of a multinational
peacekeeping force. In principle, the African Union
Peace and Security Council has welcomed the decision
of the Security Council.
 Every year we come to this rostrum to call for
progress in the Middle East peace process. For
generations that region has known no peace. If there is
any lesson to be learned, it is that the only avenue to a
lasting political settlement is through dialogue,
accommodation and compromise. It is only in an
atmosphere of negotiation that reason and common
sense can prevail over extremism and war-mongering.
 Israel and Palestine must coexist as sovereign
States that share, not only a border, but a desire for
peace, security and prosperity. We urge the people of
the Middle East to summon up the courage to
recognize the folly of war and accept the virtue of
dialogue. They should start building a common future
for generations that will know no violence and conflict,
but only cooperation and concord.
 My delegation shares the concern about the threat
of terrorism. Terrorism pervades every crevice of our
world, much to the detriment of humanity. In this
respect, we welcome the recent adoption of the United
Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (resolution
60/288) by the General Assembly.
 When the Doha Ministerial Declaration was
adopted in 2001, we had hoped for and envisaged
negotiations lasting three years. We knew then, as we
know today, that that was an ambitious and onerous
undertaking. We have already missed several important
deadlines. That should be a source of concern for all of
us. For many of our people, a fair and equitable
international trading system is not only a noble
objective, but also a development imperative. It holds
hope and promise of prosperity and the alleviation of
poverty, which is all the more reason why we must not
allow the Doha round of trade negotiations to fail.
 The indefinite suspension of the Doha round of
trade negotiations on 24 July 2006 has raised questions
about our collective commitment to development. In
this respect, the major question before us today is how
we can revive the Doha round of trade negotiations. It
took eight years to complete the Uruguay round. That
goes to show that at times it is not how fast the
negotiations are concluded but the substance and
content of such negotiations. It is clear that we are
going to miss the December 2006 deadline which we
set for ourselves in 2005.
 It is therefore our collective responsibility as the
United Nations to give the necessary political direction
to the World Trade Organization, not only to revive the
negotiations, but also to ensure the necessary impetus
for their timely and successful conclusion. A successful
conclusion should address the ever-growing special
development challenges of developing countries by
upholding the development dimension of the Doha
round.
 During the sixtieth session of the General
Assembly, a number of key decisions were made and
were outlined in the 2005 World Summit Outcome
(resolution 60/1). Heads of State or Government called
for the establishment of institutions with a view to
making the United Nations more effective in carrying
out its mandate under the Charter and in serving
Member States better.
 This session should be an implementation
session; we must commit ourselves to collective
implementation. It is important that we demonstrate in
deeds that, here at the United Nations, we make
statements to communicate thoughts, ideas and action
plans. Such ideas are not to remain on paper; they must
be translated into programmes and projects for the
common good.

06-53341 4

 Botswana strongly supports comprehensive, wide
and deep reform of the United Nations. Regarding the
ongoing management reform, we welcome the
decision, in resolution 60/283, to allow the Secretary-
General adequate authority to deploy resources and
staff from lower to higher priority programmes. We are
convinced that as chief administrative officer, the
Secretary-General should be accorded more leverage to
command both human and financial resources so that
the Secretariat can deliver more effectively. Member
States must recognize the importance of timely and
unconditional funding of the mandates entrusted to the
Secretary-General by the legislative bodies of the
Organization. It is incumbent upon the Secretariat to
ensure accountability and the prudent management of
such resources.
 Enabling the Organization to effectively deliver is
a collective responsibility of the Member States and
the Secretariat. What is essential is for Member States
to ensure that there are efficient oversight bodies to
guarantee compliance with standing rules and
regulations.
 One of the major successes of the sixtieth session
was the implementation of the World Summit decision
on the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission.
Africa expects the Peacebuilding Commission to
effectively discharge its mandate.
 The establishment of the Human Rights Council
is also one of the significant achievements of the
sixtieth session. It demonstrates our collective desire to
elevate human rights to new heights of prominence and
visibility consistent with the changing times. It is our
expectation that the new body will operate on the basis
of principles of cooperation, genuine interactive
dialogue and tolerance coupled with respect for
diversity. The importance of issues of development
should not be underestimated. In developing countries,
these issues are real challenges which should not be
overlooked. The Human Rights Council must therefore
address issues of capacity building and find ways of
responding to institutional weaknesses and resource
limitations which hamper the process of translating
constitutional and statutory human rights provisions
into reality.
 Let me conclude by reaffirming Botswana’s
abiding faith in the utility and universality of the
United Nations. The United Nations is nothing else but
ourselves, the Member States, put together. It should be
greater than the sum total of all of us. We must
therefore have the courage to strengthen ourselves by
following through with reforms, including the reform
of the Security Council. The reform of the Security
Council should not pose difficulties to anyone. We are
all responsible for keeping this world safe.
 It is only when Member States consider their
national interests to be an integral part of the wider
interests of the international community that they can
set aside their apprehension with regard to a Security
Council enlarged in both the permanent and non-
permanent categories.


Let me add my voice of
congratulations to President Sheikha Haya Rashed
Al-Khalifa on her assumption of this driving seat,
which has mainly been occupied by men in the history
of the United Nations. Before this Assembly last week,
we welcomed the first African woman to become a
national President — Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia.
At last, the glass ceiling that has tended to frustrate the
attempts of women to become presidents is surely
cracking in several places. We should celebrate that.
 Let me also congratulate Ambassador Jan
Eliasson of Sweden for a job well done as President of
this Assembly.
 Kenya is a United Nations country. We attach
special significance to our being hosts of the biggest
United Nations centre outside the developed world —
the United Nations Office at Nairobi, which also hosts
the global headquarters of the United Nations
Environment Programme and the United Nations
Human Settlements Programme. We are a major

