At the outset, on behalf
of the people and the President of the Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela, Mr. Nicolás Maduro Moros, I
would like to convey to General Assembly President
John Ashe our congratulations on his recent election to
lead this organ of the United Nations.

As is known, President Maduro Moros is not here
at this session of the General Assembly because of a
whole range of delays, obstacles, conditions imposed
and lack of guarantees for him and members of his
delegation, imposed by the Government of the United
States in flagrant violation of the obligations incumbent
upon it under the Headquarters Agreement. Despite

that, we have come here on behalf of the people of the
liberator, Simón Bolívar, to speak the truth and to ask
some questions, firmly but respectfully, as we learned
from our leader, Hugo Chávez Frías, who passed away
in March. In that regard, on behalf of my people, I
should like to express our gratitude for the heartfelt
tribute paid to President Chávez Frías last March (see
A/67/PV.67).

How happy we would be to be here if we were
really in a place where we realized the noble ideals
enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. The
Charter talks about saving succeeding generations
from the scourge of war, but the truth is that various
military interventions have been decided upon or have
been allowed here that have engulfed countries and
whole regions of the world in long wars and instability.
The Security Council has been taken hostage by the
hawks of war, and when they can, they justify their
attacks from there; when they cannot, they simply bang
on the table and still do whatever they want, which is
what they are doing when they declare that there will be
future bombings in the Syrian Arab Republic.

The Charter also states that the purpose of the
Organization is to preserve international peace and
security. But let me ask: How do some members of the
Security Council think we can achieve that purpose by
arming and protecting terrorist groups such as Jabhat
Al-Nusra and Al-Qaida, which are obscurantist forces?
Many of those groups are linked to horrible acts such as
the destruction of the Twin Towers in this very city. They
deny the existence of anybody who thinks differently
from them — whether they be Christians, Muslims
or Jews — and profess special hatred and rejection of
women. Why are such groups supported? Why do some
members of the Security Council sponsor such terrorist
groups, window-dressing them as political opposition
and even allowing them to give press conferences at this
venue? What would representatives of Governments
with ongoing internal armed conflicts say if the violent
groups they faced were to be given space and a voice
here at Headquarters to justify their downfall?

The Preamble of the Charter also sets out another
noble goal: to promote social progress and raise the
standard of living in a broader concept of freedom.
In reality, however, poverty, hunger and injustice are
continuing to grow and the standard of living and the
standard of freedoms are falling lower and lower. That
is because what is imposed on us is a model of excluding
others — a neo-fascist model — a neo-liberal model.

In the meantime, countries such as Venezuela
have chosen the path to consolidate real democracy
with a socialist system, including the people, and that
has enabled us to reach the Millennium Development
Goals. Yet we are constantly attacked and demonized
and our political and social stability is being disrupted.
That is what is happening at this very moment with
the anti-democratic opposition in our country, which
is being supported by media corporations in the region
and from the whole world.

Paragraph 4, Article 2, of the Charter of the United
Nations emphatically states that

“All members shall refrain in their international
relations from the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of
any state”.
Yet the President of the United States — and there is
the additional irritant that he is a Nobel Peace Prize
laureate — is threatening to bomb this or that country if
it does not comply with his country’s unilateral demands,
which can even include removing a Government that
the United States Government does not like. Perhaps
that could explain why, despite the fact that the Charter
talks about the equality of large and small nations, the
President of the United States said just a couple of days
ago that the United States was “exceptional”. Does that
mean that they are not equal with the other 192 States
Member States represented here?
The gap today between the noble ideals of the
Charter and what is happening by act or omission
here in the Organization is truly alarming. Why does
nobody in the General Assembly venture to propose
that sanctions be imposed for open violations of the
Charter on the Government that has an illegal detention
centre in the military base at Guantánamo, in occupied
Cuban territory, where torture and cruel and degrading
and inhuman treatment is being meted out to persons?

Why does nobody discuss sanctions against
the President who has admitted to illegal espionage
activities against Heads of State and Government
represented here? That was a point courageously
made by the President of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff (see
A/68/PV.5).

Why do we not consider the use of unpiloted
planes — so-called drones — which have taken the
lives of tens of thousands of innocent victims, including

children and old people, in North Africa, the Middle
East and parts of Asia to be crimes against humanity?

Why do we not impose sanctions against a
Government that for more than 50 years has maintained
an illegal and criminal economic blockade against the
worthy Cuban people, and flouted decisions adopted by
overwhelming majorities in the Assembly in favour of
ending the embargo?

