I am
particularly pleased to extend congratulations to
you, Sir, on your election as President of the General
Assembly at its sixty-eighth session. I am indeed proud,
given your stellar service to the General Assembly
and of the service you have rendered to your native
land, Antigua and Barbuda, and to the Latin America
and Caribbean region in general. As a member of the
Organization of the Eastern Caribbean regional group
and the wider Caribbean region, Saint Kitts and Nevis
pledges its full support to you throughout your tenure at
the helm of the General Assembly. I am confident that
your expertise and skills will position you favourably
to guide the general debate and the extensive work
programme of the various committees and agencies of
this body.

Sir, Saint Kitts and Nevis wishes to place on record
its appreciation to your predecessor, the President of the
General Assembly at its sixty-seventh session, Mr. Vuk
Jeremi., for the important contributions that he made
to advance the work of the institution during his own
tenure.

We begin the sixty-eighth session fully cognizant
of the diverse challenges with which we must contend,
and equally seized of our obligation as a Government
and people to contribute to the global priorities that
inform the work of the Assembly. We see the relevance
of maintaining sharp focus on those areas that are quite
integral to the national and international development
agendas. I refer to matters such as sustainable
development, the maintenance of international peace and
security, the promotion of human rights, disarmament,
the promotion of justice and international law, and
the effective coordination of humanitarian assistance
efforts. Those, we believe, are the core principles for
informing any plan of action to advance towards the
post-2015 era with the confidence that our shared vision
for meeting the goals we set, will be realized.

Just a few days ago, Saint Kitts and Nevis
attained another milestone, celebrating three decades
of nationhood with a very strong commitment to
maintaining the stability and prosperity of our nation,
drawing on our own creativity as a Government and
a people. Therefore, this year’s statement is very
significant for our proud nation. As one of the smallest
States Members of the Organization in the western
hemisphere, we are pleased with the significant strides
that we have made as my Government pursues a process
of transformation for sustainability in a nation that is
not immune to global developments that continue to
have a negative impact on its national agenda.

However, my Government is working assiduously
to transform our former sugar-based economy into one
that is service-oriented, driven mainly by tourism and
hospitality and supported by international financial and
offshore education services and by manufacturing and
agriculture. In all of this, we are aware of the momentum
and impact of information and communication
technology as a tool that will assist us in developing
our national economy.

As far as the manufacturing sector is concerned,
we have developed a cluster of light manufacturing

enterprises that service the North and South American
and European markets with quality electronic and
electrical components for construction, cable television,
and the aerospace and aircraft industries. Indeed, our
present economic trajectory will ensure that we meet
both the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and
our own sustainable development goals in the post-2015
development agenda. That is why the theme for this
session — “The post-2015 development agenda: setting
the stage” — is perceived to be quite relevant.

My delegation is pleased that at this session we will
be reviewing the progress made towards achieving the
MDGs as the target date of 2015 fast approaches. In that
regard, the Secretary-General must be commended for
his initiative. I am pleased to indicate that Saint Kitts
and Nevis has taken tremendous strides in achieving the
MDG 1, concerning the eradication of extreme poverty.
Our Government has invested heavily in creating a
very solid and expansive social safety infrastructure
that has helped the less fortunate to lead dignified
lives. We provide subsidized health care for children
and the elderly. We assist vulnerable families with the
resources to pursue education and provide them with
hot, nourishing meals each day. We also provide living
facilities for the aged and the indigent.

My delegation hopes that every effort will be
made globally to ensure that all targets are met by the
indicative 2015 deadline. The Millennium Development
Goals Report 2013 provides a clear indication of exactly
where the international community should be directing
its focus. The world as a whole has to pay a great deal of
attention to the MDGs that are most off track, and those
where progress has stalled, including those relating to
hunger, universal access to primary education, child
mortality, maternal health and access to sanitation. All
nations must therefore redouble their efforts to exercise
the requisite political will to implement programmes
designed especially to meet the established targets
and to improve the lives of millions of people in a
meaningful way.

We must never lose sight of the intrinsic linkages
that exist between the Millennium Development Goals
and the sustainable development goals, particularly in
the post-2015 development agenda. Both processes,
though running in parallel, are mutually reinforcing in
the sense that the latter will accelerate programmes to
meet target indicators in the former, while the former
will provide valuable lessons for achieving a higher
degree of overall success.

Cognizant of the fact that poverty eradication
is intrinsically linked to attaining sustainable
development, we must strive to ensure that a balanced
approach is taken to blending economic growth, equity,
social inclusion and environmental sustainability as we
craft and implement policies to achieve development
that is both meaningful and truly sustainable. The
post-2015 development agenda must be arrived at
through transparent and inclusive intergovernmental
negotiations under the United Nations. In that regard,
my delegation appreciates the decision taken at the
special event on the follow-up to achieving the MDGs
that was convened earlier this week.

The post-2015 development agenda should also
address other challenges faced by developing countries,
such as universal access to modern energy services,
ensuring food security and nutrition, providing full and
productive employment and decent work for all, job
skills and training, agricultural development, building
productive capacity, and infrastructure development.
My Government has seen the positive impact of its own
national initiative, which is geared towards providing
young people in particular with the skills they need to
integrate themselves into the world of work through the
People Empowerment Programme. To date, over 2,000
young men and women have reaped the benefits of this
particular initiative.

It is very important for all States Members of
this great Organization to play an active role in
ensuring that the targets identified in the post-2015 era
adequately address the remaining gaps by the indicative
deadline for achieving the MDGs. My delegation
would therefore wish to reaffirm its commitment to
ensuring that small island developing States remain
a special case for ensuring sustainable development,
recognizing our unique characteristics, our challenges
and vulnerabilities, and their ongoing impact on our
ability to achieve and build resilience. Small island
developing States remain constrained in meeting the
economic, environmental and social challenges they
face. While we recognize our own responsibility for
overcoming some of these setbacks, we wish to stress
that in the absence of cooperation and assistance from
the international community, success will definitely
remain difficult.

At this juncture, allow me to place on record our
appreciation to some of our development partners
that have offered us tangible assistance in stabilizing
our national economy and in generally diversifying

the national economy, in particular in the field
of agricultural diversification, information and
communications technologies, development and energy
diversification in an economy that relies on fossil-fuel
consumption. This phenomenon will have a positive
impact on our energy cost-reduction efforts as we
advance towards realizing our goal of a fully green
economy as we endeavour to bring much-needed relief
to our people by 2015.

The contributions of the Governments of the
Republic of China, Japan, the United States of America,
Venezuela, the United Kingdom, Canada and Cuba, and
of the Organization of American States, the European
Union, the International Monetary Fund and the World
Bank in particular, have assisted greatly in that regard.

The Assembly will agree that no discussion of the
issue of development can progress without reference
to the area of health, and in particular the chronic
illnesses that continue to plague our societies resulting
in the loss of lives, thus retarding our developmental
thrust. It was just a few days ago, in the margins of
the sixty-eighth session, that I had the privilege of
addressing a forum on non-communicable diseases and
disability, held in collaboration with several permanent
missions, the Caribbean Community secretariat, the
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the World
Health Organization and the Non-Communicable
Disease Alliance. The forum was designed to bring
focused attention to creating synergies between
non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and disabilities
and to examine how health systems can be reoriented
and reinforced to ensure equitable access to high-
quality care and thereby advance development.

In that forum, we were able to confirm that NCDs
are driven not only by ageing but increasingly and
alarmingly by the growing number of cases of juvenile
diabetes and the growing number of youth incapacitated
by accident injury. The high incidence of NCDs within
the Caribbean also places an increased burden on our
open economies, which are highly vulnerable to external
shocks and natural disasters, diverting resources that
could be allocated to building quality infrastructure
and our precious human capital. Indeed, we accept
the recommendation of the report of the Caribbean
Commission on Health and Development that urgent
steps must be taken to reverse those particular trends.

Therefore, as we focus strategically on the
Millennium Development Goals and the post-
2015 development agenda, we cannot lose sight of
non-communicable diseases and the real threat that
they pose to societies across the globe. We are therefore
grateful for the attention that was given at the United
Nations High-level Meeting on the Prevention and
Control of Non-communicable Diseases two years ago
to the need for a global response to that problem. We
recognize that much work has been undertaken by the
World Health Organization, the Pan American Health
Organization and other regional bodies to reverse the
high incidence of NCDs in our region. There is now
a strong emphasis on testing, since the collection of
empirical data is key for proper tracking and analysis.
The preparation of strategic plans and budgets and
the incorporation of families and communities into
education, prevention and detection programmes are
all pivotal in this regard.

My delegation is convinced that the combat against
the high incidence of non-communicable diseases must
receive greater prominence in the post-2015 sustainable
development agenda. It is evident that there is a strong
nexus between a nation’s health status and its levels
of productivity. My delegation therefore subscribes to
the notion that a nation’s wealth lies in the health of its
people. Our High-level Meeting of two years ago was
an important first step in that regard, and it is one on
which we must continue to build on an ongoing basis.
It is clear that we need to adopt a strategy similar to
the global response to HIV/AIDS in order to achieve
the levels of success in fighting the incidence of NCDs.