06-53615 14

contributor to United Nations peace missions around
the world. We subscribe to the principles and ideals of
this Organization and have always upheld its Charter.
 In my contribution to this general debate, allow
me to dwell on the crisis that is Somalia. I do not think
that I need to remind the world that there is a crisis in
Somalia, but I believe that I must encourage the
community of nations to understand that the problem
of Somalia is not going to go away unless we take
deliberate steps to address the crisis. The comfortable
thing to do is to look at Somalia as being far away and
hope that the problem will resolve itself somehow.
 This afternoon, I bring the bad news that the
problem of Somalia is not going to get resolved
somehow by itself. All of us, the community of
nations, must chip in. If, for a moment, we dwell on the
comforting notion that Somali does not concern us,
then it may be worth talking to my friends from South
Korea or China, which are 8,000 to 10,000 kilometres
away from Somalia. A few months ago, pirates from
Somalia hijacked merchant ships in international
waters off the coast of Somalia. It was only after
protracted negotiations that included use of Kenyan
intelligence that the merchant seamen from South
Korea and China were released safely to their families.
 I recount this story of merchant seamen so that all
of us in the international community should appreciate
that the Somali phenomenon, with no Government in
place, is a danger not just to neighbouring countries,
but to the whole world. As criminal elements establish
their safe enclaves in a country like Somalia, the
neighbouring countries and the international
community are soon forced to intervene, even
militarily, to free hostages, to hunt terrorists or to flush
out rebels.
 In the new global village, we are all neighbours
of Somalia. As a front-line State to that country in
crisis, we have participated in negotiations to free
hostages. We have cooperated in attempts to arrest
criminal elements. We continue to host close to a
million refugees. We provide life-saving support in
terms of medical facilities and supplies. But above all,
we continue to work on efforts to create peace in
Somalia. The Transitional Federal Government, the
Transitional Charter and the Transitional Federal
Parliament were established all as a result of a process
that took place in Nairobi when we hosted up to 2,000
representatives from a cross-section of Somalia over a
period of two years.
 Today, I appeal to the rest of the world to take
deliberate steps to help Somalia. The time to help is
now. Tomorrow may be too late.
 There are many communities around the world
that attach great importance to funerals. In those
communities, most people only stand by and watch
when their kin have fallen ill. An occasional visit and
some token of support are what obtains. As soon as the
patient dies, an avalanche of support flows in. The
community of nations must not take that cynical or
undertaker’s approach. We are already too late, and any
intervention we implement now is of an ambulance-
and-fire-brigade variety, at best, but it is better than
simply standing by like spectators.
 Somalia is almost dying. We can see it. We have
known that for the past 16 years. This is the time to
send in life-saving support. It is really a tribute to the
resilience of the Somali people that there are still living
human beings in that country. One day or one month
without Government, police, hospitals or banks in
modern society is unimaginable. The Somalis have
endured for 16 years. How much longer are they
expected to endure? Where is the international rescue
plan with a billion dollars? Where is the Marshall Plan
for Somalia?
 Even a much better but devastated Japan and
Germany needed a Marshall Plan after the Second
World War. We in our region are sure that humanitarian
intervention now will yield better and faster results
than military intervention and at a much cheaper price
than sending troops to pursue criminal elements in a
failed State. That is not rocket science or complex
economic theory. That is common sense. All we need is
the will and the focus to apply ourselves collectively to
the problem of Somalia. I appreciate how difficult it is
to be focused, given the several competing issues
around the world, but focused we must be if we are to
avoid the current flip-flopping from one crisis to
another like chickens with their heads cut off.
 I hear talk today about religious extremists in
Somalia. What did we expect? Our own seven-year-old
children become extremists in our households if they
go without food for one day. Somali children, youth,
women and men have been going hungry for 16 years
and living under very difficult circumstances. To be
extremist is the normal human reaction in such

15 06-53615

circumstances and one does not have to have studied
psychiatry at the PhD level to recognize that. If similar
circumstances in Somalia prevailed in other countries,
we all know that moderation would be the exception.
 Yesterday, I had the opportunity to brief the
Security Council on the position of the
Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
on Somalia. Our IGAD position is to support the
Transitional Federal Government, together with such
legitimate transitional federal institutions as the
Parliament in Baidoa and the Transitional Charter that
is the broadly negotiated road map for Somalia.
 As IGAD, we have also opened a window of
dialogue with the Islamic Courts Union (ICU). Some
four weeks ago, I met representatives of the ICU in
Nairobi. We believe that, as in all situations of conflict,
the final resolution is best achieved through dialogue.
That is why, in our communiqué issued in Nairobi, we
welcomed the Khartoum talks that brought together the
Transitional Federal Government and the ICU. But we
are also concerned that communiqués after these
dialogue conferences should be genuine. Soon after the
Khartoum meeting, the news from Somalia has not
been encouraging. There was an assassination attempt
on the life of President Yusuf. One more city was
overtaken by the ICU, not to mention the cold-blooded
murder of a long-serving humanitarian worker, a
dedicated Catholic nun. The upbeat communiqué
released from Khartoum begins to look like a sandwich
without meat, fed to a world that is starved of any
encouraging news from Somalia.
 There is a critical path that was set up by IGAD
with the help of the international community and that
resulted in the formation of the Somali Transitional
Charter that is recognized by the African Union and the
United Nations. We are encouraged by the United
Nations positive endorsement of the Transitional
Charter, which includes the Transitional Federal
Government and the Transitional Federal Parliament.
Indeed, the Transitional Federal Government is fully
accredited to the United Nations, the African Union
and IGAD, and the presidency of the Security Council
has articulated that recognition through its various
communications, including the presidential statement
of 13 July.
 However, there is a major obstacle faced by the
Transitional Federal Government of Somalia. Without
substantive international support beyond the
recognitions, accreditations, resolutions and statements
I have alluded to, the bottom line remains that the
Transitional Federal Government is like people thrown
into the deep end of turbulent waters and are expected
to swim with their hands tied behind their backs while
hungry crocodiles surround them. It is not a very
encouraging scenario. That is why we appeal for more
meaningful support for the Transitional Federal
Government, even as we insist that it continue to
dialogue with various groupings in Somalia.
 The international community must work to help
Somalia and not inadvertently compound the problem
in that country. It is vital that the international
community consolidate its efforts and not send
discordant messages from Stockholm, New York,
Nairobi, Khartoum, Cairo, Addis Ababa or anywhere
else. Whatever the motives behind the proliferation of
initiatives from different capitals, we must recognize
that discordant signals act only to give incentive to
some of the actors on the ground to attempt to establish
new facts on the ground that they may leverage in
future negotiations.
 I discussed that matter with the Secretary-General
of the Arab League this morning and yesterday. Kenya
has put forward the following proposal, which I would
like to share with the General Assembly. We propose
that an international joint committee on Somalia be
constituted with the following membership: IGAD,
representing the front-line States; the African Union;
the Arab League, also representing the front-line
States; the European Union; and the United Nations,
with at least one or two permanent members of the
Security Council to be included. It is our submission
that the international joint commission will help
consolidate our efforts and bring about a speedier
resolution of the problem.
 It is worth noting that the initiative that resulted
in the formation of the current Transitional Federal
Government was the fourteenth attempt to resolve the
Somali conflict after 14 years. Its collapse would bring
us back to square one in terms of coming up with an
institutional framework that enjoys political legitimacy.
The Secretary-General of the Arab League has
expressed his support for the Kenyan proposal and we
hope that we can proceed on that path by building on
the foundations already established by IGAD, rather
than allow another proliferation of vertical initiatives.
We appeal to other partners to embrace the proposal.