Why do we not implement the resolutions adopted
by the plenary so that the State of Palestine can be
established as a peaceful, just and lasting solution to
the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict?

Why does the United Kingdom not agree to start
negotiations with Argentina to resolve in a peaceful
way demands over the Malvinas Islands? Might it
perchance be because the elite of the United States and
some of its allies are exceptional?

We raise those questions for consideration when it
comes to the future of humankind, on behalf of the people
of Simón Bolívar — the people of Venezuela — who
love peace, equality and freedom.

Venezuela has come before the General Assembly
today to condemn a kidnapping. The Organization has
been kidnapped. The peace and dignity of the world
are being held hostage in New York. The kidnapper has
many faces. It changes names and sometimes even flags,
but it continues to be the same old imperalism. Eight
years ago, Commander Hugo Chávez Frías — a tireless
defender of genuine peace, not the peace imposed by
bombs, and of participatory democracy and a leader
for unity among peoples — called here for a genuine
transformation of the United Nations. Seven years ago,
he said that there was a whiff of sulphur here (see A/61/
PV.12). Today, alas, I have to say once again that there is
still a whiff of sulphur coming from those who consider
themselves exceptional.

Those words are truer now than ever before. The
courageous revelations of one young man offered a
great service to humankind — let us call it a wake-up
call. As a result, he is now being persecuted politically
and cannot walk freely in the streets of Manhattan. We
hope that Edward Snowden will one day be able to walk
freely among a future generation of Americans who
have taken back their civil rights and helped to ensure
peace in the world. That young man has shown us how
the privacy of every human being has been violated by
the most complex and sophisticated spying system that
humankind has ever been able to come up with.

Thanks to those revelations this year, we have
woken up to discover that George Orwell’s 1984 is
now here. And what is the United Nations doing about
that? Who is setting limits on so much arbitrariness
and running roughshod? Those are yet more questions
that find no answers from the General Assembly or the
Security Council of the Organization, which is now
almost 68 years old.

We would like to suggest that the Secretary-General
set up a body within the United Nations to ensure for
every inhabitant in the world the right to privacy and
the right to communicate without interception. Much
has been said here calling for peace, but that has often
fallen on deaf ears. Let us hope that we will all learn
how important it is to listen to the calls of the people for
peace, and employ that in tirelessly seeking to elevate
human dignity as our guiding star.

President John Kennedy spoke from this rostrum
50 years ago, the last time he would do so at the United
Nations before being assassinated. How good it would
be if his current successor, and many people here,
were to re-read just some of what he said. Whatever
differences we may have had with that historic figure,
ensuring peace requires that we seek out areas of
agreement such as this:

“For the value of this body’s work is not
dependent on the existence of emergencies — nor
can the winning of peace consist only of dramatic
victories. Peace is a daily, a weekly, a monthly
process, gradually changing opinions, slowly
eroding old barriers, quietly building new
structures. And, however undramatic the pursuit of
peace, that pursuit must go on.” (A/PV.1209, p. 5)
Let us hope that the leaders of the United States and
those that follow them blindly will think deeply about
the meaning of what Kennedy said and realize that if
they really want to be exceptional, they have to find
exceptional ways of bringing about lasting peace in the
world.
In Latin America and the Caribbean we are
showing that with exceptional decisions and actions we
can build a world of peace. Unity in diversity is what
we have in our regional organizations: the Bolivarian
Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, the
Community of Latin American and Caribbean States,

the Union of South American Nations, the Common
Market of the South and Petrocaribe. All those are tools
for democratizing our societies that promote socially
inclusive economic development and ensure political
stability. Despite various internal disputes and conflicts
between fraternal countries, we have been able to find
mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of conflict. We
have demonstrated that without military intervention,
drones or economic blockades, we can build and
preserve genuine democracy and move forward in
combating hunger, poverty and inequality.

The Venezuelan nation is proud of being part of a
region that is free of weapons of mass destruction. We
reaffirm our commitment to encouraging the complete
elimination of nuclear weapons and chemical and
bacteriological weapons as a way of ensuring that life
can continue on planet Earth.

In his various statements before the Assembly,
Commander Chávez Frías called for improving the
means for addressing problems and resolving conflicts
in a transparent manner. He also pointed out that, in
the face of today’s reality, there was a crucial need
to consider whether the Headquarters of the United
Nations should be here in this country where the
Government does not respect the Organization, much
less the sovereignty of each and every State Member.
The United Nations should be in a place where there
is respect for all Members; where the political will
flourishes, without pressure or fear, to end conflict in
the world through dialogue; where the path forward
is genuine social development and the elimination of
hunger and poverty; and where what matters is how to
stop war, not how to justify it.