Today, I respectfully submit that there are practical
lessons to be learned from the experience developed by
agencies such as the Joint United Nations Programme
on HIV/AIDS and PAHO that have touched the lives of
millions in a positive way. It is therefore important for
the Assembly to keep on the front burner a practical
strategy to address the high incidence of NCDs within
our region and the nations of the world.

As we usher in a dispensation of sustainment,
we remain cognizant of the inextricable link between
development and an environment of peace and security.
Crime in any society is an unwelcome and destabilizing
threat that must be dealt with promptly. Indeed, the
ways in which societies are affected at both the micro
and the macro levels are known to us all. Entire
societies are forced to bear the myriad costs associated
with personal injury, psychological insecurity and the
related health-care repercussions.

That is why we in Saint Kitts and Nevis have placed
great emphasis on effective leadership, clear lines

of authority and responsibility, targeted equipment
upgrades, expanded and ongoing training, community
policing, strengthened relations between the police and
the public, and full cooperation at all levels between
our national police force and our national defence force.
As a result, Saint Kitts and Nevis has made tremendous
strides in confronting the challenge of crime. Indeed,
in the space of just over one year, we were able to see
crime plummet by some 53 per cent, convincing us of
the importance of the United Nations providing a forum
via which Member States might share best practices
in this era of globalized criminality. If the challenge
is becoming international in scope, so too must our
response.

In that regard, we are equally aware that the
socioeconomic and political gains that we are trying
to achieve in the global community will be elusive if
the environment of peace is interrupted by warfare
and threats to the peaceful coexistence of the world’s
peoples. Saint Kitts and Nevis therefore joins in
condemning the atrocities that have recently been
perpetrated in Syria and Kenya, which have resulted in
wanton loss of human lives. Such use of chemical and
conventional weapons, resort to acts of violence and
terrorism, and their spiralling inhumane effects will
ultimately have a far-reaching deleterious impact on
global safety and security, which must continue to be a
concern for all of the world’s leaders and their peoples.

More than any other time in its history, the United
Nations must be more assertive in executing its mandate
as a leading actor in securing world peace. Saint Kitts
and Nevis appreciates the strides that we have made with
the Arms Trade Treaty, and would urge that we move
with alacrity to ensure its entry into force. However,
as a small island State with open borders, we see the
relevance of establishing international standards and
controls that will govern the illicit flow of small arms
and light weapons through our Caribbean ports.

We commend the United States of America for the
partnership that has been forged with Saint Kitts and
Nevis and the other States Members of the Caribbean
that form part of the United States Caribbean Basin
Security Initiative, which, among other things, will be
pivotal to our efforts to stop the illicit flow of foreign-
made small arms into our peaceful Caribbean region.
This initiative has provided avenues of collaboration in
crime prevention and detection as we work together in
building the capacity of our security forces. This, we
are convinced, will contribute significantly to creating
an enabling environment for sustainable development
through the prevalence of peace and security in our
communities.

Our focus is not only on the international
dimensions of crime. Indeed, we are mindful of the fact
that all over the world, women and children are among
the most vulnerable in our societies, and so we have
instituted a clear and assertive zero-tolerance policy in
this regard. Violence against women and children must
be seen not as a personal or family matter, but instead
as a socially destructive behaviour demanding judicial
intervention. If and where this zero-tolerance policy
does not yet exist, we strongly urge its embrace today
and its immediate implementation.

Thirty years ago, Saint Kitts and Nevis established
diplomatic relations with several countries, including
the Republic of China on Taiwan. In the intervening
years, this relationship has been mutually beneficial.
As the debate on sustainable development unfolds,
Saint Kitts and Nevis is eminently qualified to speak
on the myriad contributions that the Republic of China
is capable of making to the international community.
While the international community is preoccupied with
ensuring peace and security globally, we can applaud
the Government of the Republic of China for promoting
peace across the Taiwan Strait and proposing the East
China Sea Peace Initiative, thereby demonstrating a
commitment to peace and stability.

Taiwan is one of the top 18 economies globally. In
addition, Taiwan has worked assiduously to advance
the economic interests of countries such as ours. In
this regard, we have collaborated on a large number
of key projects, such as the multisectoral agritourism
demonstration farm, our high-priority solar energy farm
and an information and communications technology
centre, which are all designed to advance the social and
economic interests of my small nation.

I wish to place on record my delegation’s
appreciation to the World Health Organization for
having invited Taiwan, for five consecutive years,
to attend the World Health Assembly (WHA) as an
observer. We are of the view that Taiwan has adopted a
very pragmatic approach to its meaningful participation
in United Nations specialized agencies and functional
organizations that are critical to the current global
efforts to address many issues of mutual concern. My
delegation is convinced that the arrangements made
for Taiwan’s presence in the World Health Assembly,
which have been referred to as the WHA model, serve

as a useful point of reference for Taiwan’s meaningful
participation in other international agencies, such as
the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
and the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change. While on that note, permit me to
commend Mr. Roberto Kobeh González, President of
the ICAO Council, on the decision to invite Taiwan to
attend this month’s thirty-eighth ICAO Assembly as a
special guest.

Germane to the concept of exclusion from the
international trading arrangement is the trade embargo
imposed on Cuba at the height of the Cold War, which
today remains a matter of concern for Saint Kitts
and Nevis, as it does to the vast majority of nations
represented in this important institution. Our own
position is based on our commitment to international
law, the principles of the Charter of the United Nations
and our obligations under the same. We therefore,
like so many in this Hall, are concerned about the
extraterritorial application and effects of national
legislation on the sovereignty of States. Therefore,
the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis reiterates its
support for resolution 67/4 on the necessity of ending
the economic, commercial and financial embargo
imposed by the United States of America against Cuba,
and once again calls for an immediate end to that
unilateral action.

As we move to open a chapter that will usher in a
more enlightened era of human existence, Saint Kitts and
Nevis joins with the States members of the Caribbean
Community in supporting the very important case for
reparations associated with the atrocities of slavery.
Although the repercussions of slavery on the lives of our
ancestors cannot be quantified, we are convinced that
the deleterious effects, which even now are translated
into much hardship and poverty for the descendants of
our ancestors, must be resolved. Therefore, the time has
come.

The world has seen more than its share of conflicts
in recent years. In addition, natural disasters, sometimes
caused by climate change, continue to wreak havoc
in many corners of the globe. All of this speaks to
the importance of us marshalling and managing very
carefully those resources that have been placed under
our respective control for the benefit of the people we
represent. It speaks to the importance of us being far
more responsible stewards of this planet than we have
been in the past. It speaks to our working assiduously,
whenever we can, to abate tensions and promote peace.

There can be change in 2015 only as long as we
do not fail to take a bold and definitive stance in
addressing the ills that stymie our efforts to move
forward in achieving our goals. There will be change in
2015 if we do not fail to pursue the priorities that will
eradicate poverty, enhance global peace and security,
find alternative means of reducing the impact of climate
change and saving our planet from destruction, and
reduce elevated incidences of HIV/AIDS and NCDs.
There must be change in 2015 if the agencies of the
Organization adopt a policy of equity and the strong
determination to execute their mandate to enable the
institutionalization of a culture of peace and security,
respect for human lives and justice for all.

Let us therefore, today and forever, commit to rising
to the challenge and moving forward, imbued with a
renewed sense of focus, determination and urgency to
fulfil our goals. May all that we say here bring us closer
to that most vital and crucial of ends.


The
Republic of Vanuatu is honoured to participate in
this debate under your presidency, Sir, and we wish
to associate ourselves with all other delegations in
congratulating you and the members of your Bureau
on your election to lead us through this sixty-eighth
session of the General Assembly.

On Syria, we have seen internal conflicts transformed
into international disputes that require solutions from
this body. During this session, there has been intensive
debate on the protracted conflict affecting the Syrian
people and undermining regional and international
peace. We join many other peace-loving nations to call
for an end to the conflict and for the United Nations to
do more strongly to enforce the international ban on the
use of chemical weapons. We also urge the United States
of America and the Russian Federation to take a strong
leading role in the issue of Syria and in addressing the
chemical-weapons issue there.

We are concerned at the fact that that such conflicts
have often diverted the international focus from
addressing much more important issues, such as our
common aspirations for the Millennium Development
Goals. It is unfair that countries resorting to such
illegitimate acts can trigger wars that cost a great deal
of money, whereas the rest of the peace-loving countries
and their peoples suffer the consequences, as the monies
spent could be diverted to better and effective use.