06-53615 16

 On a more hopeful note, let me register our
delight at the progress made by our neighbours
Tanzania, Uganda and South Africa in brokering the
Burundi peace agreement. We commend their
collective effort. The news from the Democratic
Republic of the Congo is also encouraging.
 As Kenya takes over the chairmanship of the
International Conference on the Great Lakes Region,
which will convene in December this year, let me
assure the Assembly that we will do our best to
contribute to the stabilization of our region, which is
really a very tough neighbourhood to live in.
 Finally, let me congratulate Secretary-General
Kofi Annan on his exemplary stewardship of this world
body. As a brother from Africa, I can confidently say
that he has done us proud.


At the outset, on behalf of
the Cambodian delegation, let me extend our heartfelt
congratulations to you, Ms. Haya Rashed Al-Khalifa of
the Kingdom of Bahrain, on your election to the
presidency of the sixty-first session of the General
Assembly. Your election to that important post is a
testament to Your Excellency’s distinctive abilities and
impressive achievements over the years. I am
convinced that under your direction, this year’s session
will achieve a successful outcome.
 Please allow me also to pay tribute to the vision
and tireless efforts of Secretary-General Kofi Annan in
promoting global peace and in taking the necessary
steps to encourage many initiatives for the reform of
the United Nations. Our appreciation is also addressed
to His Excellency Mr. Jan Eliasson for his efficient
leadership as President of the sixtieth session of the
General Assembly, as well as for his countless
contributions to United Nations reform initiatives.
 In the face of uncertainties and challenges, where
the world seems to be inundated with conflicts and
serious threats — such as the proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction (WMDs), terrorism, environmental
degradation and infectious diseases — it is important
for all of us to keep our commitment to maintain peace
and security in the world. In addition, I believe that the
reduction of global poverty and the achievement of
sustainable development in many developing countries
are vital for human security. At the same time, they are
a daunting task for the United Nations as a catalyst of
the international community in helping to improve the
situation of those countries.
 Concerning the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction, Cambodia is of the view that the
international community needs to be more vigilant
about the issue and to ensure that WMDs or their
components do not fall into the wrong hands — those
of terrorists, organized crime groups or others —
which could have dangerous implications for
international peace and security. In that regard, we
need to strengthen the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation
of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) regime in order to secure a
better and more peaceful world for all. Nor should
small arms and light weapons be underestimated, as
they are an equally dangerous source of conflict,
transnational crime and violence in many regions and
countries.
 The fight against terrorism remains of utmost
priority for all Governments and for the United
Nations, given the continuing threat posed by terrorism
despite the serious measures and actions that have been
taken by Governments and international and regional
organizations at various levels, including this world
body. To combat terrorism effectively requires, I
believe, more efforts, more technical capacity, more
education, more information-sharing among law
enforcement authorities and intelligence communities
and maybe more understanding in some specific cases
of the root causes of acts of violence which are
tantamount to reactions of despair.
 Concerning the Middle East crisis, we have to
congratulate the Security Council on the adoption of its
resolution 1701 (2006) to end the recent war in
Lebanon. We call upon all parties concerned to fully
respect that resolution in order to prevent a repetition
of the conflict and further loss of innocent life. In the
same vein, the international community should work
more actively to help bring about a permanent end to
the violence between Palestine and Israel. I believe that
peace in the Middle East will be better guaranteed only
when the leaders of both sides — Palestine and
Israel — have the courage and wisdom to realize that
they cannot continue to destroy each other forever, but
must work together for a lasting peace in the region.
 Both Israel and Palestine have the right to coexist
as independent and sovereign States. At the same time,
they need to overcome their historical animosity and
hatred towards each other. Whether they like it or not,
Israel and Palestine are destined to coexist as
neighbours forever. I strongly believe that a peaceful
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would create
the foundation for durable peace and security in the
entire Middle East.
 With regard to United Nations reform, it is clear
that in recent years, every State member of the world
body has wanted the United Nations to be reformed.
However, when the opportunity arises, we face a
deadlock on this very important issue, because too
much emphasis has been placed on reform of the
Security Council. In that regard, I think that we should
learn this lesson and try to avoid repeating such
mistakes in the future. In other words, we should take a
step-by-step approach and tackle minor problems first,