Let us take the United Nations to the South, where
the antithesis to exclusion — solidarity — has often
taught us that we are in fact all equal. For now, we
welcome the proposal of President Evo Morales Ayma
that we should meet in the Organization’s various other
headquarters in different parts of the world. Beyond the
shadows that seem to darken the future of the human
race, from Latin America and the Caribbean we are
saying and showing that another world is possible
where all of us can, in peace and dignity and with
justice, enjoy lives worth living.


At the outset, let me
convey the sincere condolences of the people and the
Government of Liechtenstein to all those affected by
the abhorrent terrorist attack in Kenya. Our thoughts
are with the victims and their families.

For the second year in a row, the Assembly is
meeting under the shadow of the crisis in Syria. It is the
challenge of our time. No other situation in the recent
past has so dramatically tested the United Nations
ability to respond. And none has so starkly illustrated
the limitations and the weaknesses of our multilateral
system. Thousands of people have been killed in a
brutal war, many of them women and children, and
many of them victims of war crimes and crimes against
humanity. Regional stability has been eroded. Millions
of people are depending on humanitarian assistance,
which is often impossible to deliver. Humanitarian
access to those most in need, including the sick and
the wounded, is being systematically denied owing
to cynical political calculations. The humanitarian
agencies have become a pawn in that perverted game.

Sadly, it took a particularly outrageous act to
generate action in the Security Council: the use of
chemical weapons, with hundreds of victims, including
countless children. We are encouraged to see that the
Council has decided to ensure the destruction of all
chemical weapons in Syria. That should also provide
new momentum to ensure that all remaining States join
the Chemical Weapons Convention. Indeed, it should
be a step towards the elimination of all weapons of
mass destruction worldwide.

The use of chemical weapons in Syria has marked a
watershed in the conflict. Nevertheless, that issue must
not divert our attention away from the core problem:
the fighting in Syria continues unabated, with blatant
disregard for the civilian population and international
humanitarian law. Weapons and ammunition cross the
borders more easily than humanitarian assistance.

The recent breakthrough on the issue of chemical
weapons shows that political progress is possible.

Hopefully, that will create the momentum for the
Council to finally live up to its responsibility: to end
the supply of weapons, pressure the parties to the
conflict to accept a ceasefire, work towards a political
solution and prepare the ground for accountability for
past crimes. There may be different views on who used
chemical weapons in Syria, but everyone agrees that
that use constitutes a crime against humanity and a war
crime that must not go unpunished. It must therefore be
put before a court of law, together with the countless
other crimes committed, for an independent and
impartial investigation.

Syria is our biggest collective failure with regard
to accountability in recent history. The International
Criminal Court (ICC) has been operational for more
than a decade now. During that time, we have not
witnessed any other situation in which crimes have
been committed so systematically, on such a scale and
for such a long time without any adequate response
from the international community.

It is well documented that crimes have been and
continue to be committed by all sides. That is precisely
the type of crisis for which we established the ICC, and
it is precisely the type of situation that led us to give
the Security Council the competence to refer situations
to the Court. In its recent resolution 2118 (2013), the
Council made a limited statement on accountability.
More determined and more concrete action must follow.
A referral to the ICC will ultimately also contribute
to a viable political future for the country, create
accountability for those crimes, provide redress for the
victims and establish the truth.

The establishment of the International Criminal
Court has been the most significant development
in international law for decades. Only the adoption
of the Arms Trade Treaty earlier this year has come
even close in terms of significance. With 122 States
parties, the Court has attracted a strong following. But
the emergence of an effective international judicial
mechanism also poses challenges. We have mandated
the Court to investigate and prosecute the most serious
crimes under international law. And we have asked it
to focus on those perpetrators who bear the greatest
responsibility. Therefore, it cannot be surprising to
anyone that the Court is dealing with individuals in
leadership positions. We are satisfied that the Court
follows the evidence, and that it does not shy away
from investigating and prosecuting those in powerful
positions. It is therefore implementing its mandate and
not politicizing the work it does.

