Nearly 62 years ago, the
United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an
ancient people 3,500 years old, to a State of their own
in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the
Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish State, and I speak
to the Assembly on behalf of my country and my
people.
 The United Nations was founded after the
carnage of the Second World War and the horrors of
the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the
reoccurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has
undermined that mission, nothing has impeded it more,
than the systematic assault on the truth. Yesterday, the
President of Iran stood at this very rostrum spewing his
latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he
again claimed that the Holocaust was a lie.
 Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin
called Wannsee. There, on 20 January 1942, after a
hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided to
exterminate my people. They left detailed minutes of
that meeting that have been preserved for posterity by
successive German Governments. I have here a copy of
the minutes of the meeting of senior Nazi officials
instructing the Nazi Government exactly how to carry
out the extermination of the Jewish people. Is that
protocol a lie? Are the German Government and all
German Governments lying?
 The day before I was in Wannsee, in Berlin I was
given the original construction plans for the
Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. I now hold in
my hand the Auschwitz-Birkenau plans. They contain
the signature of Heinrich Himmler, Hitler’s deputy,
himself. Are those plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau
concentration camp, where 1 million Jews were
murdered, a lie too? In June, President Obama visited
another concentration camp, one of many — the

09-52320 36

Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama
pay tribute to a lie?
 And what of the Auschwitz survivors, whose
arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them
by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie, too? One third of
all Jews perished in the great conflagration of the
Holocaust. Nearly every Jewish family, including my
own, was affected. My wife’s grandparents, her
father’s two sisters and three brothers, and all the
aunts, uncles and cousins were murdered by the Nazis.
Is that a lie?
 Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie
spoke from this rostrum. I commend those who refused
to come and those who left in protest. They stood up
for moral clarity and brought honour to their countries.
But to those who gave that denier of the Holocaust a
hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish
people, and of decent people everywhere: Have they no
shame? Have they no decency? A mere six decades
after the Holocaust, they give legitimacy to a man who
denies the murder of 6 million Jews, while promising
to wipe out the State of Israel, the State of the Jews.
 That is a disgrace. It is a mockery of the Charter
of the United Nations. Perhaps some representatives
think that that man and his odious regime threaten only
the Jews. If they believe that, they are wrong — dead
wrong. History has shown us time and again that what
starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up
engulfing many, many others.
 For this Iranian regime is fuelled by an extreme
fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three
decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the
past 30 years, that fanaticism has swept across the
globe with a murderous violence that knows no bounds
and with a cold-blooded impartiality in the choice of
its victims. It has callously slaughtered Muslims,
Christians, Jews, Hindus and many others. The
adherents of that unforgiving creed, although it is
comprised of different offshoots, seek to return
humanity to medieval times. Wherever they can, they
impose a backward, regimented society where women,
minorities, gays or anyone else deemed not to be a true
believer is brutally subjugated.
 The struggle against that fanaticism does not pit
faith against faith, or civilization against civilization. It
pits civilization against barbarism, the twenty-first
century against the ninth, and those who sanctify life
against those who glorify death. The primitivism of the
ninth century ought to be no match for the progress of
the twenty-first. The allure of freedom, the power of
technology and the reach of communications should
surely win the day. Ultimately, the past cannot triumph
over the future, and our future offers all nations
magnificent bounties of hope because the pace of
progress is growing, and growing exponentially.
 It took us centuries to get from the printing press
to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to
the personal computer, and only a few years to get
from the personal computer to the Internet. What
seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated,
and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to
come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the
incurable. We will lengthen our lives. We will find a
cheap alternative to fossil fuel, and we will clean up
the planet.
 I am proud that my country, Israel, is at the
forefront of many of those advances in science and
technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and
water, and energy and the environment. Those
innovations in my country and in many others offer
humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.
 However, if the most primitive fanaticism can
acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history
could be reversed for a time and, like the belated
victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and
freedom prevail only after a horrific toll of blood and
fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why
the greatest threat facing the world today is the
marriage between religious fundamentalism and the
weapons of mass destruction.
 The most urgent challenge facing this body today
is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring
nuclear weapons. Are the Members of the United
Nations up to that challenge? Will the international
community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own
people as they bravely stand up for freedom? Will it
take action against the dictators who stole an election
in broad daylight and then gunned down Iranian
protesters, who died on the sidewalks and in the streets
choking in their own blood? Will the international
community thwart the world’s most pernicious sponsor
and practitioner of terrorism? Above all, will the
international community stop the terrorist regime of
Iran from developing atomic weapons and thereby
endangering the peace of the entire world?

37 09-52320

 The people of Iran are courageously standing up
to this regime. People of goodwill around the world
stand with them, as do the thousands who have been
protesting outside this Hall throughout the week. Will
the United Nations stand with them?
 The jury is still out on the United Nations. Recent
signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the
terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here in the
United Nations have condemned their victims. This is
exactly what a recent United Nations report on Gaza
did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they
targeted.
 For eight long years, Hamas fired rockets from
Gaza on nearby Israeli cities and citizens — thousands
of missiles and mortars hailing down from the sky on
schools, homes, shopping centres and bus stops. Year
after year, as these missiles were deliberately fired on
our civilians, not one single United Nations resolution
was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We
heard nothing — absolutely nothing — from the
Human Rights Council of the United Nations, a
misnamed institution if ever there was one.
 In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel
unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza. It was
very painful. We dismantled 21 settlements, really
bedroom communities and farms. We uprooted over
8,000 Israelis; we just yanked them out of their homes.
We did this because many in Israel believed that it
would win peace. Well, we did not get peace. Instead
we got an Iranian-backed terror base 50 miles from
Tel Aviv. But life in the Israeli towns and cities
immediately adjacent to Gaza became nothing less than
a nightmare. The Hamas rocket attacks not only
continued after we left, they actually increased
dramatically. They increased tenfold. And again, the
United Nations was silent — absolutely silent.
 Well, after eight years of this unremitting assault,
Israel was finally forced to respond. But how should
we have responded? There is only one example in
history of thousands of rockets being fired on a
country’s civilian population. This happened when the
Nazis rocketed British cities during the Second World
War. During that war, the Allies levelled German cities,
causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. I am not
passing judgement; I am stating a fact, a fact that is the
product of the decisions of great and honourable
men — the leaders of Britain and the United States —
fighting an evil force in the Second World War.
 It is also a fact that Israel chose to respond
differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double
war crime — firing on civilians while hiding behind
civilians — Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes
against the rocket-launchers themselves. That was no
easy task because the terrorists were firing their
missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as
weapons depots and missile caches, and ferreting
explosives in ambulances.
 Israel, by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by
urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted
areas. We dropped countless flyers over their homes.
We sent thousands and thousands of text messages to
the Palestinian residents. We made thousands and
thousands of cellular phone calls urging them to
vacate, to leave. Never has a country gone to such
extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy’s civilian
population from harm’s way.
 Yet faced with an absolutely clear-cut case of
aggressor and victim, who do you think the United
Nations Human Rights Council decided to condemn?
Israel. A democracy legitimately defending itself
against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered,
and given an unfair trial to boot. By these twisted
standards, the Human Rights Council would have
dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war
criminals. What a perversion of truth! What a
perversion of justice!
 The delegates to the United Nations and the
Governments that they represent have a decision to
make. Will they accept this farce? Because if they do,
the United Nations would revert to its darkest days,
when the worst violators of human rights sat in
judgement against the law-abiding democracies, when
Zionism was equated with racism and when an
automatic majority could be mustered to declare that
the Earth is flat. If you had to choose a date when the
United Nations began its descent, almost a freefall, and
lost the respect of many thoughtful people in the
international community, it was the day in 1975 it
decided to equate Zionism with racism.
 Now this body has a choice to make. If it does
not reject this biased report, it would vitiate itself, it
would recommence the process of vitiating its own
relevance and importance. But it would also do
something else. It would send the message to terrorists
everywhere that terrorism pays: all you have to do is