06-53329 4

such as strengthening the role of the Economic and
Social Council to deal with development, since that
issue is less controversial and there is more inclination
to support it.
 Next, we might consider revitalizing the General
Assembly as the sole body representative of all United
Nations Member States. Afterward, we can move
forward to the reform of the Security Council. We have
to start first with issues where consensus could be
easily reached, and then move to the more difficult
ones, without having to completely stall the United
Nations reform process.
 Since their adoption in 2000, by and large there
has been progress in achieving the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs). But in actuality there has
been little achievement for developing countries thus
far due to a number of factors, such as lack of financial
and human resources, including the negative impact of
globalization, which has led to a widening gap between
developed countries and poor nations.
 In Cambodia, the Royal Government has set up
its own “MDGs”, called the Cambodia Millennium
Development Goals, with specific target priorities.
Since their establishment, Cambodia has made positive
progress in some areas, such as reducing poverty,
combating HIV/AIDS and improving the livelihood of
our people, thanks to the rectangular strategy of the
Royal Government, which yielded strong economic
growth over the past year.
 Extreme poverty in the world today is an affront
to the whole world with 1.3 billion people still living
on the margins of life, earning less than one dollar a
day, while another 1.8 billion are living on less than
two dollars a day, in spite of the commitment to the
MDGs in 2000. Addressing this crucial problem
requires painstaking efforts at the national and
international levels. The eradication of poverty is, first
and foremost, the responsibility of the whole world and
requires the cooperation of the developed countries and
international organizations. Given the enormous
resources and wealth of this world, I believe that no
one on this planet should go hungry while in developed
countries there is an over-supply of food, which has led
to wasteful dumping.
 To deal with global poverty, a comprehensive
approach and collective actions are needed. Official
development assistance, debt relief, market access,
transfer of know-how, foreign direct investment and so
forth must be addressed all together, so that developing
countries can catch up with the current globalization in
order to bridge the gap between peoples and nations in
this world where we all are living.
 Finally, let me reiterate that our world today will
continue to face major global threats and challenges.
The role of the United Nations, as an Organization that
is representative of the whole world, in tackling these
phenomena is of paramount importance for humankind.
Therefore, Cambodia hopes that United Nations reform
can move ahead to significantly contribute to dealing
with these challenges successfully.


The United Nations
today is at a crossroads. It needs to become part of the
twenty-first century, and it must do so with great
urgency. It needs to gear itself to become an institution
capable of taking on the serious challenges that
confront the international community.
 As we address these tasks, your election, Madam
President, to preside over the sixty-first session of the
General Assembly is a tribute to your wisdom and
skill. It is also a compliment to your great country. I
take this opportunity to congratulate you. At the same
time, it gives me pleasure to express appreciation to
Mr. Jan Eliasson, who presided so ably over the
sixtieth session. Today, as the United Nations
approaches the end of one era and the beginning of
another, the Maldives expresses its profound
appreciation to the outgoing Secretary-General, Mr.
Kofi Annan. He has led the Organization for a decade,
with great devotion and skill.
 Modernization should be a top priority for any
organization that wants to remain relevant in a time of
rapid change. It is particularly important for the United
Nations because of the central role that it must
continue to play in promoting cooperation for
international peace and security, economic and social
development, human rights and the rule of law. The
Maldives believes that reform of the United Nations
must be transparent, balanced, comprehensive and
inclusive.
 In addition to modernizing the Security Council,
we must strengthen the General Assembly and the
Economic and Social Council. These reforms must
make the Organization more action-oriented and
democratic. A reformed United Nations must be
responsive to the entire membership, and be faithful to
its founding principles. The Organization must be
adapted to carry out its mandate in full. There can be
no doubt that this can be achieved by gearing the
United Nations to implement all its mandates,
decisions and resolutions without fear or favour.
 The question of equitable representation and an
increase in the membership of the Security Council is a

06-52879 14

crucial part of the reform process. The Maldives
believes the membership of the Council must reflect
the realities of the present day. In this regard, the
Maldives reiterates its support for the proposal of the
group of four on Security Council reform.
 For the Maldives the next few years will be a
crucial period in our national development. As a result
of national efforts made with the support of the
international community, the Maldives is today set to
say goodbye to its least developed country status. The
three-year smooth transition period will begin in
January 2008. Graduation from the least developed
country list will pose numerous challenges to us.
 However, we look forward to that event as a
positive development. We have already begun work
with the donor community to identify ways in which
the economic and social progress of the country will
continue without disruption after graduation. In this
regard, I note the successful launching of the Maldives
Partnership Forum as an annual event. The first such
forum was held in June this year. I wish to thank our
donors for their continued commitment to support the
development of the Maldives beyond graduation.
 The graduation of the Maldives from least
developed country status to that of a developing
country coincides with an important political phase in
the country’s development. Over the past three years
we have been engaged in a major political
transformation. These reforms are based on the
sustained social and economic progress that has
qualified the Maldives for graduation. The political
reform programme that we began in 2003 covers
institutionalizing political pluralism and strengthening
human rights protection, media freedom and judicial
reform.
 The achievements of the programme to date
include the formation of four political parties last year,
strengthening the fundamental rights of the people and
enhancing the rule of law. Also a constitutional
assembly is in session to modernize the constitution.
Other projects are being implemented to overhaul the
criminal justice system, set up a modern police service,
strengthen media freedom and develop civil society.
 We are also determined to meet the standards
prescribed in international human rights treaties. Over
the past two years we have acceded to the Convention
against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol. We
have also acceded to the Optional Protocol to the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women. Just yesterday I
deposited with the Secretary-General our instruments
of accession to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights and its Optional Protocol and to the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights.
 The Maldives was the country worst affected by
the 2004 tsunami. Twenty-one months into the
recovery programme, much has been achieved, but
much remains to be done. I take this opportunity to
thank the donor community and friendly countries for
the support and assistance extended to our recovery
programme. The biggest obstacle to the programme is
the substantial funding shortfall in key aspects of
recovery, in particular in the areas of repair and
reconstruction of housing, transportation, water and
sanitation, and environmental mitigation. The funding
gap is estimated at $100 million. In addition, as a result
of the impact of the tsunami and of high petroleum
prices on public finances, there is a budget deficit of
$100 million. At this critical juncture of our national
progress I call upon our development partners, and the
international community as a whole, to continue to
assist the Maldives.
 It is a matter of satisfaction to us that, despite the
devastation caused by the tsunami and the short-term
fiscal pressures, the Maldives has been able to meet
some international development targets. In reducing
poverty and in providing primary education the
Maldives has already met the Millennium Development
Goals. We are confident that we can attain the targets
for health care and gender empowerment.
 Instability in any part of the world has
implications for the entire international community.
One of the most intractable disputes of our time is the
conflict in the Middle East, particularly the non-
realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian
people. The recent hostilities in Lebanon and the
sufferings of the Lebanese people have their roots in
the Palestinian problem. The Palestinian issue must be
resolved, in accordance with international law and the
relevant resolutions of the Security Council.
 The continued instability and violence in
Afghanistan and Iraq is a matter of great concern to the
Maldives. Years of instability and conflict have