It is here, from this rostrum, that the leaders of our
nations have spoken out freely, from their hearts, in an
endeavour to find common solutions so as to inspire the
community of nations committed to international peace
and security. Our main objectives are to take collective
decisions so as to address a spectrum of international
issues, some of which require urgent action, such as the
issue of climate change. It is here that we have called
for the recognition of the rights of women, children and
persons with disabilities who are caught up in conflicts
and violence. It is here that we have called for help for
those who have been discriminated against because of
their colour, their religion or their political convictions.

For the Republic of Vanuatu, this rostrum is the
only international platform from which, year after year
since 1981, we have spoken out against colonialism
and neo-imperialism in all its forms. Today once
again, I speak on behalf of the entire population of our
archipelago to be the voice of those who still live in
colonized territories.

We know that decolonization is still incomplete.
However, we have seen the Special Political and
Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) take
more and more positive steps during its 2013 sessions,
recognizing the inalienable right of French Polynesia
to self-determination. We also applaud the work of the
Committee in continuing discussions and dialogue on
the question of New Caledonia.

Allow me at this juncture to thank the Government of
France for its cooperation in moving the decolonization
process forward. It is important to maintain this
dialogue with the specific goal of helping the Kanak
people to attain their independence. With the greatest
possible respect, I encourage all parties to ensure that
the process of achieving freedom remains on track. We
in the Melanesian Spearhead Group are appreciative of
the work of the Kanak and Socialist National Liberation
Front as chair of the Group.

The Republic of Vanuatu has just emerged from
colonialism, having achieved its political independence
from the Powers of the British-French condominium
33 years ago. Based on our struggle for independence,
we share the journey and the litany of heartaches and
dreams of many of our brothers and sisters whose rights
to political and civil freedom are still held back by the
tentacles of imperialism and colonialism.

I would like to reiterate today our appeal launched
last year from this rostrum that the Secretariat should
always remain impartial and avoid any selective
implementation of General Assembly and Security
Council resolutions on the rights of all people who
desire to be free from colonialism or any form of
imperialism.

We can debate issues of terrorism, financial and
economic crises and climate change and reach some
level of understanding of the seriousness of those
challenges and the measures that must be taken to
address them. We can talk of good governance and the
rule of law and respect for human rights. But when it
comes to the issue of the rights of the people of West
Papua, our voices fall silent, even from this rostrum.

I wish to congratulate the Secretary-General,
Mr. Ban Ki-moon, who, when he visited Asia in
2012, emphasized that the United Nations would do

everything possible to ensure that human rights are
respected in West Papua, saying

“whether you are an independent State or a non-self-
governing territory or whatever, [that] human right
is inalienable and a fundamental principle of the
United Nations”.
Now, as Members of the United Nations, we must
call for those words to be translated into action.

My Government calls upon the United Nations to
appoint a special representative to investigate alleged
human rights violations in West Papua and its political
status in the light of the controversies surrounding the
administration established in the 1960s, the United
Nations Temporary Executive Authority. Ever since the
controversial Act of Free Choice, the West Papuans have
always been consistently denied any sort of recognition
by the United Nations. It is clear from many historical
records that the Melanesian people of West Papua were
the scapegoats of Cold War politics and were sacrificed
to gratify the appetite for the natural resources that the
country possesses. Today, they are still victims of the
ignorance of the United Nations.

If the United Nations representative at the time,
Mr. Fernando Ortiz-Sanz, described the West Papuan
issue as a cancer growing on the side of the United
Nations and that it was his job to remove it, it is very
clear today from what we have observed that that cancer
has never been removed, but merely concealed. One day
it will have to be treated. We must not be afraid. The
United Nations has made mistakes in the past. We must
admit our mistakes and see that we are the stronger for
that, because when we are weak, admit our mistakes
and take corrective action, we become stronger and
more alive.

As Members of the United Nations, we all subscribe
to the principles of democracy, good governance, human
rights, accountability and the rule of law enshrined in
the United Nations Charter. In this age of technology,
when nothing can escape the attention of civil society
and Governments, I ask how then can we ignore the
hundreds of thousands of West Papuans who have been
brutally beaten and murdered?

The people of West Papua are looking to the United
Nations as a beacon of hope. We are now deliberating
on the issue of Syria. In that same spirit, I would ask
that my fellow leaders express support for West Papua.
It is time for the United Nations to move beyond its
limits and take action to rectify the errors of the past.

Since our independence 33 years ago, the indigenous
peoples of my country have remained concerned that a
part of our maritime and cultural jurisdiction, including
the islands of Umaepnune and Leka, situated south of
Vanuatu, are still occupied by France. Thus, the people
of our country are denied the right to the exercise of
full political freedom and their inherent cultural rights.
The indigenous peoples of the southern province of
our country cannot, therefore, fulfil their obligations
to protect their culture and traditions that bind them
to the sovereign land that has been theirs since time
immemorial.

Those two islands are of paramount importance,
because they form the basis for the establishment of
our unique cultural framework, which brings together
our cultural island group known as the Tafea Islands.
It is that cultural framework that governed us and
defined our identity and our way of life long before
administrative colonial Powers began to explore and
govern our shores.

Unfortunately, today, our indigenous peoples
continue to be denied access to those sacred and
cultural islands. My Government therefore calls on
the community of nations meeting in the Assembly
to uphold the principles of the respect of the rights of
our indigenous peoples and their way of life. Further,
we call upon the French Government to allow our
indigenous people of Tafea to have access to the land
of their forefathers, the islands Umaenupne and Leka in
the south of the Republic of Vanuatu.

The call by the United Nations to review the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and to
strategize a post-2015 development agenda compels
us to rethink our global partnership structures and
our national priorities in order to better achieve our
goals in the period after 2015. My country has made
some progress in achieving some of the MDG targets.
However, the appropriate conditions for economic
growth and development must be created. An integrated
and balanced approach is required to deal adequately
with the social, economic and environmental
dimensions.

To that end, my Government has placed emphasis on
climate change, renewable energy and the sustainable
use of the environment. We have now created a separate
Ministry focusing on adaptation to climate change,

energy and the environment so that the Government
can address issues in that area. We would therefore
welcome opportunities for unconditional partnerships
in order to better address those issues.

It is clear that there has been much debate on the
issue of climate change. However, the level to which
final pledges have been met has been unsatisfactory,
considering the fast pace at which climate change is
having an impact on small island developing States. We
call for more urgent action and decisions on that front.

While Vanuatu supports the shift in the development
paradigm, we also recognize that the new development
agenda might harbour its own shortcomings and must
therefore be given careful consideration when it comes
to its final design. It is evident that the new approach
must take heed of, first, the complexity that still exists
within international aid programmes for development,
coupled with the risk of unpredictable financial crises
that can affect the delivery of aid; secondly, the
challenges faced by countries at present in attaining
the MDGs; thirdly, the ambiguities and difficulties
involved in setting the priority of goals within an
expanded list of priorities; fourthly, the imminent
graduation of my country from least developed country
status and the benefits accompanying that change; and
fifthly, the risk of a reduced level of real aid spending
per capita affected partly by a failure to increase global
aid for development.

Aware of those issues, Vanuatu has taken measures,
partly on its own and with the assistance of its partners,
to ensure greater resilience to its own vulnerabilities.
Our plan involves taking decisions that lead to quantum
leaps in the development of our country’s infrastructure
in which ports, roads and airports will be built and
upgraded to facilitate, inter alia, the large-scale
integration of the rural population into the national
economy.

I would like to thank the Governments of China,
Australia and New Zealand and the Asian Development
Bank for their assistance, as well as the Government
of the United States for its enormous investment in
the two major national highways in Vanuatu. We see
that as an investment in the future of my country,
where 60 per cent of the population is aged 25 years or
under, whereby most of the rural population will gain
greater access to markets and economic opportunities
throughout the archipelago’s islands.

All our development initiatives must be inclusive
and not ignore the poor and the marginalized. My
country has taken the measures necessary to ensure
gender equality and the empowerment of women. The
Government’s measures include legislation amending
laws on sexual discrimination, addressing issues of
domestic violence and the submission of universal
periodic reports to ensure compliance with the reporting
framework of the Human Rights Council.

In conclusion, I wish to thank you once again,
Mr. President, for giving me the opportunity to express
my views in this forum. We have spoken a great deal
about many things, and we now must translate our
words into action. Long live our aspirations for a better
and more secure world for everyone!


I feel deeply honoured and
privileged to stand here before the General Assembly
today representing the citizens of the State of Israel.
We are an ancient people. We date back nearly 4,000
years to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. We have journeyed
through time. We have overcome the greatest of
adversities. And we re-established our sovereign State
in our ancestral homeland, the land of Israel. The Jewish
people’s odyssey through time has taught us two things:
never give up hope and always remain vigilant. Hope
charts the future, vigilance protects it.

Today our hope for the future is challenged by a
nuclear-armed Iran that seeks our destruction. But I
want members to know that that was not always the case.
Some 2,500 years ago, the great Persian King Cyrus
ended the Babylonian exile of the Jewish people. He
issued a famous edict in which he proclaimed the right
of the Jews to return to the land of Israel and rebuild the
Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. That is a Persian decree,
and thus began a historic friendship between the Jews
and the Persians that lasted until modern times.