09-52320 38

launch your attacks from densely populated areas, and
you will win immunity.
 A third point: in condemning Israel, this body
would also deal a mortal blow to peace. Let me explain
why. When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the
missile attacks would stop. Others believed that, even
if they did not stop, at the very least Israel, in having
made this extraordinary gesture for peace, would have
international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-
defence if peace failed. What legitimacy? What self-
defence?
 The same United Nations that cheered Israel as it
left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-
defence now accuses us — my people, my country —
of being war criminals? And for what? For acting
responsibly in self-defence? For acting in a way that
any country would act, with a restraint unmatched by
many? What a travesty!
 Israel justly defended itself against terror. This
biased and unjust report provides a clear-cut test for all
Governments. Will the Assembly stand with Israel or
will it stand with the terrorists? We must know the
answer to that question now. Now, not later. Because if
Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we
must know today that the Assembly will stand with us
tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can
defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.
 Make no mistake: all of Israel wants peace. Any
time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us,
we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by
Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King
Hussein. And if the Palestinians truly want peace, my
Government and I, and my people, will make peace.
But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a
permanent peace.
 In 1947, this body voted to establish two States
for two peoples — a Jewish State and an Arab State.
The Jews accepted that resolution. The Arabs rejected
it and invaded the embryonic Jewish State with the
hopes of annihilating it.
 We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they
have refused to do for 62 years: say yes to a Jewish
State. It is as simple, as clear and as elementary as that.
Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-State of the
Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to
recognize the nation-State of the Jewish people. The
Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land
of Israel. It is the land of our forefathers.
 Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the
great Biblical vision of peace: “Nation shall not lift up
sword against nation. They shall learn war no more.”
These words were spoken by the great Jewish prophet
Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in
my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of
Jerusalem.
 We are not strangers to this land. This is our
homeland. But as deeply connected as we are to our
homeland, we also recognize that the Palestinians also
live there and they want a home of their own. We want
to live side by side with them — two free peoples
living in peace, living in prosperity, living in dignity.
 Peace, prosperity and dignity require one other
element: we must have security. The Palestinians
should have all the powers to govern themselves except
a handful of powers that could endanger Israel. That is
why the Palestinian State must be effectively
demilitarized. I say “effectively” because we do not
want another Gaza, another south Lebanon, another
Iranian-backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and
perched on the hills a few kilometres from Tel Aviv.
 We want peace. I believe that with goodwill and
with hard work such a peace can be achieved. But it
requires that all of us roll back the forces of terror led
by Iran that seek to destroy peace, that seek to
eliminate Israel and to overthrow the world order.  The
question facing the international community is whether
it is prepared to confront those forces, or will it
accommodate them.
 Over 70 years ago, Winston Churchill lamented
what he called the “confirmed unteachability of
mankind”. By that he meant the unfortunate habit of
civilized societies to sleep and to slumber until danger
nearly overtakes them. Churchill bemoaned what he
called the
 “want of foresight, unwillingness to act when
action would be simple and effective, lack of
clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the
emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes
its jarring gong …”.
 I speak here today in the hope that Churchill’s
assessment of the “unteachability of mankind” is for
once proven wrong. I speak here today in the hope that

39 09-52320

we can learn from history, that we can prevent danger
in time.
 In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to
Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of
good courage.  Let us confront this peril, secure our
future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for
generations to come.
(spoke in Hebrew)
 May God bless his people with peace; may God
give strength to his people; may God bless his people
with peace.


Let me begin by
congratulating our sisterly country the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya and you personally, Mr. President, on your
assumption of the presidency of the General Assembly
at its sixty-fourth session. I express our confidence that
your long-standing diplomatic skills and leadership
will lead us to a successful conclusion of the session. I
wish to assure you of the full support of the delegation
of the State of Eritrea in the realization of this mission.
 Permit me also to seize this opportunity to pay a
well-deserved tribute to the President of the General
Assembly at its sixty-third session, Mr. Miguel
d’Escoto Brockmann of Nicaragua, for the very able
and effective manner in which he led the affairs of the
Assembly.
 Likewise, we commend Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon for his continuous efforts to administer
the affairs of the United Nations, and especially for
convening the Summit on Climate Change last week.
 The General Assembly is holding its annual
general debate for 2009 at a very critical juncture. One
year after the world financial and economic crisis
began, this gathering provides us with another
opportunity for reflection.
 The Hall in which we meet today and the lofty
purposes for which it was built have both outlived their
time. This body was conceived in another era to
address the challenges of the world order prevailing
after the First and Second World Wars. Therefore, it
cannot realistically cope with the demands of the
twenty-first century. From an objective point of view,
the United Nations should have embarked on a process
of transformation 20 years ago, in concurrence with the
end of the cold war. By now, it should have been
replaced by a reformed Organization fit to address the
challenges of the century we live in and beyond.
 The calls to re-engineer this renewed
Organization have not been few. Two decades have
passed without any meaningful results in the direction

23 09-52598

of substantive reform. The financial and economic
crisis and the global awareness that it has spawned are
mere symptoms of the consequences of inaction at the
cost of reform.
 The prevailing world order has not succeeded in
guaranteeing the peace and security of our planet, in
spite of all the intentions that brought forth its creation
and of the harsh lessons learned from the two World
Wars. On the contrary, this ageing world order has been
hijacked to serve the interests of the few, opening the
door to a myriad of ramifications.
 Financial institutions have been left to operate
unrestrained by restrictions or regulations. Economic
structures that pillage the resources and wealth of
peoples and nations have been consolidated.
Illegitimate military and coercive blunders have been
allowed to fester unchecked. The exploitation of war
and those who help spread it have been honed in a
purposeful manner. The number of people suffering
from poverty and hunger has not been reduced; it has
rather multiplied many times over. Violent extremism
has not received the attention it deserves; rather, it has
been further fuelled and manipulated as a pretext and
excuse for ulterior motives. A culture of the politics of
fear and management by crisis has been nurtured,
exploited and established as a norm. Indeed, world
peace and security have been imperilled beyond
measure. The United Nations itself has been one of the
victims of this world order. Evidence to this effect is
known to us all and is well documented.
 Reform and change are long overdue. Despite
fervent calls for reform by the international
community, the few who control our outdated world
order are unfortunately not attuned to the notion of
change. They have instead regarded crises and
suffering as ordinary historical imperatives. To this
end, they have resisted all attempts to introduce change
and, through their clout, influence and advantages,
have been able to block it. Thus, no real reform has
occurred so far.
 In this global maelstrom, where even the peoples
of the developed countries have been adversely
affected, none have been more exposed to harm than
the marginalized in Africa. We, the peoples of Africa,
have been victims of poverty and hunger, models of
backwardness, and metaphors for diseases and
epidemics. And the continent has become a breeding
ground for crises and conflicts.
 In this regard, the most urgent concern is the fact
that special-interest groups have rendered Africans
paralysed. Hence, instead of resolving our own
problems, we find ourselves mired in poverty, hunger
and disease rather than actively striving to achieve
development and growth. Similarly, when it comes to
the resolution of crises and conflicts, Africans find
themselves dependent on the goodwill of others.
 However, criticism cannot be reserved only for
the special-interest groups that steer the prevailing
world order; it must also be apportioned to those
groups that serve as their instruments and partners.
Indeed, the role of Africa in this body, as well as in
other international organizations, can best be described
as inconsequential. The evidence for this unfortunate
situation is also well documented.
 If world peace and security are to be preserved,
justice and human rights respected, hunger eradicated,
and economic development and growth made to benefit
the majority in a sustainable fashion, the implementation
of fundamental change in this Organization and other
international bodies should not be left to the goodwill
of the few. The change needed to transform this
outdated world order into a new one must not be
limited to reform; it should be solid, genuine and
capable of bringing peace, security and prosperity to
coming generations. Reform should not be limited to
increasing the number of seats in the Security Council.
It should, rather, steer our world away from its
dangerous downhill path, controlled by a powerful few,
and redirect it towards one that ensures the safety of
all.
 Though this is the ideal to which the world’s
peoples aspire and strive for, the African continent, for
obvious and particular reasons, needs to expend more
effort to achieve it. But beyond all the good wishes, the
fundamental reform we are waiting for requires
collective commitment. On this auspicious occasion, it
would not do simply to dwell on various current events
or those consequences spawned by the fundamental
flaws of the world order. Doing so would only confuse
and distort the bigger picture. I have therefore chosen
not to address important issues concerning the Horn of
Africa and Eritrea’s specific problem of the illegal
occupation of sovereign Eritrean territory, which is
already in the records of the United Nations awaiting
responsible and urgent action.