15 06-52879

ravaged the lives and society of the peoples of these
countries.
 The Maldives fully subscribes to the efforts made
by the international community to combat terrorism.
We are party to the major international conventions
that have been formulated to defeat terrorism.
Terrorism is an assault on the values of freedom and
human solidarity. However, our efforts to combat the
menace should avoid undermining the very values that
we seek to protect. There is a resurgence of the
vilification of Islam and Muslims. As the Maldives has
been a 100 per cent Muslim nation for more than 850
years, we are dismayed by this trend. Islam has
provided the basis for peace and social harmony in the
Maldives. Islam preaches moderation, not extremism.
Violence and killing are abhorrent to Islam. The Holy
Koran states, “Take not life, which Allah hath made
sacred, except by way of justice and law.” (The Holy
Koran, VI:151)
 Needless to say, we are deeply pained and
outraged by the negative imaging of Islam and the
effort to associate fanaticism and violence with our
peace-loving faith. The Holy Koran says, “Allah
commands justice, the doing of good, and liberality to
kith and kin, and He forbids all shameful deeds, and
injustice and rebellion.” (ibid. XVI:90)
 Only love can conquer hatred. Knowledge alone
can overcome prejudice. Tolerance can defeat fear.
Stable peace requires inclusion. Effective and
meaningful dialogue among civilizations and mutual
respect among diverse peoples are necessary to address
the challenges that we face today. Tolerance and
respect for diversity are given a high value in Islam.
 Civilization is under serious threat from the
continued degradation of the environment and its
resultant effects of global warming, climate change and
sea-level rise. Small island States such as the Maldives
and other low-lying regions of the world are in the
front line of danger from rising seas. The extreme
weather events of the past few years have been more
frequent and destructive than ever before. They clearly
demonstrate that the entire world is vulnerable to the
devastation caused by climate change. The Kyoto
Protocol has been a great disappointment. We call upon
all countries to accelerate the adoption of urgent and
realistic measures to stop climate change and sea-level
rise.
 If we are to address the vast array of challenges
that humanity faces today we must effectively
implement crucial blueprints and action programmes
agreed through the multilateral process. We must
breathe new life into Agenda 21. We must also adhere
to the Monterrey Consensus. The Millennium
Declaration must be followed up diligently. And, as
Secretary-General Kofi Annan said earlier this month,
the United Nations must move from a culture of
reaction to one of prevention.
 Today I am speaking in my vernacular language,
Dhivehi. It represents the legacy of several
millenniums of continuous settlement and the culture
that it has produced in the Maldives. Is not the
protection of such legacies the touchstone of success of
this global family of nations? If the United Nations can
make small and vulnerable countries feel safe, then
who will be facing any danger at all?


On behalf of the
Government and people of the State of Eritrea, I avail
myself of this opportunity to extend to Ms. Haya
Rashed Al-Khalifa, and to the Government and people
of the Kingdom of Bahrain, my sincere congratulations
on her election as President of the General Assembly at
its sixty-first session. I also wish to express our
appreciation to Mr. Jan Eliasson of Sweden, who
presided over the sixtieth session of the Assembly, for
his dedication and skilful leadership during the past
year.
 For reasons of brevity, I do not wish to dwell on
generic themes of global economic development,
United Nations reforms and other issues of interest that
have been addressed comprehensively by many
speakers with whom we share similar views. I shall
instead focus on cardinal issues of peace and security
that remain of paramount importance to my country
and the Horn of Africa region as a whole.
 In this respect, allow me, Sir, to bring to the
attention of this Assembly, for the umpteenth time,
Ethiopia’s reckless flouting of international law that is
threatening peace and security in our region. It is
painful for my Government to harp on the same theme
at every Assembly session for the past four years. But
these are the sad facts of a perilous reality imposed on
my country. In the event, we are duty bound to press
for and exhaust all legal processes to stave off
dangerous consequences before it is too late.
 As the Assembly is aware, demarcation of the
boundary between Eritrea and Ethiopia remains stalled,
more than four years after the legal award, owing to
Ethiopia’s rejection of the final and binding arbitration
decision. Ethiopia’s conduct is contrary to the terms
and conditions of the Algiers Peace Agreement. Indeed,
article 4.15 of the Agreement stipulates as follows:
  “The parties agree that the delimitation and
demarcation determinations of the Commission
shall be final and binding. Each Party shall
respect the border so determined, as well as the
territorial integrity and sovereignty of the other
party”.
 It must be stressed that there is no equivocation
or ambiguity in the general provisions of this
Agreement. Yet, Ethiopia has violated the core of the
Algiers Peace Agreement with impunity. And, it has
continued to occupy, by force, the sovereign territory
of a United Nations Member State for the past four