But, in 1979, a radical regime in Tehran tried to
stamp out that friendship. As it was busy crushing
the Iranian people’s hopes for democracy, it also led
wild chants of “Death to the Jews!” Since that time,
presidents of Iran have come and gone. Some presidents
were considered moderates, others hard-liners. But
they have all served that same unforgiving creed, that
same unforgiving regime — that creed that is espoused
and enforced by the real power in Iran, the dictator
known in Iran as the Supreme Leader, first Ayatollah
Khomeini and now Ayatollah Khamenei.

President Rouhani, like the presidents who came
before him, is a loyal servant of the regime. He was
one of only six candidates the regime permitted to run
for office. Nearly 700 other candidates were rejected.
What made him acceptable? Rouhani headed Iran’s
Supreme National Security Council from 1989 through
2003. During that time, Iran’s henchmen gunned
down opposition leaders in a Berlin restaurant. They
murdered 85 people at the Jewish community centre
in Buenos Aires. They killed 19 American soldiers by
blowing up the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. Are we
to believe that Rouhani, the national security adviser
of Iran at the time, knew nothing about those attacks?
Of course he did — just as 30 years ago Iran’s security
chiefs knew about the bombings in Beirut that killed
241 American marines and 58 French paratroopers.

Rouhani was also Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator
between 2003 and 2005. He masterminded the strategy
that enabled Iran to advance its nuclear-weapons
programme behind a smokescreen of diplomatic
engagement and very soothing rhetoric. I know that
Rouhani does not sound like Ahmadinejad. But when it
comes to Iran’s nuclear-weapons programme, the only
difference between them is this: Ahmadinejad was a
wolf in wolf’s clothing, Rouhani is a wolf in sheep’s
clothing — a wolf who thinks he can pull the wool over
the eyes of the international community.

Like everyone else, I wish we could believe
Rouhani’s words, but we must focus on Iran’s actions.
And it is the brazen contrast — that extraordinary
contradiction between Rouhani’s words and Iran’s
actions — that is so startling. Rouhani stood at this very
rostrum last week and praised Iranian democracy (see
A/68/PV.6). Iranian democracy, he said. But the regime
that he represents executes political dissidents by the
hundreds and jails them by the thousands. Rouhani
spoke of “the human tragedy in Syria”. Yet Iran directly
participates in Al-Assad’s murder and massacre of tens
of thousands of innocent men, women and children in
Syria, and that regime is propping up a Syrian regime
that just used chemical weapons against its own people.
Rouhani condemned the “violent scourge” of terrorism.
Yet in the past three years alone Iran has ordered,
planned or perpetrated terrorist attacks in 25 cities
on five continents. Rouhani denounced “attempts to
change the regional balance through proxies”. Yet Iran
is actively destabilizing Lebanon, Yemen, Bahrain and
many other Middle Eastern countries. Rouhani promises
“constructive engagement with other countries”. Yet
two years ago, Iranian agents tried to assassinate Saudi
Arabia’s Ambassador in Washington, D.C. Just three
weeks ago, an Iranian agent was arrested while trying
to collect information for possible attacks against the
American Embassy in Tel Aviv. Some constructive
engagement!

I wish I could be moved by Rouhani’s invitation
to join his “WAVE” — a world against violence and
extremism. Yet the only waves Iran has generated in the
past 30 years are waves of violence and terrorism that
it has unleashed on the region and across the world. I
wish I could believe Rouhani, but I do not because facts
are stubborn things. The facts are that Iran’s savage

record flatly contradicts Rouhani’s soothing rhetoric.
Last Friday, Rouhani assured us that in pursuit of its
nuclear programme, Iran had “never chosen deceit and
secrecy.” Never chosen deceit and secrecy?

In 2002, Iran was caught red-handed secretly
building an underground centrifuge facility at Natanz.
In 2009, Iran was again caught red-handed secretly
building a huge underground nuclear facility for
uranium enrichment in a mountain near Qom. Rouhani
tells us not to worry. He assures us that all that is not
intended for nuclear weapons. Does any here believe
that? If so, here are a few questions to ask.

Why would a country that claims to only want
peaceful nuclear energy build hidden underground
enrichment facilities? Why would a country with vast
natural energy reserves invest billions in developing
nuclear energy? Why would a country intent on merely
having civilian nuclear programmes continue to defy
multiple Security Council resolutions and incur the costs
of crippling sanctions on its economy? And why would
a country with a peaceful nuclear programme develop
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) whose sole
purpose is to deliver nuclear warheads? You do not build
ICBMs to carry TNT thousands of miles away. You
build them for one purpose: to carry nuclear warheads.
Iran is now building ICBMs that the United States says
could reach this city in three or four years.

Why would they do all that? The answer is simple.
Iran is not building a peaceful nuclear programme.
Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Last year alone,
Iran enriched three tons of uranium to 3.5 per cent,
doubled its stockpile of 20 per cent-enriched uranium
and added thousands of new centrifuges, including
advanced centrifuges. It also continued work on the
heavy-water reactor in Arak in order to have another
route to the bomb — a plutonium path. Since Rouhani’s
election — and I stress this — that vast and feverish
effort has continued unabated.

Underground nuclear facilities? Heavy water
reactors? Advanced centrifuges? ICBMs? It is not that it
is hard to find evidence that Iran has a nuclear-weapons
programme; it is hard to find evidence that Iran does not
have a nuclear-weapons programme. Last year, when
I spoke here at the United Nations (see A/67/PV.12), I
drew a red line. Iran has been very careful not to cross
that line. But Iran is positioning itself to race across that
line in future, at a time of its choosing. Iran wants to
be in a position to rush forward to build nuclear bombs
before the international community can detect it, much
less prevent it. Yet Iran faces one big problem, and that
problem is summed up in one word: sanctions.

I have argued for many years, including from
this rostrum, that the only way to peacefully prevent
Iran from developing nuclear weapons is to combine
tough sanctions with a credible military threat. That
policy is today bearing fruit. Thanks to the efforts of
many countries, many represented here, and under the
leadership of the United States, tough sanctions have
taken a big bite out of Iran’s economy. Oil revenues
have fallen. The currency has plummeted. Banks are
hard pressed to transfer money. As a result, the regime
is under intense pressure from the Iranian people to get
the sanctions removed. That is why Rouhani got elected
in the first place. That is why he launched his charm
offensive. He definitely wants to get the sanctions
lifted — I guarantee the Assembly that — but he does
not want to give up Iran’s nuclear-weapons programme
in return.

Here is the strategy to achieve that: first, smile a lot.
Smiling never hurts. Secondly, pay lip service to peace,
democracy and tolerance. Thirdly, offer meaningless
concessions in exchange for lifting sanctions. Fourthly,
and most important, ensure that Iran retains sufficient
nuclear material and sufficient nuclear infrastructure
to race to the bomb at a time that it chooses to do so.
Why does Rouhani think he can get away with that?
This is a ruse, a ploy. Why does Rouhani think he can
get away with that? Because he has gotten away with it
before. Because his strategy of talking a lot and doing
little has worked for him in the past. He even brags
about it. Here is what he said in his 2011 book about
his time as Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator: “While
we were talking to the Europeans in Tehran, we were
installing equipment in Isfahan”. For those here who
do not know, the Isfahan facility is an indispensable
part of Iran’s nuclear-weapons programme. That is
where uranium ore called yellowcake is converted into
an enrichable form. Rouhani boasted: “By creating a
calm environment, we were able to complete the work
in Isfahan”. He fooled the world once; now he thinks
he can fool it again. Rouhani thinks he can have his
yellowcake and eat it too.

He has another reason to believe that he can get
away with that, and that reason is called North Korea.
Like Iran, North Korea also said its nuclear programme
was for peaceful purposes. Like Iran, North Korea also
offered meaningless concessions and empty promises

in return for sanctions relief. In 2005, North Korea
agreed to a deal that was celebrated the world over by
many well-meaning people. Here is what a New York
Times editorial had to say about it:

“For years now, foreign policy insiders have
pointed to North Korea as the ultimate nightmare ... a
closed, hostile and paranoid dictatorship with an
aggressive nuclear-weapons programme. Very few
could envision a successful outcome. And yet North
Korea agreed in principle this week to dismantle its
nuclear-weapons programme, return to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, abide by the Treaty’s
safeguards and admit international inspectors.
“Diplomacy, it seems, does work after all.”
(New York Times, 20 September 2005)
A year later, North Korea exploded its first nuclear-
weapon device.
Yet as dangerous as a nuclear-armed North Korea
is, it pales in comparison to the danger of a nuclear-
armed Iran. A nuclear-armed Iran would have a
chokehold on the world’s main energy supplies. It would
trigger nuclear proliferation throughout the Middle
East, turning the most unstable part of the planet into
a nuclear tinderbox. And for the first time in history, it
would make the spectre of nuclear terrorism a clear and
present danger.