We look back
on a year that has been exceptional in so many
respects. Twelve months ago, a bank only a few
hundred metres away from here collapsed and brought
the global financial system to the verge of breakdown.
The ensuing turbulence in the finance sector led to a
severe global economic downturn.
 This illustrates the interconnectedness of our
world. It reminds us that other issues, such as climate
change, the food crisis, migration, pandemics,
terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction are not confined by national borders.
Rising to these global challenges requires determined
and coordinated action at the national, regional and
international levels. International cooperation has
become vital. The United Nations is the place where
this cooperation happens. Today, the world needs the
United Nations more than ever.
 The United Nations should continue along its
path of reform in order to reinforce its legitimacy. At
the same time, exchanges between the United Nations
and other forums such as the Group of 20 (G-20) —
which is meeting today — must be strengthened. The
G-20 has taken over a role in discussing important
global issues. This development must not take place at
the expense of other nations or global institutions such
as the United Nations. The G-20 lacks legitimacy;
basic considerations of due process are absent in the
sanctions procedures. The members of the G-20
themselves are not subject to the same scrutiny.
Switzerland advocates a level playing field.
 The financial and economic crisis continues to be
of concern to all of us. Governments and central banks
have put together vast stabilization packages. However,
quantity is not everything. What counts is quality.
Economic activity must revert to fundamental values
and virtues. It must focus on economic, social and
environmental sustainability. Through institutions such
as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank
and the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), the United Nations has the knowledge and the
instruments needed to combat the financial and
economic crisis. It is important to ensure that the
voices of these institutions too be heard within the
G-20.
 The present crisis has occasionally been used in
some quarters as an opportunity to question the market
economy and, indeed, globalization. I do not dispute
that reform is necessary. The failures and abuses have
been too big to ignore. Nevertheless, we must remind
ourselves that it is also thanks to a liberal economic
order and open markets that much of the world’s
population has been lifted out of poverty. Here, we
share the concerns of those who believe that the current
growing trend towards protectionism will lead us
straight towards disaster. My country therefore
welcomes the call made at the United Nations World
Conference on the Financial and Economic Crisis for
the swift conclusion of the Doha Round.
 People in the developing countries have been hit
particularly hard by the financial and economic crisis.
There is a significant risk that the achievement of the
Millennium Development Goals will be delayed. As for

09-52320 24

Switzerland, we have pledged to maintain our level of
development aid despite stringent budget constraints.
Developing and developed countries are jointly
responsible for achieving the Millennium Development
Goals. Next year, the United Nations conference
marking the tenth anniversary of the Millennium
Declaration will provide us with the opportunity to
reinvigorate this partnership and to improve the
effectiveness of development aid.
 Sustainable development must also be our
guiding principle in the fight against climate change.
This is why the climate conference in Copenhagen
must be a success. Switzerland wants and is able to set
a good example. We will achieve our CO2 reduction
targets for 2012. For the period until 2020, we are
prepared to cut our CO2 emissions by 20 per cent. At
the global level, the costs of adaptation to climate
change will amount to several tens of billions of
dollars per year of which more than half will be at the
expense of developing countries. Switzerland has
therefore proposed the creation of a global carbon tax
which is based on the polluter-pays principle, in order
to deal with these emerging needs.
 Violent conflicts continue to plague the planet,
rendering a life in dignity, peace and security elusive
for too many people. The unique legitimacy of the
United Nations allows it to play an active role in
conflict prevention, mediation, the protection of
civilians, peacekeeping and peacebuilding. My country
welcomes the greater involvement of the United
Nations in these areas and especially advocates the
strengthening of United Nations prevention and
mediation capacities. Switzerland is also active in the
area of peacebuilding. It has taken over the
chairmanship of the Peacebuilding Commission’s
country-specific configuration on Burundi and will
continue its initiative on armed violence and
development.
 This year we celebrate the sixtieth anniversary of
the Geneva Conventions. Since their creation, the
Geneva Conventions have set indispensable rules for
situations of armed conflict. New forms of armed
conflict and new means and methods of warfare make
it increasingly difficult to ensure respect for these
rules. It is unacceptable that civilian populations
should be so often the target of deliberate attacks and
that humanitarian aid personnel should be so often
denied rapid and unimpeded access to populations in
need.
 In an effort to identify ways of improving
compliance with the Geneva Conventions, Switzerland
is organizing a ministerial side event on Saturday here
in New York. In November we will hold an
international conference of experts in Geneva, open to
all State parties to the Geneva Conventions. The
conference will focus on the current and future
challenges faced by international humanitarian law.
 Human dignity is an inalienable right of all
human beings, regardless of their gender, origin or
religion. The Human Rights Council is the principal
forum for discussing human rights within the United
Nations. Both its special procedures and its universal
periodic review process have demonstrated their
effectiveness. This said, a great many challenges
remain. Switzerland will continue to work vigorously
for an effective Human Rights Council and will present
its candidacy for a second term starting in 2010.
 The protection of human rights, along with the
promotion of democracy and the strengthening of the
rule of law will also be priorities of the Swiss
presidency of the Council of Europe from November
2009 to May 2010. Under the Swiss presidency, efforts
will be made to increase cooperation between the
United Nations and the Council of Europe.
 2010 will thus be a symbolic year for the United
Nations. Five years will have passed since the adoption
of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document and ten
years since the signing of the Millennium Declaration.
Next year’s summit will be an opportunity to assess the
status of implementation of these declarations and to
initiate new, more comprehensive reforms. These are
necessary steps because only a reformed United
Nations will be in a position to find appropriate
responses to the global challenges.
 In this context, it is my great pleasure to
announce to Member States that Switzerland has put
forward the candidature of Joseph Deiss, former
President of the Swiss Confederation, for the
presidency of the sixty-fifth session of the General
Assembly.
 I will conclude with the following: the challenges
to be met are huge, however we must not yield to
pessimism. Throughout history, human beings have
demonstrated time and again that with courage,
imagination and persistence they are capable of great
achievements. The Swiss writer Max Frisch once said:
“A crisis can be a productive state. You just have to get

25 09-52320

rid of the aftertaste of disaster.” I absolutely agree. So
let us be productive and seize the opportunity to create
a prosperous, just, peaceful and sustainable world.


I have the
special honour and privilege today to address this
esteemed forum and to share with you the views of the
Republic of Macedonia regarding the topics of this
session, but also on other current issues that concern us
all, directly or indirectly.
 At the outset, I would like to convey my
congratulations and to greet the President of the
General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session, Mr. Ali
Abdussalam Treki. I would also like to extend to him
our full readiness for cooperation in the course of his
mandate. At the same time, I wish to congratulate the
President of the Assembly at its sixty-third session,
Mr. Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, for his successful
presidency. Availing myself of this opportunity, I
would like to acknowledge the engagements and the
efforts of the Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon,
which indisputably have contributed to the
enhancement of the role and reputation of the
Organization.
 Before I refer to the key theme of this session, I
would like to remind the Assembly of the fear and
uncertainty we all felt exactly one year ago, right here.
It was fear and uncertainty over the scope and the
consequences of the global financial and economic
crisis. I recall this in order to emphasize the urgent
need for the United Nations to use this opportunity to
contribute to processes that will facilitate the
overcoming of the effects of the crisis. It is even more
important that we assist in preventing new such crises.
In this context the serious economic problems most of
us have been facing should not shift our focus from the
absolute priority, which is the implementation of the
Millennium Development Goals.
 The issue of climate change, which today
represents one of the biggest challenges facing
humanity, is extremely high on our national agenda,
but also on that of the United Nations. We owe it to our
children and to the generations to come to preserve our
planet. If we do not establish, urgently and
immediately, the highest and most sustainable
standards for how we treat the environment, we will
pay the price in the future. Time is running out, and
there is no possibility for us to further postpone