06-53341 18

years, in violation of that Agreement and Article 2,
paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter.
 How and why did this happen?
 To single out Ethiopia as the primary and only
culprit would be missing the forest for the woods. The
fact is that Ethiopia has neither the power nor the
political skill to defy international law for even a single
day, let alone for four long years. If it has done so for
the past four years, it is simply because its unlawful
conduct has been, and continues to be, encouraged and
supported by certain Powers in the Security Council.
 This poignant state of affairs is best exemplified
by the following three instances. First, when three
years ago, in September 2003, Ethiopia’s Prime
Minister sent an ominous letter to the Security Council
announcing his Government’s blatant rejection of the
Boundary Commission decision and calling for a “new
mechanism” outside the Commission to overrule the
legal award, the Secretary-General and the Council
chose to accommodate Ethiopia’s unlawful conduct.
This happened in spite of the fact that the Council is
the main guarantor of the Algiers Peace Agreement and
has treaty obligations to maintain the integrity of the
legal decision. It must be recalled that the Council is
explicitly empowered, by article 14 of the same
agreement, to invoke Chapter VII of the United
Nations Charter to ensure compliance by the parties.
 As it happened, the Secretary-General and the
Council opted for the wrong path and appointed a
Special Envoy, in contravention of the legal agreement.
The demarcation process has thus been stymied for the
past four years at huge financial cost to the
international community and inestimable cost in terms
of lost opportunity and heightened tension for the
peoples of Eritrea and Ethiopia.
 Secondly, when this Special Envoy scheme
proved unworkable, the United States Government
employed its full diplomatic clout to unlawfully alter
and modify the legal Award under the rubric of a “new
initiative”. This time around, the United States dropped
all pretensions of influencing the demarcation process
from without, through an external envoy wearing a
United Nations mantle. The current plan consists of
directly planting a senior expert as an adjunct to the
Boundary Commission and bestowing on him wide
powers to alter the decision in the process of
demarcation.
 Washington’s package further envisages creating
a new and political appellate body — outside the
Boundary Commission — to accommodate Ethiopia’s
additional requests in case of dissatisfaction with the
“alterations” that would be implemented through the
services of the expert. This United States “diplomatic”
scheme, which in effect renders fundamental tenets of
the Algiers Peace Agreement null and void, has been
tailored to fully address Ethiopia’s request for an
extrajudicial mechanism when it rejected the Boundary
Commission decision in September 2003.
 From the foregoing, one can only surmise that
Ethiopia’s original rejection of the award must have
been tacitly supported by Washington from the outset.
The United States Government has even resorted to a
series of measures against my Government with the
apparent purpose of furthering this aim. In this
connection, I wish to refer particularly to the seizure of
financial and other assets of our Embassy in
Washington by the United States Homeland Security
Department in contravention of the Vienna Convention
on Diplomatic Relations and to avail myself of this
occasion to lodge a complaint on behalf of my
Government and to solicit the support of the
international community for redress and restitution.
 Thirdly, the semi-annual and other periodic
reports of the Secretariat to the Security Council have
invariably tended to downplay Ethiopia’s violation of
the Algiers Peace Agreement and the Charter of the
United Nations. These reports have often tended to
apportion equal blame to both parties without
differentiation and, particularly in the last two years, to
impugn Eritrea alone. In this regard, Security Council
resolution 1640 (2005), which the Security Council
adopted in December last year, went so far as to
threaten imposing punitive measures against Eritrea,
ostensibly for curbing the freedom of movement of the
United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea
(UNMEE), while overlooking Ethiopia’s refusal to
accept unconditionally the final and binding decision
of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission (EEBC).
 This unlawful conduct by Ethiopia is indeed
threatening to unravel the peace process as a whole.
We can also cite various instances in which the United
Nations Secretariat went out of its way to downplay
unacceptable excesses and infringements of Eritrea’s
sovereignty by UNMEE staff and to blame my
Government instead of taking appropriate remedial
measures. Incidentally, whether the huge annual

19 06-53341

financial outlays for the sustenance of UNMEE are
really justified and provide value for money spent
remains a critical matter that requires thorough
scrutiny and auditing.
 For us, these concerted unwarranted acts belie an
overarching theme. The solemn pledges that we have
heard on this podium from leaders of major Powers on
upholding international justice and the rule of law, like
the collective commitments to prevent and resolve
conflicts and avoid humanitarian disasters, ring hollow
at the altar of reality. When the chips are down, major
Powers, and especially the United States, continue to
pursue their perceived narrow interests at the expense
of regional peace and security and the sovereign rights
of nations and peoples.
 Be this as it may, my Government is determined
not to allow the legal process to be derailed through
various subtle subterfuges. Let me recall that Eritrea’s
right of independence was compromised by the United
Nations in the 1950s — during the period of African
decolonization — to serve the interests of the United
States. Half a century later, we shall not allow any
encroachment of our territorial integrity.
 In addition, as my Government underlined during
the last meeting of the Boundary Commission, first, the
award that is “final and binding” in accordance with
the Algiers Peace Agreement should not be tampered
with under any circumstances. In this connection,
Ethiopia’s acceptance of the decision must be
ascertained publicly and unequivocally. Secondly, the
details and modalities of demarcation must be worked
out in an environment that is free from political
interference, unlawful and compounding mechanisms,
and loopholes susceptible to distortion.
 Allow me now to briefly dwell on the dangerous
developments that are unfolding in Somalia and the
muddled interpretations, both deliberate and innocent,
that have gained currency in recent months. We must
recognize that the current crisis in Somalia derives
from multifaceted and cumulative underlying causes
that have been in place for the past 15 years. Collective
or individual initiatives that will be taken to promote
enduring peace and stability in Somalia must
accordingly address the following parameters if they
are to bear fruit.
 First, the daunting problem in Somalia is
essentially an internal political problem that must be
resolved through negotiations among Somali political
forces themselves. In this spirit, my Government
welcomes the efforts of the Sudanese Government to
facilitate talks among Somali political forces.
 Secondly, the portrayal of recent developments in
Somalia in terms of the global war on terrorism is
factually untenable and politically imprudent. The
overarching national cause of the Somali people should
not be reduced to or lumped together with this singular
concern.
 Thirdly, any external military intervention will
further polarize the political realities of Somalia and
induce greater conflagration. Ethiopia’s military
intervention, under whatever guise or justification, is
particularly dangerous both for reasons of historical
animosity and because of the events of the past few
years. It must be understood that there is no consensus
within the Intergovernmental Authority on
Development (IGAD) on the modalities, timing and
nature of deploying foreign forces, although the matter
was comprehensively discussed at ministerial meetings
for the purposes of contingency planning only. We find
the African Union’s recent call for deployment of an
8,000-strong peacekeeping force in the absence of a
robust framework of peace unwise and fraught with
unnecessary complications. Its practicality is also
questionable in view of the financial and other
challenges that the African Union Mission in the Sudan
(AMIS) is grappling with in that country.
 Fourthly, a recent call by some forces for a
selective lifting of the United Nations embargo on arms
is unbalanced, misguided and fraught with the potential
for dangerous consequences. Indeed, a selective lifting
can only imperil the political process of reconciliation
in Somalia and a durable political settlement there.
Accordingly, appropriate adjustments to the arms
embargo in Somalia can be contemplated only when
there is irreversible progress in the political
arrangements giving rise to national institutions that
have credible legitimacy and popular support.
 Fifthly, the challenges for promoting lasting
peace and stability in Somalia are formidable. They
will be complicated if different actors work, or are seen
to be working, at cross purposes. Closer coordination
and consultation among all interested players must be
cultivated and structured.
 Finally, the current situation in Somalia is raising
the spectre of territorial claims and disputes between
Somalia and its neighbours. Territorial disputes and