A nuclear-armed Iran in the Middle East would
not be another North Korea. It would be another
50 North Koreas. I know that some in the international
community think that I am exaggerating that threat.
Sure, they know that Iran’s regime leads these chants:
“Death to America!”, “Death to Israel!”. Then it
pledges to wipe Israel off the map. But they think that
wild rhetoric is just bluster for domestic consumption.
Have those people learned nothing from history? The
last century has taught us that, when a radical regime
with global ambitions gets awesome power, sooner or
later its appetite for aggression knows no bounds. That
is the central lesson of the twentieth century. And we
cannot forget it.

The world may have forgotten that lesson; the
Jewish people have not. Iran’s fanaticism is not bluster.
It is real. That fanatic regime must never be allowed to
arm itself with nuclear weapons. I know that the world
is weary of war. We in Israel know all too well the cost
of war. But history has taught us that to prevent war
tomorrow, we must be firm today.

That raises the question: Can diplomacy stop
that threat? The only diplomatic solution that would
work is one that fully dismantles Iran’s nuclear-
weapons programme and prevents it from having one
in the future. President Obama rightly said that Iran’s
conciliatory words must be matched by transparent,
verifiable and meaningful action; and to be meaningful,
a diplomatic solution would require Iran to do four
things; first, cease all uranium enrichment, as called
for by several Security Council resolutions; secondly,
remove from Iran’s territory the stockpiles of enriched
uranium; thirdly, dismantle the infrastructure for a
nuclear-breakout capability, including the underground
facility near Qom and the advanced centrifuges in
Natanz; and, fourthly, stop all work at the heavy water-
reactor in Arak aimed at the production of plutonium.
Those steps would put an end to Iran’s nuclear-weapons
programme and eliminate its breakout capability.

There are those who would readily agree to leave
Iran with a residual capability to enrich uranium. I
advise them to pay close attention to what Rouhani said
in a speech to Iran’s Supreme Cultural Revolutionary
Council published in 2005. This is what he said:

“A country that can enrich uranium to about 3.5 per
cent will also have the capability to enrich it to
about 90 per cent. Having fuel-cycle capability
virtually means that a country that possesses this
capability is able to produce nuclear weapons.”
Precisely: that is why Iran’s nuclear-weapons
programme must be fully and verifiably dismantled.
That is why the pressure on Iran must continue. Here
is what the international community must do. First,
keep up the sanctions. If Iran advances its nuclear-
weapons programme during negotiations, strengthen
the sanctions. Secondly, do not agree to a partial deal.
A partial deal would lift the international sanctions
that have taken years to put in place, in exchange for
cosmetic concessions that will take only weeks for Iran
to reverse. Thirdly, lift the sanctions only when Iran
fully dismantles its nuclear-weapons programme.

The international community has Iran on the
ropes. If it wants to knock out Iran’s nuclear-weapons
programme peacefully, do not let up on the pressure.
Keep it up. We all want to give diplomacy with Iran a
chance to succeed. But when it comes to Iran, the greater
the pressure, the greater the chance. Three decades
ago, President Ronald Reagan famously advised “trust
but verify”. When it comes to Iran’s nuclear-weapons

programme, here is my advice: distrust, dismantle and
verify.

Israel will never acquiesce to nuclear arms in the
hands of a rogue regime that repeatedly promises to
wipe us off the map. Against such a threat, Israel will
have no choice but to defend itself. I want there to be
no confusion on this point: Israel will not allow Iran to
get nuclear weapons. If Israel is forced to stand alone,
Israel will stand alone. Yet in standing alone, Israel will
know that we will be defending many others.

The dangers of a nuclear-armed Iran and the
emergence of other threats in our region have led many
of our Arab neighbours to finally recognize that Israel
is not their enemy. That affords us the opportunity
to overcome historic animosities and build new
relationships, new friendships and new hopes. Israel
welcomes engagement with the wider Arab world. We
hope that our common interests and common challenges
will help us forge a more peaceful future.

And Israel continues to seek a historic compromise
with our Palestinian neighbours, one that ends our
conflict once and for all. We want peace based on
security and mutual recognition in which a demilitarized
Palestinian State recognizes the Jewish State of Israel.

I remain committed to achieving a historic
reconciliation and building a better future for Israelis
and Palestinians alike. I have no illusions about how
difficult it will be to achieve. Twenty years ago, the
peace process between Israel and the Palestinians began.
Six Israeli Prime Ministers — myself included — have
not succeeded in achieving peace with the Palestinians.
My predecessors were prepared to make painful
concessions. So am I.

But so far, Palestinian leaders have not been
prepared to offer the painful concessions they must
make in order to end the conflict. For peace to be
achieved, the Palestinians must finally recognize
the Jewish State and Israel’s security needs must be
met. I am prepared to make a historic compromise
for a genuine and enduring peace. But I will never
compromise on the security of my people and of my
country — the one and only Jewish State.

One cold day in the late nineteenth century, my
grandfather, Nathan, and his younger brother, Judah,
were standing in a railway station in the heart of Europe.
They were seen by a group of anti-Semitic hoodlums,
who ran towards them waving clubs, screaming, “Death
to the Jews!” My grandfather shouted to his younger
brother to flee and save himself. And he then stood
alone against the raging mob to slow it down. They beat
him senseless. They left him for dead. Before he passed
out, covered in his own blood, he said to himself:
“What a disgrace! What a disgrace! The descendants
of the Maccabees lie in the mud, powerless to defend
themselves.” He promised himself then that if he lived,
he would take his family to the Jewish homeland and
help to build a future for the Jewish people.

I stand here today as Israel’s Prime Minister because
my grandfather kept that promise. So many other Israelis
have a similar story: a parent or a grandparent who fled
every conceivable oppression and went to Israel to start
a new life in our ancient homeland. Together we have
transformed a bludgeoned Jewish people, left for dead,
into a vibrant, thriving nation, defending itself with the
courage of modern Maccabees, developing limitless
possibilities for the future.

In our time, the Biblical prophecies are being
realized. As the prophet Amos said,

“They shall rebuild ruined cities and inhabit
them. They shall plant vineyards and drink their
wine. They shall till gardens and eat their fruit.
And I will plant them upon their soil never to be
uprooted again.”
The people of Israel have come home, never to be
uprooted again.


I warmly
congratulate Mr. John Ashe on his election as President
at the sixty-eighth session of the General Assembly and
wish him success during his term.

Over the past decade, the world has experienced a
string of crises. Development has slowed. Confidence
in the global economic system has been shaken. There
are signs of recovery, but growth remains anaemic and
uneven. Unemployment is high in many countries,
particularly among the young. That has exacerbated
problems by increasing poverty levels, widening
income gaps, adding to social instability and causing
public trust in Governments and institutions to decline.
Extreme poverty remains a major concern in many
parts of the world.

Violence and conflict are as great a threat to global
stability as poverty, and the international community
must respond firmly to them. In that regard, Singapore
welcomes the unanimous adoption of Security Council
resolution 2118 (2013) on the destruction of chemical
weapons in Syria. We strongly condemn the use of
chemical weapons under any circumstances, as it
constitutes a violation of international law. We remain
deeply concerned about the humanitarian situation in
Syria, and we hope that the “Geneva II” conference
will be convened promptly and will find a political
solution to end the conflict and violence. We also offer
condolences to the Government and the people of Kenya
over the brutal attacks in Westgate Mall, a painful
reminder of the need to remain vigilant against terror.
All countries must unite against violence and terror in
order to create an environment in which sustainable
development can be pursued.

The global ecosystem is under stress from
the transnational effects of human development
activities. Human progress has come at the expense
of the environment and the climate. Deforestation,
desertification of land and the transboundary pollution
of the sea, land and air degrade our quality of life and
threaten human civilization.

We cannot go on with business as usual. We need
to rethink and retool our economies and societies and
to place poverty eradication and sustainability at the
centre of our development agenda. The President’s
choice of “The post-2015 development agenda: setting
the stage” as the theme for the sixty-eighth session of
the General Assembly is therefore particularly timely.
The 1987 Brundtland report of the World Commission
on Environment and Development defined sustainable
development as development that meets the needs of
the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs. That should
remain our guiding principle as we negotiate the post-
2015 development agenda.

The United Nations has a critical role to play in the
evolution of the post-2015 development agenda. Only
the United Nations, with its universal membership and
access to global data, has the standing to establish a
new global development agenda that is inclusive,
effective and adaptable. The United Nations has
adopted an inclusive multi-stakeholder approach to
gather the views of Member States and harness the
energy of civil society. Several mechanisms have been
set up, including the High-level Political Forum, the
Open Working Group on Sustainable Development
Goals, in which Singapore is participating actively,
and the Working Group on Sustainable Development
Financing. We strongly encourage the United Nations
to demonstrate leadership and weave those strands of
discussion into a single, clear framework. That would
allow Member States to focus their attention and
prioritize their resources to meet critical challenges.