21 09-52463

coordinated and serious measures to combat the
negative consequences of climate change. Climate
change and global warming have an increasingly
serious impact on economic growth and on the quality,
quantity and price of food. That exacerbates poverty. It
is therefore imperative that we tackle this issue
immediately.
 The Republic of Macedonia, as a party to the
Framework Convention on Climate Change for more
than a decade now, has been actively working on
implementing the goals set out in the Convention. We
have — including me personally — assigned special
significance to the forthcoming United Nations Climate
Change Conference in Copenhagen, and we all have
great expectations for it. The Macedonian authorities
are truly committed to undertaking numerous concrete
activities with a view to raising awareness in society
regarding this issue. The Republic of Macedonia is
fully prepared to make its contribution to the global
effort.
 When we address issues related to peacekeeping
and stability, a large majority of us, unfortunately,
regularly expresses dissatisfaction regarding the
current state of affairs. Peace and security are
compromised on a daily basis in certain regions of the
world. We are faced with the continuation of old and
frozen conflicts, but also with a series of new tensions
in many regions throughout the world.
 When it comes to the reasons for the constant
crises besetting our world, or certain parts of it, allow
me to seize this opportunity to quote Martin Luther
King, who in 1967 uttered a recipe for overcoming
bilateral, regional and global crises. He said:
 “Let us be dissatisfied until from every city hall,
justice will roll down like waters, and
righteousness like a mighty stream. Let us be
dissatisfied until that day when the lion and the
lamb shall lie down together, and every man will
sit under his own vine and fig tree, and none shall
be afraid.”
 With reference to these words, I welcome the
topic of this session, which is meant to assist us in
finding effective responses to global crises. The
responses to most questions must take into
consideration not only the present and the reality of
today’s world, but on top of that, we must anticipate
the future and take on board the objectives we have set
ourselves.
 Instead of paying lip service to multilateralism,
which I do not believe will help, a real approach based
on meaningful multilateralism and action is required.
The Republic of Macedonia and I personally strongly
believe in and strive towards effective multilateralism.
We believe that strengthening multilateralism is the
only way to advance towards and achieve our primary
goals of peace, democracy, human freedoms and rights
and respect of international law and principles.
 The Republic of Macedonia strongly supports
joint efforts to improve the overall coherence of the
United Nations system. We need a United Nations that
will, in the best possible and most efficient manner,
realize the expectations and the objectives of its
Member States.
 The Republic of Macedonia is a country that has
immense experience in nurturing and affirming
dialogue and in advancing dialogue among
civilizations. It is a unique example of a successful
multi-ethnic and multi-faith country.
 The summit on Dialogue Among Civilizations
that was held in the Republic of Macedonia, in Ohrid
in 2003, with assistance and support from the United
Nations, is an example of the kind of regular annual
meetings at the highest level that are being held in
South-East Europe under the auspices of UNESCO.
This not only represents recognition for my country but
also demonstrates the value of dialogue in the
advancement of security and in development.
 Since its independence, the Republic of
Macedonia has been unswervingly committed to the
promotion of democracy and the improvement of the
living standards of its people, and to reform in all
spheres of our economy. The Republic of Macedonia
promotes a society founded upon the rule of law,
respect for human rights, multi-ethnic cohabitation,
dialogue and mutual understanding.
 Over the past number of years, the Republic of
Macedonia has achieved impressive progress that has
been recognized and acknowledged by all. My country
today is looking forward to the initiation of the
accession negotiations with the European Union. My
country has fulfilled all of the conditions set for NATO
membership. It is an active and strong supporter of
regional cooperation. It remains fully committed to
good-neighbourly relations and to dialogue as a key
tool for overcoming all of the issues that continue to
beset the region.

09-52463 22

 All of my country’s Governments have consistently
focused on the realization of the country’s two top
strategic priorities: accession to the European Union
and accession to NATO. The Republic of Macedonia is
dedicated to sharing and contributing to the
Euro-Atlantic values in a common vision for the
enlargement of the stability and security zone in South-
East Europe.
 The actions of our southern neighbour that
prevented the Republic of Macedonia from acceding to
the NATO alliance were contrary to the obligations
undertaken in the 1995 interim agreement. That was
done in an attempt to influence the outcome of the
negotiations held under the auspices of the United
Nations and was completely opposite to the common
vision. Nevertheless, I would like to stress before this
forum that the Republic of Macedonia is sincerely
dedicated to the process of resolving our differences
with our southern neighbour within the framework of
the mechanism set out in United Nations resolutions.
 The Republic of Macedonia believes in law and
in justice. The Republic of Macedonia believes in the
International Court of Justice as a body of the United
Nations and as a protector and upholder of the law.
Beyond the absurdity of the dispute with our southern
neighbour, the Republic of Macedonia sincerely hopes
that soon the only obstacle that prevents us from taking
our rightful place in the Euro-Atlantic family will be
removed.
 In spite of the flagrant violation of international
obligations by our southern neighbour — in respect
whereof the Republic of Macedonia has filed an appeal
at the International Court of Justice — we are actively
participating in the negotiation process with the
Republic of Greece. I would like to state clearly that
we are prepared to discuss only the issues foreseen in
the United Nations resolutions. The Republic of
Macedonia is prepared to seek a solution that is a
reasonable and fair compromise and that will not touch
upon or deny our national, cultural or linguistic
identity in any way, a solution that would obtain the
legitimacy and the seal of approval of our citizens.
There is no more sovereign right than the right of self-
determination and self-identification. That right has
been cherished by many generations before us.
 I hope that the Republic of Greece will abandon
its policy of taking action from a position of power in
order to unfavourably influence the outcome of the
disputed issue. I expect that the political leadership
will look towards the wider interest in terms of
permanent stabilization of the entire region. We believe
that with truthful and sincere willingness and
preparedness we can reach a solution whereby there
will be neither winners nor losers.
 Allow me to take this opportunity to recall
Article 1, paragraph 2 of the Charter of the United
Nations:
 “[t]o develop friendly relations among nations
based on respect for the principle of equal rights
and self-determination of peoples, and to take
other appropriate measures to strengthen
universal peace”.
 Let not this Organization betray the expectations
of the vast majority of people who set their hope on it,
and let it not betray the ideals of its founders. The
Organization must prepare itself to come up with
responses to existing and emerging challenges posed
by our times. When I say “the Organization”, I refer to
all of us who support those processes. The Republic of
Macedonia sees in the Organization the potential to
maintain stability in international affairs and a unique
opportunity to tackle the numerous challenges posed to
humanity. The Republic of Macedonia, as has been the
case hitherto, shall continue to respect and support the
values and principles enshrined in the Charter.
 Allow me to finish my address with the words of
the former Secretary-General Mr. Kofi Annan, who
said that if the goal of humanity is progress in peace
and freedom, the state of peace is not only a state free
of conflict, it is a state of respecting human freedom
and rights. We are still far from that goal. However,
indisputably, huge and serious progress has been
achieved.


As I take
the floor for the first time at the present session, allow
me to join all of those who preceded me at this rostrum
in congratulating Mr. Ali Abdussalam Treki and telling
him how proud we are to see him presiding over the
General Assembly at the sixty-fourth session. His
election testifies to his personal qualities and is a
tribute to the African Union.
 I applaud our Secretary-General, Mr. Ban
Ki-moon. He has kept the United Nations on track and
strengthened the United Nations in the context of the
multiple crises affecting the world.
 Two years ago, from this very rostrum, I updated
the Assembly on the crisis in my country, Côte
d’Ivoire. At that time, I welcomed the important role
played by regional organizations, such as the African
Union and the Economic Community of West African
States. I particularly dwelt on the internal processes
that brought us, the Government and former rebels, to
commit to a process of peace that ended the conflict
and led to the current preparations for general
elections. All through that process, we enjoyed from
the support of the United Nations, notably through the
United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire. We
benefited even more from the assistance of the
President of Burkina Faso, Mr. Blaise Compaore.
 Thanks to the efforts of all, and particularly to the
Ivorians’ hard work and desire for peace, the process
has now entered into a irreversible phase. Today, there
are no remaining political obstacles to the holding of
the elections. I take this opportunity to express once
again the gratitude of Côte d’Ivoire to the United
Nations and to all our friends for their commitment to
the restoration of peace.
 I would also like to share our desire to do our
utmost to end the crisis via the ballot box. We are all
the more resolute given that the challenges facing
today’s world require of all States, and in particular
small States such as ours, a political strategy based on
democracy. Thus armed, we will be able not only to
effectively address our current difficulties, but also to
contribute to the understanding of and resolution of
international crises.
 This is what President Treki has called on us to
do through the theme of this sixty-fourth session of the
General Assembly, “Effective responses to global
crises: strengthening multilateralism and dialogue
among civilizations for international peace, security
and development”.
 We note that, in addition to recurrent political
crises, the acute crises facing the world today affect the
stability of nations and jeopardize our shared future. In
2008, the energy crisis reached unprecedented
proportions. The price of a barrel of oil, it will be
recalled, rose to nearly $150. That major crisis took
place alongside a food crisis and an unprecedented
financial crisis that soon turned into a deep economic
crisis. The entire world woke up to the threat posed to
social and political equilibrium by the three crises that
struck at the same time. These crises shook all our
certainties and caused a wave of panic. They showed
us in no uncertain terms that nothing can ever be taken
for granted, even in big countries.
 The entire world mobilized to meet the challenge,
both within individual countries and within
international institutions and organizations. We saw the
International Monetary Fund provide assistance to
countries that are not usually the recipients of such aid,
such as those of northern Europe. This exceptional
mobilization points to the concern of the international
community at seeing the situation end in uncontrollable
social and political crises.
 However, although the mobilization and
cooperation were multilateral, the crisis resolution