06-53341 20

claims can only be settled by strict adherence to the
sanctity of colonial boundaries.
 Let me conclude by urging caution and prudence
in the international efforts to help resolve the problems
in the Sudan. The truth is that the high price of hasty
and ill-advised policies will ultimately be borne by the
people of the Sudan and the region as a whole. The
complexities of the situation must therefore be gauged
carefully, and all international efforts must be
harnessed to promote a robust peace package that will
bring about a lasting solution. Focus on short-term
arrangements without an overall peace framework will
only postpone and complicate a lasting solution.


These days, the days of the
general debate of the General Assembly, fall this year
at a time of unique significance for the Jewish people.
They come on the eve of the Jewish New Year and the
Day of Atonement and are known as the Days of Awe.
 In Jewish tradition, these are days of soul-
searching and prayer, of judgement and of renewal.
That concept of reflection is fitting not just for the
faithful. It should be a time of reflection for nations as
well. Let us use this time and this gathering to look
deeply and honestly at the world in which we live —
the world as it is and as it might be. The United
Nations emerged from the horrors of war and offered a
vision of a new and peaceful world, but we see the
suffering of the people of Darfur, we see bloodshed and
violence across the globe, and we know that that is not
yet the world in which we live.
 Our planet remains torn by conflict, At its heart,
this is a conflict about values — a battle of ideas. It is a
conflict about whether to respect or to reject the
other — a conflict between tolerance and tyranny,
between the promise of coexistence and the
hopelessness of hate. We see it played out in internet
chat rooms and in houses of prayer, in classrooms and
newsrooms, on the battlefield and in the corridors of
power. It is the challenge of our time.
 We, the people of Israel, have lived for many
years on the frontlines of this conflict. Our nation has
felt its fury; our soldiers have fought and died in its
battles. An ancient people in the heart of the Middle
East — great in history but small in number — we
have been a constant target of those that oppose our
very existence. We face this conflict on different
fronts — as Jews against the dark forces of anti-
Semitism, as Israelis against the enemies of our
statehood, and as members of the free world against
the merchants of global terror.
 We have been guided in this conflict by two core
values that are embodied in our declaration of
independence and shape our national identity. The first
is that Israel, with Jerusalem at its heart, is the national
homeland of the Jewish people, their refuge from
persecution, their first and last line of defence. The
second is that Israel is a democracy and that the values
of justice, peace and humanity — first expressed by the
prophets of Israel — are an integral part of our nation’s
sense of mission. We share the same values as the
community of democratic States. We are ready and
proud to be judged by them. They are our own.

06-52885 44

 But too often there is a gap between perception
and reality. Too often, Israel is not seen for its unique
creativity and spirit of enterprise, or for its
contribution — well beyond its size — to the sciences
and to literature, to human development and
innovation. In many parts of the world, we are seen
mainly through the lens of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
And too often, that lens is distorted. To many, this
conflict is portrayed as a clash of David and Goliath,
with Israel perceived unjustly as Goliath, but this
simplistic image ignores the fact that Israel remains a
threatened democracy in a hostile region.
 We have, of necessity, the capacity to defend
ourselves, but we will always be constrained in its use
by our values. And yet, we face an enemy willing to
use all the means at its disposal to kill without restraint
and without distinction. Every innocent casualty in this
conflict is a tragedy. There is no difference between the
tears of a grieving Israeli mother and a grieving
Palestinian mother, but there is a critical moral
difference between the terrorists who hunt down
civilians and the soldiers who target terrorists while
trying to avoid civilian casualties.
 To protect its integrity, the international
community must uphold that basic moral distinction.
Terror is terror, even when it is called resistance. It
cannot be justified and it cannot be equated with the
actions of those seeking only to defend themselves
against it.
 If we want to protect our values, it is not enough
to believe in them — we must act according to them.
There is no greater challenge to our values than that
posed by the leaders of Iran. They deny and mock the
Holocaust. They speak proudly and openly of their
desire to wipe Israel off the map. And now, by their
actions, they pursue the weapons to achieve that
objective, to imperil the region and to threaten the
world. The moment of truth is here.
 The international community is faced with no
greater responsibility than to stand against that dark
and growing danger — not for Israel’s sake, but for its
own; for the sake of the values it claims to embrace;
for the sake of the world we all wish our children to
inherit. What more needs to happen for the world to
take the threat seriously? What more needs to happen
to end the hesitation and the excuses? We know the
lessons of the past. We know the consequences of
appeasement and indifference. There is no place for
such leaders in this forum. There is no place for such a
regime in the family of nations.
 For any who still had doubts, the Iranian threat
was exposed to all in the recent conflict in Lebanon.
Armed, financed and directed by Iran, Hizbullah
kidnapped Israeli soldiers and targeted Israeli cities,
but it was the hopes of an entire region that they sought
to take hostage. Out of the conflict — and because of
Israel’s response to it — opportunity has emerged, but
much is needed to turn opportunity into reality.
Hizbullah can never again be allowed to threaten the
future of the region. The world faces a critical test —
to ensure the full implementation of resolution 1701
(2006) and the immediate and safe release of the Israeli
hostages.
 As we gather here, we think of anxious families
that ache for the return of their loved ones — parents
waiting for a son, a brother for a brother, a wife for a
husband. Israel will not rest until all the Israeli
hostages are returned safely to the arms of their
devoted families and to the embrace of a loving nation.
Let us all make them the same promise today.
 Last year, a great leader of Israel, Ariel Sharon,
stood before this forum and said:
 “The Palestinians will always be our neighbours.
We respect them and have no aspirations to rule
over them. They are also entitled to freedom and
to a national, sovereign existence in a State of
their own.” (A/60/PV.5, p.46)
 That was not only the voice and vision of one
man. It is the voice and vision of a nation. We do not
believe that Israeli-Palestinian relations are of
necessity a zero-sum game. Not every Israeli interest is
at odds with Palestinian interests. There is, in fact, a
common vision that binds together Israelis, moderate
Palestinians and the international community. It serves
the goals of both peoples and represents the basis of a
genuine and lasting peace. At its heart is the vision of
two States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in
peace and security. Israel believes in this vision, and
from this vision we have drawn our principles for
peace.
 The first is inherent in the very idea of two
States. For the Jewish people, Israel was established to
be our national homeland. It was the solution for
Jewish refugees and the realization of Jewish rights.
And this is the true calling of the future State of