Singapore understands very well the importance
of poverty eradication and sustainable development
in securing a country’s future. When we became
independent, in 1965, we faced several challenges. To
uplift our population, which had only a small number
of skilled workers and graduates, the Government
focused on education and skills development. To create

jobs and alleviate poverty, we also gradually moved our
industries up the value chain towards higher-skilled,
innovation-focused sectors. Given Singapore’s land
and resource constraints, sustainable development was
a necessity, not just a slogan. At 700 square kilometres,
Singapore is slightly bigger than Manhattan but smaller
than the five boroughs of New York. To ensure that our
city-State remained liveable, we had to ensure that our
policies on housing, infrastructure, transport and the
environment were well integrated in a long-term and
holistic vision.

Over several decades, we have managed to pursue
growth while preserving a good living environment. For
instance, despite the country’s being densely populated
and highly urbanized, our greening efforts have resulted
in more than 50 per cent of Singapore being covered by
vegetation. The Singapore Botanic Gardens, founded in
the nineteenth century, is the only city botanic garden
in the world to include a tract of original, primary
rainforest. And despite our rapid development, we have
managed to preserve much of our biodiversity. One of
our nature reserves, Bukit Timah, contains more plant
species than the entire North American continent.

We have also developed creative solutions to
overcome some of our resource constraints. Take the
example of water: Singapore now imports slightly more
than 40 per cent of our water needs. To meet our drinking
and industrial needs, we use a variety of methods,
including collecting water through reservoirs, the
desalination of seawater, and cutting-edge membrane
technology to reclaim waste water into high-grade,
ultra-clean water, which we call “NEWater”. When
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited Singapore in
March 2012, he was impressed enough by our water
management to make a toast with NEWater, rather
than wine, calling NEWater, “something far more
valuable — the elixir of life”.

Let me now turn to the post-2015 development
agenda and suggest three priority areas. First, we should
learn from the example of the Millennium Development
Goals. We should avoid being prescriptive. As each
country is unique, countries should be allowed to
exercise flexibility as to which goals they choose to
prioritize and how they will achieve them. The new
global development road map should have poverty
eradication and sustainable development at its centre
and should converge around a single, clear set of
practical and quantifiable goals. We should keep to
that outcomes-based approach and not forget that the
core purpose of the post-2015 development agenda is to
improve the lives of people. Today, 1.2 billion people
still live in extreme poverty. That is a staggering figure.

Secondly, we should emphasize urban management
and the intertwined issues of water and sanitation.
According to the United Nations Human Settlements
Programme, more than half of the world’s population
lives in urban areas. By 2050, 7 out of 10 people will
live in urban areas. Many cities are already under
strain. More than 2.5 billion people lack access to basic
sanitation, and another 800 million do not have safe
drinking water. Some 2,000 children die every day
from diarrhoea. The crisis will be exacerbated as more
people move to crowded cities, where the infrastructure
cannot grow fast enough to support them. Singapore
introduced a draft resolution in July, which was
adopted by the General Assembly (resolution 67/291),
to designate 19 November as World Toilet Day. We
hope that will encourage countries to take a close look
at how the nexus of urbanization, water and sanitation
can be better managed.

Thirdly, it is important for the views and concerns
of small States to be incorporated into the post-2015
development agenda. Small States make up more
than half of the United Nations membership; many,
especially small island developing States (SIDS), are
among the more vulnerable Members of the United
Nations family. Singapore identifies closely with the
urgent concerns of our fellow SIDS. The third SIDS
Conference, to be held in 2014, will be an important
milestone, and Singapore has participated actively
in all the preparatory meetings to date. At last year’s
inaugural Conference on Small Island Developing
States, which was organized by the Forum of Small
States (FOSS), Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon agreed
that small and vulnerable States deserved special
attention. Singapore will continue to work with the
members of FOSS to share the perspectives of small
States and ensure that our views are factored into the
evolution of the new global development road map.

Although we are a small country, we will continue
to play our part in assisting other countries in poverty
eradication and furthering the sustainable development
agenda. We established the Singapore Cooperation
Programme in 1992 to share our developmental
experience with our friends — our successes and our
failures alike. We believe that technical assistance
and capacity-building are more effective in creating
the right conditions for growth. More than 80,000

Government officials from 170 countries have received
training under the Programme in areas as diverse as
sustainable urban development, water management
and human-resource development. To support our
engagement in the post-2015 development agenda,
we will develop and customize new programmes on
sustainable development and climate change that meet
the needs of SIDS and least developed countries.

Singapore has also been working with other
Governments to promote sustainable development
internationally. In 2007, Singapore and China embarked
on a joint project to develop the Sino-Singapore
Tianjin Eco-city, which is envisioned as a city that
will be socially harmonious, environmentally friendly
and resource-efficient. That will become a model
for sustainable urbanization in China. By 2020,
the Eco-city is intended to be a low-carbon, green-
living environment approximately half the size of
Manhattan, housing around 350,000 people. Singapore
will continue to share its experience in sustainable
urbanization through Singapore-led events such as the
biennial Singapore International Water Week and the
World Cities Summit.

The only way to secure our collective future
is through poverty eradication and sustainable
development. The next two years will be critical for the
world as we embark on an ambitious journey to map out
the post-2015 agenda. The United Nations must play a
leading role, and we are fully committed to working
closely with other Member States to achieve that.


Allow me to begin by congratulating
President Ashe on his election and wishing him great
success in presiding over the General Assembly. I
would also like to congratulate the outgoing President,
Mr. Vuk Jeremi., on his successful presidency. I also
thank the Secretary-General for his leadership in
strengthening the United Nations ability to respond to
today’s and tomorrow’s challenges.

Each year in September, world leaders gather in
New York to develop joint responses to challenges. That
is a great challenge for all — national Governments,
international and regional organizations, civil
society and the private sector. We share the primary
responsibility for a peaceful and secure world that
ensures the rights and interests of individuals, nations
and countries within the framework of the rule of
national and international law. That was also the
objective when the United Nations was established
following the Second World War.

We thank the President and the Secretary-General
for their engagement and leadership in the work to
establish the new post-2015 development framework,
building upon the Millennium Development Goals to
include an economic, social and ecological dimension
of sustainable development. What is important for
the post-2015 development agenda — an ambitious
and complex project — is the building of a global
partnership among Governments, the private sector,
civil society and individuals, including the mobilization
of institutional and human resources.

The environment must be a key building block of
sustainable development: it is nature that sustains us,
and its resources should be used wisely. Economic
growth facilitates human growth, reduces poverty and
facilitates better education and health care and is thus
a crucial element of any development framework. The
Republic of Macedonia will fully contribute to the
achievement of all global objectives through its national
agenda, in which investment in education, health,
agriculture and food, the environment and infrastructure
and the partnership between the Government and the
business community are the highest priorities.

Peace, conflict resolution and human rights
protection are United Nations goals. Today they
represent an even a greater challenge, which we should
respond to and overcome. The Republic of Macedonia
supports the approach of the United Nations in
responding to those challenges. We actively contribute
to the promotion of peace on an international level,

participating in international missions that safeguard
freedom and democracy.

With regard to one of the major issues — the crisis
in Syria and the internal conflict that has created more
than 100,000 victims and 2 million refugees — what
is more troubling is that chemical weapons were used
against the Syrian people while diplomatic efforts
were under way, although their use is strictly prohibited
under international law. That must not be tolerated. We
are among the countries to have asked for an urgent
investigation under the auspices of the Secretary-
General’s mechanism for the investigation of the alleged
use of chemical and biological weapons.

Despite differing views, all member States of
the Security Council and of the United Nations agree
that to achieve a final resolution of the Syrian crisis,
the political approach should be given a chance. It
is therefore essential to focus maximum effort on
revitalizing the search for a political settlement and to
convene the “Geneva II” conference as soon as possible.
The Syrian people deserve better days through decisive
action by the international community that will end the
violence and threats.

The region of South-East Europe has entered a
phase of positive development, and in general the
national and regional primary objectives are either
fulfilled or are within reach. Regional cooperation
is expanding in a number of new fields. Despite such
advances, certain long-standing unresolved or partly
resolved bilateral issues are clearly having a negative
impact on our present and immediate future. In the
case of the Republic of Macedonia, that happens to be
a serious obstacle to our agenda for integration into
international organizations.

The Republic of Macedonia is celebrating the
twentieth anniversary of its United Nations membership
with the still unresolved issues of the use of the name
of my country, the Republic of Macedonia, and of the
identity of my people, the Macedonian identity. Those
questions emerged because of a dispute raised by our
southern neighbour Greece, which opposes our name,
which is our fundamental individual and collective
right. The issue, which should have been promptly
resolved among neighbours, partners and future allies,
has lasted for 22 years. While being a very realistic
problem for my people, this is an issue that I deeply
believe is essentially hypothetical and does not have any
basis in international law or in the United Nations acts.
It is difficult, I would say even impossible, for someone
to find a legal justification for such an objection.