09-52463 12

plans were not. Countries in North America, Europe
and Asia adopted national plans. This shows that there
are limits to multilateralism and that nation States
protect their prerogatives and shoulder their full
responsibilities at the economic level, when necessary.
 I note, moreover, that the mobilization in Africa
and for Africa was quite diffident. It was as though the
financial crisis was not also an African crisis, or as if
the financial sector in Africa was not sufficiently
integrated into the international financial system.
Perhaps our continent did not grasp the full extent of
the crisis. And yet, the financial crisis has had
consequences on the African continent. In Africa,
perhaps more than anywhere else, the financial crisis
became an economic crisis that underscored the
economic and social fragility of our countries.
 The lesson we draw from that experience is that
no country is immune to crisis. This requires the
international community to enhance its vigilance by
increasing oversight of the financial system and its
institutions at the international level. It would also be
timely for us to embark on a reform of the international
monetary and financial system. In this context, United
Nations reform, and above all reform of its organs, is
essential if the United Nations is to play a solid leading
role in strengthening multilateralism.
 Among the cross-cutting issues in which the
United Nations must play a key role are the resurgence
of extremism. The entrenchment and hardening of
positions are prevailing over dialogue and deepening
the chasm between cultures that need to live together in
harmony. Hence, the importance of the historic high-
level meeting convened in this very Hall on 12 and
13 November 2008 on the urgent need for genuine
dialogue among religions with a view to creating a
culture of peace. That initiative bolstered activities to
raise the awareness of the international community to
the need for preventive diplomacy on this key topic, in
particular the World Conference on Dialogue, held in
Madrid in July 2008, and the launching in July 2005 of
the Alliance of Civilizations, under the auspices of the
United Nations.
 We therefore believe that all of these initiatives in
favour of dialogue among cultures, as well as those to
come, point to the need to establish a permanent forum
for dialogue among civilizations so as to draw peoples
together.
 I now turn to world peace and security. The only
sure way to attain lasting peace is the equitable
settlement of conflicts within a reformed, more
democratic and more credible Security Council.
Together, we need to build a United Nations with a
stronger mandate and greater representativity.
 In that regard, it would be preferable to entrust
the prevention, management and settlement of local
conflicts to regional and even subregional
organizations. That approach, which was enshrined in
April 2008 by the Security Council, should be
strengthened by an earnest updating of the mechanism
for cooperation with regional organizations, as
provided for in the United Nations Charter of 1945.
 In that regard, I would like to simply reiterate
here the position of my delegation, which is based on
our experience of handling and settling the Ivorian
crisis. Direct dialogue, like that in Côte d’Ivoire, offers
avenues for thought that the United Nations could
make good use of. I think that the Burkina Faso
delegation can address that issue as well as, if not
better than, we can.
 Another topic of concern is world poverty. World
peace and security are dependent on the eradication of
extreme poverty and poverty reduction. That is why my
delegation welcomes the convening at the sixty-third
session of two high-level meetings on Africa’s
development needs and the Millennium Development
Goals. We welcome the outcomes and
recommendations of those meetings.
 Côte d’Ivoire is resolved to free itself of the
burden of debt that is threatening its development
goals. There have been meetings on debt, but there
need to be more, and decisions must be taken on debt
because the debts that were incurred in the 1960s, the
1970s and the 1980s today hamper the development of
African countries. That must be considered. It is a law
of nature that when a small, weak country is
overburdened by debt, the original purpose of which is
often not known even to its leaders, that country sinks,
and drags the world down with it. Africa is part of the
world. If a decision is not taken on the issue of the debt
of African countries, the entire global financial system
will be on course for disaster.
 That is why I stress, alongside the problem of
debt, the issue of climate change. We talk of climate
change, and we are right to do so, but we need to take
decisions that are critical for most of our countries. I

13 09-52463

do not know the situation in West Africa very well, but
it has been shown that, in Central and Southern Africa,
the deserts are advancing by two kilometres a year.
What does that mean? It means that in 50 years the
deserts will have advanced by 100 kilometres and
reached the coasts. We must decide.
 While the deserts advance, on the coasts villages
and houses are disappearing into the sea. That is
happening in Nigeria, Benin, Togo, Ghana, Côte
d’Ivoire and elsewhere. There are people living today
with the water at their feet. There are those who live
not knowing if tomorrow it will reach their houses or if
their houses will, in fact, be in the sea. Urgent
measures are needed. We need not only meetings, but
also decisions, and those decisions — on deserts, the
sea and floods — must be implemented. Everywhere
today — in Burkina Faso, Mali and Côte d’Ivoire —
the rains bring disaster, and those very rains that we
call for to water our farms have become a cause for
alarm. We no longer know if the rains to come bring
death or life.
 Africa is fighting, and is doing so alone. It would
prefer to fight with the rest of the world behind it. That
is also why we have come to speak here. Africa no
longer wishes to feel abandoned or to fight alone.
Soon, in 50 years according to the experts, it will be
easier to find oil than clean drinking water, because we
will have to go a long way — too far for our
economies.
 What are we going to do? The issue of clean
water has become a problem. Certainly, in some rich
oil-producing countries in the Arab world, we have
seen our brothers working to make seawater drinkable,
but how many countries in the world have the means to
turn seawater into drinking water? It is terribly
expensive. We need to convene a meeting here at the
United Nations on that issue — and not only meetings,
but decisions followed by action.
 Those are the problems that I came here to talk
about on behalf of the Ivorian delegation. Everyone
knows that Africa is such that when one delegation
talks, it speaks for all delegations because we face the
same problems. I would hope that, as of today, we can
look beyond internal crises. We all know that Africa
has made great progress. It is up to us to strengthen
ourselves by daring to fight poverty, extreme poverty
and catastrophic climate change. Climate change is
dangerous throughout the world, but it is catastrophic
for us. We need the help of representatives to tackle
this difficult century before us. I pray that God may
bless the United Nations.


When we met here last
year, financial institutions such as Lehman Brothers
and American International Group (AIG) were falling
like tenpins. For weeks, credit froze as perceptions of
risk shot up. The global financial system went into
seizure. National Governments took emergency
measures to rescue banks and keep credit lines open.
The United States Treasury and the United States
Federal Reserve, in particular, reacted with
extraordinary boldness. For a period of time, it seemed
as if everyone was flying blind.
 After a year, the situation no longer looks as
bleak today. In fact, after a sharp contraction of the
advanced economies in the first half of this year, there
are signs of a recovery. Some of the leading indicators
are flashing positive again and the next two quarters
will probably register good growth globally. Whether
this growth can be sustained is, however, a different
question.