45 06-52885

Palestine: a national homeland for the Palestinian
people — the solution to Palestinian claims, the
fulfilment of Palestinian dreams, the answer for
Palestinian refugees, wherever they may be. If
Palestinian leaders are unwilling to say this, the world
should say it for them. Instead of giving false hope, it
is time to end the exploitation of the refugee issue and
to begin to resolve it on the basis of the vision of two
States, two homelands.
 That is the real and only meaning of the two-State
vision. It requires each people to accept that their
rights are realized through the establishment of their
own homeland, not in the homeland of others.
 The second principle for peace is drawn from the
concept of living in peace and security. On the basis of
this principle the international community has insisted
that the State of Palestine that emerges next to Israel
cannot be a terror State. A terrorist State is the last
thing our troubled region needs. It is for that reason
that the road map requires an end to terror. It is for that
reason that the international community has demanded
that any Palestinian Government fulfil three basic
conditions: renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right
to exist and accept existing Israeli-Palestinian
agreements. Those conditions are not an obstacle to
peace or to the establishment of a responsible
Palestinian State; they are a crucial ingredient for the
realization of those goals.
 An end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will also
require agreement on a common boundary. There are
those who believe that if only we could turn back the
hands of time to 1967 all would be resolved. But, in
1967 there was no Palestinian State; there was no link
between the West Bank and Gaza; and there was no
commitment to lasting peace. A two-State solution
requires the creation of a new reality which never
existed in the past. For it to succeed, both sides will
need to commit themselves to compromise and to
believe in coexistence.
 If only we could end the conflict today. But we
have learned from bitter experience that to reach
lasting peace it is not enough to have a vision. Peace
must be built on the solid foundations of shared values,
not the shifting sands of false promises. Without this,
the political horizon will always be out of reach. We
have seen negotiations doomed by mistrust and
frustration. We have seen them lay the ground for
greater violence, not greater understanding. We cannot
afford to repeat that experience.
 Unfortunately, the Palestinian Authority is
dominated today by a terrorist organization that teaches
children to hate and seeks to transform the conflict
from a resolvable political dispute into an endless
religious confrontation. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict
is the consequence and not the cause of this ideology
of intolerance and hatred. We cannot reach peace by
ignoring these realities. We cannot find the solutions
for tomorrow without addressing the problems of
today.
 But we also cannot give up hope, and I refuse to
do so. In a Middle East where being moderate is often
the same as being weak, our challenge is to empower
the peacemakers and disempower their opponents. The
road map phases and the three international conditions
are designed precisely for that purpose. But if the
world hesitates in enforcing these standards, the
extremists sense opportunity. And if it appeases, they
sense victory. This is the moment for determination not
half-measures and vague formulations. It is the
moment to demand that those Palestinian leaders that
believe in peace determine the future on these terms,
not on the terms of terrorists.
 Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts on the road
to peace. But stagnation is not in our interest, and it is
not our policy.
 It is in this spirit that Israel embarked on the
painful process of disengagement, to create an
opportunity for progress. But, sadly, we received terror
in return. And it is in this spirit that I met with
Chairman Abbas two days ago, and we agreed to re-
energize the dialogue between us and create a
permanent channel to pursue ways to advance together.
The parties do not need another forum to act out their
differences, and the only forum that will resolve them
is the bilateral negotiating table. We have no illusions
about the difficulties before us. We must face them not
ignore them. But we can advance along the road to
peace if we have the strength to defend its principles
and the courage to confront its enemies.
 In these days, while Jews prepare to welcome a
new year, Muslims around the world prepare for the
holy month of Ramadan. As two great faiths begin their
annual journey of reflection and decision, let the
nations of the world begin it too.

06-52885 46

 The Jewish prayers tell us that this is a time of
decision not just for individuals but also for States:
“which for the sword and which for peace, which for
famine and which for plenty”.
 Those are sobering words, but they are also
empowering ones. The message of these special days is
that no future is predetermined; no conflict is
inevitable. It is up to us to make the right choices.
History will judge us by them. In the words of the
traditional greeting: may the curses of the last year
end; may the blessing of the new year begin. Shana
tova: may it be a good year.