The fact that the overwhelming majority of countries
have recognized our constitutional name — the Republic
of Macedonia — with more than 135 of them being
United Nations Members, clearly shows that most of
countries do not believe that the dispute has a justified
basis, or if it does they denounce it. I believe that this
issue was a created one, a classic case of politicization
and an instrument that, approximately 20 years ago, was
either supposed to make someone score some political
points or, by creating an atmosphere of conflict, to
bring about some strategic regional shifts, as well as to
slow down the spread of freedom, democracy and the
introduction of market economies in the Balkans.

At the last session, the General Assembly discussed
the rule of law, with all Member States unanimously
agreeing that respect for internationally agreed norms
and principles was a must. Unfortunately, norms are not
always adhered to. The United Nations must be neither
idle in that regard nor renege from its responsibility to
counter any disrespect for the rule of law.

The Republic of Macedonia became a United
Nations Member in 1993 with an atypical membership
condition, namely, the denial of its constitutional name.
It was admitted with an interim country reference — an
unprecedented event in history that was contrary to the
provisions of international law. But we have endured all
that, although it lingers to date as a problem.

In 1995, under United Nations mediation, we
signed an interim accord with Greece by which we
changed our flag and parts of our Constitution, while
Greece undertook not to create obstacles to our NATO
accession in 2008. Not only did Greece obstruct our
act of accession to the international Organization
itself, it also obstructed the processes for opening the
membership procedures in another organization. For
four years in a row, Greece has prevented the start
of negotiations for our membership in the European
Union.

On the basis of our appeal concerning the
obstructions of Greece with regard to our application
for membership, in 2011 the International Court of
Justice\ — a principal organ of the United Nations
established by States Members and located at The
Hague — issued a judgment that Greece had violated
international law by not adhering to the interim accord
and that the Republic of Macedonia had not violated

international law or the commitments it had agreed to.
However, we were hindered again, notwithstanding the
decision of the highest body of justice in the world,
and that is apparent to the Assembly and its member
countries.

The United Nations was established in order to
protect international law. There is no regulation of
international law that restricts a country from calling
itself as it wishes, or restricts its citizens from being
able to be called and named as they wish. Naming is
one of the five prerogatives of States, as well as an
undisputed right of every Member country.

Why do we need international law if we do not
adhere to it? If we turn a blind eye to that injustice
and obvious violation of international law, we will be
directly responsible for breaking one of the principles of
world peace and of the United Nations. We do not want
that, nor can we allow it. If it were not for international
law, anarchy would reign and the United Nations would
become a debate club without any basic competencies.
We do not want to participate in that, at the expense of
everything, even to our own detriment.

Not respecting international law also means having
no respect for the 50 million victims that fought for it
70 years ago, as well as going against the decisions of
our predecessors — the founders of the Organization.
International law should not be a platitude, but rather
should provide a solution to every challenge.

According to international law, the Republic of
Macedonia is entitled to decide on its own name and to
use the word Macedonian to denote its ethnic identity.
Settling our differences with our southern neighbour is
our priority, but only and precisely within the United
Nations resolutions that define the solution that is
the subject of discussion, and by reaching a mutually
acceptable solution. We should settle our differences in
no other way, especially not by expanding those limits.

Sixty-six years after the adoption of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, this dispute, unjustly
imposed on us by Greece, violates one of the
fundamental rights of the individual — the right to
decide one’s own name. Every representative of my
people is denied the right to be called as they wish, as
their mothers and fathers, grandparents and all other
ancestors throughout history were called: Macedonian.

In addition to disputing the constitutional name of
my country — the Republic of Macedonia — Greece
also disputes the identity of my citizens, that is, it
does not allow them to be called Macedonians or the
language that they speak to be called the Macedonian
language, despite the fact that for more than half a
century there have been departments in universities
throughout the world where the Macedonian language
has been studied and it has been called the Macedonian
language. It is the same as if somebody denied an
individual the right to speak French, German, Polish,
English, Dutch, Portuguese, Japanese, Hindi or any
other language.

The United Nations must not overlook the violation
of the basic human right to decide one’s own name, and
should take action to enable the exercise of that right.
In this particular case, the United Nations should take
action that will lead to the settlement of the outstanding
issues that Greece has with us.

At the previous session, we debated preventive
diplomacy and concluded that it should be an essential
element of the international community. Therefore, the
United Nations must not, and should not, stand aside
in this process, which severely hinders Macedonia’s
aspirations to a better future for its citizens.

Commitment is necessary to make it possible for
Greece to begin resolving this issue, because in the past
two years there has been great inertness on the part of
Greece. Although that is a result of objective reasons
caused by its adverse economic situation, it also entails
a strategic and tactical political element based on the
analysis that prolonging the process of solving the
dispute would contribute to the Republic of Macedonia
being isolated in its positions, which are based on
international law and values, and to its resignation to a
kind of self-annihilation of the State and the nation by
agreeing to be renamed.

According to that line of thinking, with the lack
of commitment in the discussions and the blocking
of European and Euro-Atlantic integration that my
country faces — integration that is directly hindered
by the dispute despite our having met the standards
required of us by the international multilateral
organizations, NATO and the European Union — we
would thus be prevented from joining and face the
possibility of internal misunderstandings regarding
the hindrance caused by our southern neighbour, and
we would drop our guard in spite of the force of the
arguments, which are on our side. It is true that by
putting off the solution of the dispute, more challenges
in the country and the region are created, and the tension
becomes greater at certain moments. But it should be

clear to everyone that such challenges should not be
considered a trigger for any changes of our justified
and internationally correct position that would lead to a
change in our Macedonian identity.

It is not possible to change something that has
existed for centuries by imposing blockages or by threats
about possible misunderstandings, tensions or unrest,
not even by implementing them. The Macedonian
people will never accept being renamed. If it is not
possible for that issue to be resolved now — although
we are the ones who are most interested in its resolution
and we sincerely wish for a sustainable, balanced
and, most important, mutually acceptable solution to
be found — then some other generation in different
circumstances will be able to resolve it, but precisely
on the basis of the values, positions and principles
that I mentioned before, which indicate a just and fair
solution, without winners and losers.

However, I personally believe that we must not
leave those thorny issues to future generations. We
must try to find a solution and find strength to provide
prosperity for the countries and the region. It is said
that actions speak solely of those who undertake them.
Faced with the lack of interest by the Hellenic Republic
in substantive talks for a solution to the dispute, two
months ago I suggested to the Greek Prime Minister a
change in the format of discussions, that is, raising them
to a much higher political level. I as a Macedonian and
he as a Greek Prime Minister, together with ministers
from both Governments, would meet directly and talk
about a solution. That would lead to greater efficiency,
because we are the ones most often called upon to solve
the issue. Twenty-two years is too much time to not get
anywhere and is sufficient proof that there must be a
change in the game.

Our mandate, entrusted to us by the citizens,
should be essential to achieving a mutually acceptable
solution — which I believe can be attained — a
solution that will be accepted and agreed upon by the
citizens of our countries. The examples of Serbia and
Kosovo, as well as those of Croatia and Slovenia, where
political representatives at the highest level managed
to overcome challenges, are the best proof that results
can be achieved in that way. I invite the Assembly to
directly take part in the realization of this initiative,
overcome the standstill and, through its commitment,
provide intensity and forward movement, as well as
greater interest on the part of Greece in a solution and
progress.

Actions speak of the one who undertakes them.
With our openness and with our justified initiative, we
are showing that we wish for a solution to be found.
However, our meetings must not be purely a formality;
rather, they must have substance and must not create
an alibi for not finding a solution. I am convinced that
only a substantial commitment by the international
community, above all by the United Nations, will lead to
a solution, taking into consideration the basic documents
of the United Nations on the rights of countries and
individuals, the United Nations resolutions that defined
the talks, agreements guaranteed by the United Nations,
the decisions of United Nations bodies and international
law as a whole.

However, if there is no progress, the United
Nations must not remain inactive and be satisfied with
the status quo, as that would mean showing further
irresponsibility. Aware of this already discouraging
situation, the United Nations should help via its
organs, through the General Assembly and the Security
Council. It is on the basis of Security Council resolution
817 (1993) that we are in discussions with our neighbour
to arrive at a solution that will free the identity of my
country. Otherwise, the United Nations will be faced
with failure again and will bear the responsibility for
not having acted in accordance with its own principles
and values.

I do not want to spare anyone. We all have
responsibility, including the Organization. Instead
of assuming that responsibility, the Organization
has accepted the comfort of remaining silent and not
resolving the dispute; instead of defending itself, it has
remained inactive with regard to the status quo, which
is obviously creating problems and challenges for the
region. It should start considering alternative scenarios
and doing more to stimulate a solution to this long-
standing dispute.