41 09-52598

 It would be a mistake to think that the global
economic crisis will soon be over. The crisis came
about because of excesses and imbalances which have
to be put right. Looking back, we know that the
excesses were the result of inadequate regulation of
banks and quasi-banking institutions. Over the years,
clever minds turned non-banks into de facto ones
which were not regulated as conventional banks. This
unregulated financial sector grew to dwarf the
regulated sector.
 To forestall collapse when the bubble burst,
Governments and regulators stepped in taking over
financial institutions, guaranteeing liabilities,
increasing public spending and pumping liquidity into
the economy. These are emergency measures which are
needed to get the global economy through a critical
phase. They have stabilized the financial sector and
prevented the real economy from being too badly
affected.
 However, as when steroids are administered to
reduce inflammation, there is a price to be paid for this
temporary relief. First, the expectation that
Governments will step in when things go badly wrong
creates a huge moral hazard. Once Governments set a
bottom limit to the consequences of risk-taking, more
risks will be taken in the future.
 Secondly, the huge increase in global liquidity
has slowed down or reversed the fall in inflated asset
prices. Worldwide stock markets have benefited from
easy money. In Asia, property markets are booming
again even though the real economy is still struggling.
Withdrawing liquidity without destabilizing economies
and asset markets in the coming months and years will
be a tricky business.
 And thirdly, the emergency measures which have
been taken reduce the need for painful restructuring.
Yet without major restructuring of regulatory systems
and businesses, the imbalances which created the
conditions for the crisis in the first place can only get
worse.
 While excesses in the financial sector were the
trigger of the crisis, the deeper underlying cause was
the global imbalance between producers and consumers
and between saving and consumption. For too long, the
world depended on the United States consumers
keeping global demand high and on lending those
consumers the money to keep the game going. To
correct this imbalance, Asians have to consume more
and save less as a proportion of income, while
Americans have to consume less and save more.
Otherwise, a global Keynesian paradox of thrift will
cause the global economy to operate below capacity.
 Rebalancing the global economy is, however, not
a simple matter at all, and is not only about economics:
it is also deeply political. The rise of Asia is altering
the global power structure. Nothing expresses this
more than the complex relationship that now ties the
United States and China together. China, with its
reserves of over $2 trillion, is heavily invested in the
United States dollar, making it a major stakeholder in
the United States economy. Without continuing market
confidence in the United States dollar, not just the
United States economy, but the entire global economy
will be put at risk.
 Looking ahead, however, it is not going to be a
bipolar world but a multi-polar world. Europe and
Japan will remain heavyweights. India, Russia, Brazil
and others will become more significant players. A
multi-polar world means a messier world with a
diversity of political systems, values and worldviews.
Non-State actors like civil society organizations must
increasingly be engaged. At the same time, we are all
members of the same human family sharing the same
planet. Looking ahead, we will need more effective
global governance across a wide range of issues from
protection of human rights and international financial
regulation to efforts to combat pandemics, climate
change and terrorism.
 The greatest challenge confronting us today is
that of ensuring effective global governance. We do not
want a global Government but we do need better
coordination, cooperation and enforcement in many
areas. The reform of the United Nations, including the
United Nations Security Council, is going to take time.
Incremental rather than dramatic change is a more
practical approach.
 In terms of world trade, the World Trade
Organization, while far from perfect, can still function
well with effective political leadership. Once that
leadership is supplied, the Doha Round of negotiations
can be concluded within the next few years. We are
fortunate to have in Pascal Lamy a strong Director-
General at the helm. But this is a dangerous period
because domestic politics in many countries favour
greater protectionism. At all regional and international

09-52598 42

forums, we must take a clear collective stand against
protectionism.
 Climate change is a long-term challenge for
humanity which needs to be addressed with some
urgency. While we cannot be sure how much increased
carbon dioxide emissions will affect the global climate
in the coming decades and centuries, it would be
irresponsible for us in this generation not to start acting
now. The increased weather volatility we have been
experiencing in recent years could be a warning of
longer-term trends already under way. An international
agreement on climate change which aligns our interests
and efforts is absolutely necessary to preserve this
planet for future generations.
 For that reason, we must redouble efforts to
conclude negotiations for an international agreement at
the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference at the end
of this year. It is good that caring for the environment
is increasingly becoming a moral norm in the world,
especially among the young. We must not fail them.
The strong political commitment expressed by many
leaders at the Summit on Climate Change, chaired by
the Secretary-General himself here last week, gives us
reason for hope.
 The present economic crisis is a major challenge
to global governance. In November last year, then
United States President George W. Bush convened the
first summit of the Group of 20 (G-20). The second
meeting of leaders was held in London in April and the
third has just concluded in Pittsburgh under President
Barack Obama’s chairmanship. The G-20 has now been
designated the premier forum for international
economic cooperation, replacing the Group of Eight
(G-8).
 This G-20 process and the swift, decisive actions
that it brought about have helped avert an economic
depression in the last year. The emergency measures
taken by various Governments in response to the
financial tsunami have bought us precious time to
restructure and rebalance the global economy. In
Pittsburgh, the G-20 leaders acknowledged that a sense
of normalcy should not lead to complacency. We
welcome their pledge to adopt policies needed for
strong, sustained and balanced growth. If the biggest
economies do not persist in that effort — and persisting
means pain for domestic constituencies in many
countries — the respite we are now enjoying will lead
to an even bigger crisis, this time possibly involving
foreign exchange markets as well.
 In the coming months and years, it is important
for the G-20 process to develop greater legitimacy,
especially as it begins to deal with a broader set of
issues. That the establishment of the G-20 leaders
meeting was not blessed by the United Nations or other
existing international organizations should not hold us
back from giving it full support. Although the G-20
process is not ideal, it is the most important driver of
change that we have right now.
 The United Nations itself is too intricate and not
structured to deal with issues such as a major financial
crisis. The old G-8 lacked representation, and the G-8
Plus was not acceptable because it put the additional
participants at a disadvantage. As for the International
Monetary Fund, it was never designed to tackle a crisis
of such scale. In any case, the Bretton Woods
institutions themselves need reform, which indeed is a
major subject on the G-20 agenda.
 For the G-20 process to be effective and
legitimate, however, it is not enough for leaders to
confer and make general exhortations. Ministers and
experts must also meet and go into details. They should
not be confined to the same G-20 countries every time.
We need variable geometry in membership. For
different subjects, there could be different groups of
participants, including both G-20 and non-G-20
countries. The views of small States, which comprise
the majority of Members of the United Nations, must
not be ignored. The meetings should be transparent.
There must be wide consultations so that those not
included in specific meetings can still table their views.
Depending on the subject, those consultations can take
place at the United Nations or at one of the other
international organizations.
 Mindful of the need to widen participation,
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown invited regional
representatives, such as the Chair of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Chair of the
New Partnership for Africa’s Development and the
Chairperson of the African Union Commission, to the
G-20 leaders meeting in London in April 2009.
President Obama followed this precedent in Pittsburgh.
We in ASEAN certainly hope that the inclusion of the
ASEAN Chair will become the norm at future G-20
leaders meetings. It is right that the United Nations

43 09-52598

Secretary-General was included from the very
beginning.
 A balance has to be struck between effectiveness
and inclusiveness. If a meeting is too big, it becomes
unwieldy and unworkable. If too small, it lacks
representation and legitimacy. As most Members of the
United Nations are not in the G-20, it is important for
us to have a say on the role the G-20 should play as an
agent of change in global governance. While we should
support the G-20 process, we should do so in a way
that ensures that our own interests as smaller States are
taken into account.
 A great power shift is taking place in the world.
The formal establishment of the G-20 as a new
international institution last week marks a momentous
new beginning. History shows that power shifts never
occur smoothly. Without a good system of global
governance, we can be sure that the power shift in this
century will also be a troubled one. Putting that system
in place requires the collective effort of all of us. We
should not be lulled by the temporary easing of the
global economic crisis into thinking that the worst is
behind us and that we can return to our old ways.


First of all, let me extend
my sincere congratulations to the President, Mr. Ali
Treki, on his assumption of the presidency of the
General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session. I am
confident that under his able leadership, meaningful
progress will be made during this session. I also wish
to express my appreciation and support to Secretary-
General Ban Ki-moon for his tireless efforts in
reforming the United Nations.
 I would first like to recall the special historic ties
between the Republic of Korea and the United Nations.
The contemporary history of the Republic of Korea
began with the United Nations. Under the auspices of
the United Nations, we held our first democratic
elections in 1948, and with the approval of the United
Nations we became the only legitimate Government on
the Korean Peninsula.
 Indeed, the Republic of Korea is a country that
has been championed by the United Nations. Men from
16 United Nations Member States came to our support
when the Korean War broke out in 1950, only two
years after the founding of the Republic. Fallen heroes
of the Korean War from 11 countries are buried in the
only United Nations cemetery in the world, located in
Busan, the second largest city in Korea. To this day, the
cemetery serves as a place for the Korean people to
commemorate their noble sacrifices.
 At the time of the Korean War, Korea was among
the least developed countries in the world, with a per
capita income of less than $50. But to everyone’s
surprise, Korea was able to achieve both
industrialization and democratization in a single
generation. Korea has transformed itself from an aid-
recipient country to a donor country.
 While this achievement is the fruit of the Korean
people’s toils and tears, the invaluable support of the
United Nations has been a great source of strength. For
this reason, Korea observed United Nations Day even
before becoming a Member State in 1991. Building on
such achievements, Korea is now embarking on a path
of actively contributing to the international community.
That is the goal that a global Korea aims to achieve.
 We wish to share our past development
experiences in order to help developing countries lift
themselves out of famine and poverty. While financial
support to developing countries is important, it is even
more important to find the right development model to
fit each country.
 Today, the unprecedented financial crisis is
compounding the difficulties of developing countries.
As a member of the G-20 Troika , Korea is making the
utmost effort to strengthen the free trade system which
powers global economic growth, while also ensuring
that the voices of developing countries are heard.
 The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) set
forth by the United Nations must be realized.
Development cooperation and humanitarian assistance
need to increase, especially for the developing
countries most severely affected by the economic
crisis. Korea will fulfil its pledge to triple the volume
of its 2008 official development assistance (ODA) by
2015. And in 2011, we will be hosting the Fourth High-
level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Seoul. By
ensuring its success, we will enhance aid effectiveness
for the achievement of the MDGs by 2015 and
contribute to strengthening the global partnership for a
more comprehensive and effective development
cooperation.
 Today, young Korean volunteers, under the name
of World Friends Korea, are doing volunteer work
throughout the world to put into practice the spirit of
love and giving. Currently, more than 3,000 volunteers
have been dispatched to some 40 countries, and we will
continue to send more volunteers, focusing on sharing
our areas of strength in information technology,
medicine and agricultural technologies as well as our
experience in governance development.
 Among other efforts, Korea is also actively
engaging in promoting international peace and security

43 09-52179

and preventing terrorism through its participation in
peacekeeping operations. Currently, Koreans are
serving in 13 missions around the world. Since last
March, we have also been taking part in multinational
efforts to protect commercial vessels of all flags from
acts of piracy in the waters off the coast of Somalia.
 Korea will faithfully fulfil its responsibilities as
expected by the international community, including in
the areas of preventing conflicts, countering terrorism
and responding to natural disasters.
 Responding to climate change has become an
indispensable and urgent item on the agenda for all of
humanity. Climate change poses a common challenge
to all humankind and thus requires the concerted
efforts of developed and developing countries as well
as newly industrialized countries. For this reason, all
countries need to take part and be prepared in
addressing this challenge.
 Korea greatly appreciates the role of the United
Nations in placing climate change high on the agenda
as an urgent priority and in galvanizing global efforts
to address this critical issue. At the Copenhagen
Conference, to be held in December 2009, the
international community is expected to deliver a very
important decision with great implications for the
future. At this very place yesterday, we reaffirmed our
commitment to making the Copenhagen Conference a
success.
 Korea, while not included in annex I of the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC), plans to make a voluntary
announcement before the end of this year stating its
midterm emissions-reduction target for 2020. Korea
has proposed the establishment of a registry of
nationally appropriate mitigation actions at the
secretariat of the UNFCCC, with a view to inviting
developing countries to voluntarily participate in
mitigation actions and to providing the international
support that they need. We hope that our proposals and
efforts will contribute positively to the attainment of
successful outcomes at Copenhagen.
 To respond proactively to climate change, Korea
has adopted low carbon green growth as a guiding
vision for our nation and a strategy for further
development. We are currently working to enact a
framework law on green growth and establish a five-
year plan for green growth. Thereby, we will not only
transform our economic and industrial structures, but
also change our very lifestyles to become more future-
oriented. Under this plan, Korea will invest about 2 per
cent of its gross domestic product in the field of green
growth every year over the next five years. This is
twice the level recommended by the United Nations.
 The underlying objective of the low carbon green
growth strategy is to promote sustainable development
by putting in place a positive cycle in which the
environment revives the economy and the economy
preserves the environment. This strategy is the most
effective way to address global climate change and to
overcome the economic crisis at the same time. By
pursuing a green growth policy that makes assertive
fiscal investments in areas of green growth, Korea is
preparing for the future, while also responding to the
immediate economic crisis.
 The development of green technologies and
international cooperation are key factors in ensuring
success in responding to climate change. At the
expanded Group of Eight Summit last August, Korea
was designated as a leader in transformational
technology, including the area of smart grid
technology. Korea will strengthen global partnership
for cooperation on green technology and share the
ensuing benefits of this partnership with the rest of the
world.
 While fossil energy is replaceable, water is not.
Water is the most important resource in our lives.
Accordingly, I wish to urge the President of the
General Assembly, world leaders and the Secretary-
General to take a special interest in the issues
concerning water, since it is also a crucial factor in
achieving the MDGs.
 Today, close to half of the world’s population
face water-related problems, and most of the climate
change-related natural disasters, including floods,
drought and rising sea levels, are water-related
disasters. In the course of launching the East Asia
Climate Partnership, the Korean Government reviewed
water-related issues in Asia. We have come to the
conclusion that the provision of clean water and the
development of policies and infrastructure for
inundation and disaster prevention are the most
pressing issues at hand.
 Korea possesses cutting-edge desalination
technology and has been improving its integrated water
resource management system. The restoration of
Cheong Gae Cheon in Seoul, which had been a

09-52179 44

concrete-covered dry stream for several decades, has
provided more than 10 million residents with a
pleasant recreation site and a clean stream. This was an
environmentally friendly greening project that helped
the city to overcome the heat island phenomenon, not
to mention rendering it more attractive at the same
time.
 Such experiences and achievements have led us
to launch a four major rivers restoration project,
involving the four rivers that traverse our country from
north to south and from east to west. This project not
only provides a fundamental solution for securing
water and controlling flooding, but also enables us to
revive the ecosystem of these rivers.
 The time has come for the international
community to establish a system of governance that
addresses water-related issues effectively. I am aware
that some 20 United Nations agencies have been
working in earnest on water issues. Issues concerning
water are complex, as they have a bearing on a wide
range of areas. To establish a more effective system of
international cooperation on water, I would like to
propose a specialized integrated water management
cooperation initiative.
 Global peace and security form the cornerstone
for maintaining the stability and prosperity of all
mankind. Today, global peace is threatened by the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their
means of delivery. To respond to these challenges,
strong determination and cooperation among all
countries are essential in strengthening the
international non-proliferation regime, including the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Last October, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon put
forward a five-point proposal for nuclear disarmament.
And, in his speech in Prague in April, United States
President Barack Obama set out his vision for a world
free of nuclear weapons. Through sufficient
discussions, we anticipate that these initiatives, which
embody the hopes and desires of humanity, will
enhance a common understanding on nuclear
disarmament and non-proliferation.
 In particular, a nuclear weapons-free Korean
Peninsula must be realized in order to attain peace in
North-East Asia and beyond. Denuclearization is a
prerequisite to laying a path towards genuine
reconciliation and unification in the Korean peninsula,
which is the only remaining divided region in the
world.
 The Republic of Korea will play an active part in
the concerted international efforts to dismantle the
nuclear programmes of the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea. We urge the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea to join in these efforts and to return
to the Six-Party Talks forthwith and without
precondition.
 The 1992 Joint Declaration on the
Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, to which
both Koreas committed themselves, must be observed.
On that basis, the Republic of Korea will increase
dialogue and exchanges with the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea, and strengthen cooperation with the
international community towards that country’s
development. I have proposed a grand bargain that
would involve dismantling the core components of the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear
programme and the concomitant provision of security
assurances and intensified economic support within the
framework of the Six-Party Talks. We are currently
engaged in consultations with the concerned parties. I
want to make it clear that now is the time for the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to make the
decision to achieve genuine peace on the Korean
peninsula, and for its own sake as well.
 We are confronted with diverse and complex
challenges that can be met only through international
cooperation. In meeting the expectations of the
international community, we hope that a renewed and
strengthened United Nations will assume a greater role.
To that end, it is important now more than ever for the
United Nations to demonstrate efficient and effective
management. We hope that the United Nations reform
initiatives in the various areas will yield concrete
results.
 As a responsible State Member of the United
Nations, Korea will continue to render its close
cooperation so that the Organization can play a lead
role in bringing progress to all humankind and the
international community at large. Korea seeks to be a
friend to the world that is considerate of others and
contributes to global society.