I am confident that we have the capacity to jointly
respond to the challenges. In the name of the people
that we represent, we must assume responsibility for the
present and the future. Assuming such responsibility
means taking decisions, changing habits and reinforcing
cooperation and prosperity, but it is something that can
be done. That is the responsible way to proceed.


The Government of Honduras extends its warmest
congratulations to Mr. Ashe on his election to preside
over the proceedings of the General Assembly, and we
wish him every success.

I am grateful for the honour that the President of
Honduras conferred upon me by asking me to represent
him in this world forum. As we come to the close of our
term in office, we in the Administration of President
Porfirio Lobo Sosa note with satisfaction that we have
laid the foundation for national unity and reconciliation.
We have successfully overcome the severe political
crisis that affected Honduras during the previous
Government, and Honduras now looks forward to new
general elections in November.

The Government of President Lobo Sosa has
normalized relations with the international community.
We have secured ties of close cooperation with more than
a hundred friendly countries, restored foreign credit
and shown the world that we are a country that lives up
to its democratic and peaceful calling. Today, Honduras
is a member of the principal international and regional
organizations. Our membership in major forums has
given us access to new markets, opportunities for
investment and employment and helped to strengthen
our energy sector.

As part of the process of unity and reconciliation,
the President of the Republic created a Government
of National Integration, with the participation of all
the political parties that took part in the last electoral
process. Fortunately, that participation continues
today and will continue through the end of the present
constitutional term. Accordingly, I wish to mention that,
as part of the process of healing the wounds of the 2009
political crisis and building the future together, we have
successfully adopted by consensus a long-term country
vision and a national plan from which our Government
programme is derived. That shared vision is being
implemented through a major national agreement
for economic growth with social equity between the
Government of President Lobo Sosa, trade unions,
business owners, workers, farmers and civil society. I
believe that Honduras and the world should welcome
those efforts, together with the spirit of dialogue and
commitment of all sectors of Honduran society, which
have shown that collective interests come well before
individual interests.

Today, we are reaping the benefits of that major
national agreement. We have had successes in the small
and medium-sized enterprise sector, social protection
programmes, the establishment of a transparent budget
and foreign trade. Democratic participation has also
been strengthened because of the interaction of all
sectors in our economic and social council, which is
a forum that has made it possible for mechanisms for
dialogue and conflict prevention to work.

We are pleased to state that our Government will be
handing over to the incoming Administration a series of
principles that should serve as a basis for consolidating
social policies. Those principles were discussed
and agreed upon between the Government and civil
society in order to ensure a solid foundation and the
sustainability of social institutions in the country.

Our country and our democratic institutions have
suffered the onslaught of external aggression, which
has led to violence and insecurity. I am referring to
drug trafficking and various forms of transnational
organized crime. With all the measures adopted to
combat crime, last year the Government of President
Lobo Sosa was able to halt the rise of the homicide
rate, and this year we have seen a reduction in that
rate. That has been achieved through the adoption by
the National Congress of an entirely new legal and
institutional framework, which was lacking before. We
have undertaken a reform of the security and justice
system. For the first time, we have adopted procedures
to certify judicial officials, using confidence-testing
measures. We have also adopted a tax to strengthen
citizen safety. To the extent possible, we are providing
training for the security and defence institutions. We
have implemented a national policy to prevent violence
against children and youth, and we have promoted and
protected human rights.

And yet, while halting the spiral of violence is a
positive sign, it is insufficient, given the high level of
criminal activity that had been reached. Our commitment
to combat crime will be upheld until the very last day of
our mandate. However, it is very important to sustain
those efforts. The new Government will have to do so
with a firm hand. It will have to continue to strengthen
security and justice institutions, which is a medium- to
long-term task. Combating global crime requires a more
decisive and more effective international and regional
effort, in which drug-producing and drug-consuming
countries assume the shared and differentiated
responsibility that they bear in this wave of violence.

Today, I reaffirm Honduras’s commitment to the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right to
life and the respect for human dignity. We recognize
that the protection of human rights is the very essence
of democracy. During our administration, we created
a Secretary of State for Justice and Human Rights
and strengthened the role of the Special Prosecutor
for Human Rights. We established institutions for
combating torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment, and we enacted a law combating human
trafficking and introducing a public human rights
policy and a national plan of action for human rights.
We now require presidential candidates to sign the
human rights pact.

It is fundamentally important to Honduras that
we continue working towards meeting the Millennium
Development Goals, with which we have made
significant progress. Food and nutrition security is a
national priority for President Porfirio Lobo Sosa’s
Government, and we have focused efforts to eradicate
hunger through various food and nutrition security
programmes targeting the most vulnerable people and
the neediest areas of the country.

Through its recognition of the multidimensional
and multisectoral nature of the food and nutrition
security issue, the Government of our Republic reduced
the population suffering from malnutrition by 21 per
cent between 2010 and 2012, meeting and exceeding its
target for the Millennium Development Goals. As an
example of our multisectoral approach and to ensure
the sustainability of our programmes, I am pleased to
announce the launch of a Government initiative, the
Partnership for the Dry Corridor. The Partnership,
which has the support of the international community,
targets those suffering from poverty and hunger in our
country’s most vulnerable area.

Concerning education, I should emphasize that
Honduras has seen a significant increase in the number
of 5-year-olds entering the pre-school system. It is
roughly triple what we expected. Our Government
has been deeply committed to reforming the national
education system. The new legal framework requires
a broad participatory process involving parents,
communities and teachers. The proposal that President
Lobo made here in the General Assembly last year,
when he said that classrooms must never be closed (see
A/67/PV.6, p. 49), has led to a considerable increase in
the number of school days for children in Honduras.
That has resulted in an improvement in the quality of

education, and as a nation we are very optimistic about
it.

As to gender equality and the empowerment of
women, we have made progress in implementing
a gender equality system, created with a view to
promoting, encouraging and institutionalizing gender-
equity policies and improving equality of opportunity
between men and women. With regard to the reduction
of under-five mortality and improving maternal health,
our Government approved a public policy for the holistic
development of infants and a comprehensive care
strategy for children in the community. The strategy
has been internationally recognized, because it has
improved maternal health conditions before, during and
after delivery and has thus lowered the mortality risk
and increased the number of births in medical centres.

Similarly, it is important to emphasize the efforts
we have made to reduce infant morbidity and mortality
associated with diseases that are preventable through
vaccination; our broad immunization programme has
achieved more than 90 per cent coverage for vaccines
required for children under the age of 2. With regard
respect to HIV/AIDS, our Government has increased
the national budget for prevention and care and has
financed almost 100 per cent of the antiretroviral
treatment.

Concerning the delimitation of maritime space
in the Pacific Ocean, and specifically the situation
in the Gulf of Fonseca, a historic bay that Honduras
shares in a co-sovereignty regime with El Salvador
and Nicaragua, my Government wishes to reiterate its
respect for the decision that the International Court of
Justice handed down on 11 September 1992. We also
affirm our commitment to including a comprehensive
cooperation agreement under the auspices of a
tri-national commission of coastal States, which
develops conservation and protection programmes for
the environment in the Gulf and the improvement of
living conditions for neighbouring communities. It is
an opportune moment to recall that it was in October
2012 that Honduras first asked the Security Council
to authorize the Secretary-General to provide all
necessary support for constituting that authority, and I
take this opportunity to repeat our request. I thank the
European Union for its cooperation in developing this
zone, which has great economic potential.

I would like to emphasize the importance that all
coastal States attach to the decisions of the International
Court of Justice. We wish to avoid making any territorial
or maritime claims that would distance us further from
the big picture, which is to make the Pacific Ocean and
the Gulf of Fonseca a zone of cooperation and peace.
But given the understanding and neighbourliness
we possess, we have concluded, based on equitable
principles, the necessary agreements regarding the
maritime impact on the Pacific Ocean. Honduras has
already made proposals that we are prepared to discuss
with our fraternal neighbours.

I wish to underscore the fact that our Government
has defined a strategy for a governmental transition
for 2013-2014, whose primary objective is to ensure
an orderly and structured handover, so as to avoid the
vacuums and delays in planning that have traditionally
accompanied a change of Government. It is essential
to ensure the sustainability of public policies beyond
the life of our Administration, so that we can achieve
long-term planning that benefits the Honduran people.
In November we will hold general elections with the
participation of nine political parties, including a strong
female presence in the election process. Honduras’s
electoral authorities, which function independently, are
making every possible effort to ensure that the general
elections are free and transparent. On behalf of the
people of Honduras, I would like to ask all friendly
nations to support our electoral process. All States are
welcome to witness it.

I hope sincerely that, during its sixty-eighth session,
the General Assembly will meet the expectations of
Member States, and I take this opportunity to express
my thanks, on behalf of the people and Government
of Honduras, for the solidarity that the international
community has shown to the Administration of
President Porfirio Lobo Sosa.