Permit me to
congratulate Mr. Razali Ismail on his unanimous election
to preside over this session. His election is a reaffirmation
by the United Nations Member States of the confidence
that they have placed in him and in the Government of
20

Malaysia. In this regard, I should like to assure him of the
cooperation of the delegation of the Republic of Rwanda in
our shared desire to galvanize the community of nations in
their common resolve to fulfil the objectives of the United
Nations Charter. I should like to take this opportunity to
pay tribute to his predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Diogo
Freitas do Amaral, for presiding over the fiftieth session of
the General Assembly in a most efficient and able manner.
The session over which Mr. Razali is presiding will be
addressing a considerable agenda of more than 155 items,
which, when put together, will contribute to world peace,
security and stability. The United Nations is the most
appropriate forum to discuss these and other related matters
of global peace, development and international cooperation.
The agenda before us therefore seeks to address the
implementation of the objectives of the Charter, as
enshrined in Article 1.
As we move towards the twenty-first century, it is our
individual and collective responsibility to re-examine the
extent to which our countries have or have not contributed
to the attainment of these objectives. The United Nations
Agenda for Peace and its valuable initiatives on
peacekeeping, human rights and other development-related
issues — collective security, terrorism, denuclearization,
conflict prevention and resolution — will be discussed
during the session. Rwanda would like to join its voice to
those of the delegations that spoke from this rostrum and
who called for world peace, security and the development
of developing countries.
Statements have been made from this rostrum in
connection with what some have described as the ghastly
events that took place in Rwanda in 1994. Many, perhaps
inadvertently and in a simplistic manner, have described the
events of 1994 in Rwanda as a conflict, a crisis, ghastly
events or as gross violations of human rights. There was
genocide in Rwanda, nothing else but a genocide. It was
not a tribal or ethnic conflict, as it is often referred to.
Between April and July 1994 more than one million
Rwandans were butchered in a systematic and planned
manner. This carnage was carried out in only 98 days. The
devastating effects of the aftermath of the Rwandan
genocide are still with us, and we live with them. Rwanda’s
population now consists of 70 per cent women, 60 per cent
of whom are widows, and we have 400,000 orphans in the
country.
The perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide are still at
large in some capitals. Far from feeling remorse, they pride
themselves in their unfinished agenda. Their army, militia
and political leadership are in military and refugee camps
within walking distance of the Rwanda-Zaire border. They
have recently stepped up infiltrations into Rwanda in
order to kill the remaining survivors of genocide.
We call upon the international community to exert
pressure on the Government of Zaire to relocate the
refugees away from its borders with Rwanda, in
conformity with the 1951 Geneva convention (relating to
the Status of Refugees).
The withdrawal of United Nations peacekeeping
troops in April 1994, at the height of the execution of the
genocidal agenda, was not helpful. For us in Rwanda, it
remains, and will continue to remain, a reminder of the
responsibility of the United Nations to ensure that this
does not reoccur anywhere else. More importantly, it
points to the need for the United Nations to support
Rwanda in its efforts to rebuild its socio-economic
infrastructure. This is critical. There can be no sustainable
peace without reconstruction and development. The recent
high-level symposium on conflicts in Africa, which was
held in Tokyo this month, on 9 and 10 September, came
to the same conclusion.
Allow me to put on record my Government’s
appreciation of the efforts made by those countries,
institutions and humanitarian agencies that helped and
continue to assist Rwanda in the various sectoral
rehabilitation programmes. We are equally grateful to
those who have shown their disposition to do so in the
near future.
The recently concluded round table conference,
which was organized with the support of the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP), has been
helpful. We are grateful for the commitments that were
made. This will go a long way in assisting Rwanda to
consolidate and build on the achievements of the past two
years.
The Government of National Unity of Rwanda,
under the leadership of His Excellency President Pasteur
Bizimungu, has made significant strides to return the
country to normalcy. Tremendous achievements have
been made, including the gradual and steady rehabilitation
of the security structure, the judiciary, the legislature and
the economy. The sound macroeconomic policies that
have been adopted have contributed, in less than two
years, to a reduction in inflation from 60 per cent in 1994
to 10 per cent in 1996. This will drop to 5 per cent by the
21

end of 1997. Agricultural production has reached 70 per
cent of the pre-war level, and we have recorded impressive
levels of food production.
We are also pleased to inform the international
community that more than 2.2 million refugees have now
returned to Rwanda. All Rwandan refugees originally based
in Burundi have been repatriated and successfully resettled
in their own communities without incident. This is
sufficient proof that Rwandan refugees in other
neighbouring countries, apart from being the hostages of
genocidal leaders in the refugee camps, have no other
reasons to remain.
These achievements have been made in spite of some
critical factors that the international community could help
Rwanda overcome if we are to maintain the pace of our
continuing progress towards stability, durable peace and
development.
The crippling debt burden has hamstrung all social
sectors, especially the most vulnerable groups. Children,
women, widows and the elderly are among the most
affected. Rwanda’s debt stock at the end of 1995 stood at
a staggering high of $1 billion, or 91 per cent of the gross
domestic product (GDP). Most of this, 84 per cent, is owed
to multilateral institutions; 13 per cent is bilateral; and the
remaining 3 per cent is on account of suppliers’ credits.
Given the magnitude of this suffocating debt, the
Government cannot rebuild its shattered socio-economic
infrastructure in the aftermath of genocide. We therefore
urge the international community, and especially the
multilateral financial and development institutions, to cancel
immediately Rwanda’s debt. Short of new resources in the
form of a Marshall Plan, this cancellation would greatly
contribute to Rwanda’s recovery and sustainable growth.
We know very well that where there has been a significant
infusion of financial resources in post-war periods, peace
and stability have been achieved and sustained.
The question of conflicts and insecurity in the Great
Lakes region has been mentioned by many speakers. The
situation in Burundi is cause for concern to many,
especially the countries of the region. I should like in this
regard to commend the efforts of the Organization of
African Unity, the leaders of the region and all those who
are involved in the search for a durable solution.
Regional instability has been complicated by the
systematic persecution of Kinyarwanda-speaking Zaireans.
This process was stepped up this year with the massacre of
several North Kivu region Zaireans of Rwandese culture;
others were forced to flee to Rwanda and Uganda. This
persecution has recently been extended to the South Kivu
region of Zaire, where, again, Kinyarwanda-speaking
Zaireans have been subjected to brutal attacks by Zairean
forces, along with former Rwanda Government soldiers
and interahamwe militias, who did not finish but exported
their genocidal and “ethnic cleansing” agenda.
Survivors of these attacks — predominantly women
and children, as men and boys are either killed or
imprisoned — have been forced to seek refuge in
Rwanda. It is the responsibility of the Government of
Zaire to unconditionally repatriate its nationals who are
currently living in refugee camps in Rwanda. We call
upon the international community to prevail upon the
Government of Zaire so as to stop the systematic “ethnic
cleansing” currently taking place in eastern Zaire. We
further call upon the Government of Zaire to cease
immediately its military aggression which has recently
been directed against Rwandan territory.
We would like to pay tribute to Mwalimu Julius
Nyerere, former President of the United Republic of
Tanzania, for his unequivocal and genuine search for
solutions, not only for Burundi, but also within the wider
context of the Great Lakes region.
The problem is not the lack of solutions. What is
lacking is the decisiveness to implement commitments
voluntarily entered into. That is what should be addressed.
In the case of the Great Lakes region, former Presidents
Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Jimmy Carter of the United
States of America and General Touré of Mali successfully
managed to get the Heads of State and Government to
agree and sign solemn declarations on the modalities for
solving the problems of the region.
At this session, we will be considering the
re-election of the Secretary-General. My Government’s
position has been clear since Yaoundé, during the summit
of the Organization of African Unity. We are not
supportive of the re-election of the incumbent. Doing so
would reward his failure to use the instruments of the
United Nations Charter in order to come to the rescue of
Rwandans during the genocide. Above all, it would be
against the collective conscience of the Rwandan people
to support the candidacy of the incumbent. But beyond
these moral grounds, we believe that the election of a
contested Secretary-General is not in the interest of the
United Nations. It would jeopardize the functioning of an
institution that needs to be strengthened.
22