Recent events in Syria have reminded us of the
importance of the amendments to the Rome Statute
adopted in Kampala in 2010. We added provisions
that criminalize the use of poisonous and other gases,
whether they are used in international or in internal
armed conflict. It is troubling that those provisions
have become relevant so quickly. But the biggest steps
forward are amendments to crimes of aggression. They
complement the prohibition of the illegal use of force
enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. The
most serious forms of the illegal use of force by one
State against another will become a punishable offence
before the ICC. The Court will thereby help enforce
the core principle of the rule of law at the international
level. With ratifications by Andorra, Cyprus, Slovenia
and Uruguay earlier this week, we have come a
significant step closer to our common goal, namely,
the activation of the Court’s policy over crimes of
aggression in 2017. Liechtenstein was the first country
to ratify the amendments, and we will continue to assist
in the ratification process.

Liechtenstein firmly believes in the responsibility
to protect populations from crimes of atrocity. Clearly,
we have much work left to do in order to put that
norm into practice. Our inability to respond to the
crisis in Syria demonstrates a crucial weakness in the
system: the use of the veto, or its threat, in a manner
incompatible with the purposes of the United Nations.
That can make the Security Council irrelevant when it
is most urgently needed. During this general debate,
the President of France suggested a common code of
conduct for Permanent Members of the Security Council
(see A/68/PV.5). We strongly agree with that proposal.
All five permanent members should be able to give the
world one public commitment, that is, that they will
not use their veto to block action aimed at ending or
preventing crimes of atrocity. That would be crucial to
enhancing the Council’s effectiveness and credibility.
Unfortunately, we have not yet reached the point where
we are able to bring the composition of the Security
Council in line with the geopolitical realities of the
twenty-first century. But the Council is also struggling
to adjust its working methods to new challenges in order
to better include the perspective of non-members in its
decisions, which is a crucial ingredient for effective
leadership. We will therefore continue our efforts to

promote accountability and transparency in the work
of the Council.

The rule of law and accountability have made
steady progress in the work of the United Nations.
Nevertheless, that progress remains abstract for
countless individuals who are vulnerable to atrocities.
Sexual violence in conflict has become a rampant
phenomenon, with women and girls at particular risk of
becoming victims. The ICC has made the fight against
that scourge a priority. Most important, though, we
must do our part as States. Liechtenstein fully supports
the United Kingdom’s initiative to take greater action
to end sexual violence during conflict. The fight
against sexual violence must also play a central role
in the larger context of the women, peace and security
agenda. All of that requires stronger emphasis on the
need to empower women. Many of our stated goals,
from sustainable development to lasting peace, require
the full participation of women. Otherwise, they are
simply not attainable. In that regard, I am grateful for
the leadership of the Secretary-General. We should all
rally behind his call to make the twenty-first century
the century for women.

The upcoming negotiations on the post-2015 agenda
will be a crucial test of our ability to tackle challenges
that will define the lives of future generations. We look
forward to the leadership of the President of the General
Assembly in that process. It is of course too early to
offer a final assessment of the Millennium Development
Goals. But we know that important unfinished business
will be carried over into the sustainable development
goals. Those new goals must be much more than just an
extension of past efforts. They must aim at eradicating
poverty and hunger once and for all, and finally ensure
full equality between men and women. They must
therefore be firmly rooted in human rights, respect for
the rule of law and principles of good governance. The
sustainable development goals will ensure sustainability
only if they approach development in a holistic way.
Most important, once we have agreed on our new goals,
we need to become more serious in our commitment to
achieving them. Let us therefore develop and apply an
effective monitoring mechanism to show the world that
we are indeed serious.

The post-2015 process will also be decisive in
moving the General Assembly back to the centre of
multilateral policy-making. Only the “G-193” provides
the legitimacy and universality required for decisions
of global impact and for setting standards that apply to
all. This is our General Assembly. Let us use it.


The rapidly changing
situation, growing tensions, radicalization, security
challenges and threats in various regions of the world
today cannot but raise serious alarm and concerns
around the world. In this regard, needless to say, those
problems enjoy special priority on the agenda of the
General Assembly at this session.

The war in Afghanistan, which has been ongoing
for more than 30 years, remains a serious source of
threats to regional and global security. The situation
unfolding in Afghanistan, according to experts, is
generally uncertain and unpredictable overall. In
these conditions, the drawdown of the International
Security Assistance Force troops in 2014 may lead
to an escalation of confrontation in the country, stir
up terrorism, extremism and drug trafficking, and
aggravate the interregional standoff. Undoubtedly, it
will have a negative impact on the situation in the wider
region of Central Asia and contiguous regions.

It should be recognized that the world has adopted
the unambiguous view that there can be no military
solution to the Afghan problem. The only way out of the
Afghan crisis is a political process through negotiations
among the main parties involved, the achievement
of consensus regardless of how difficult it might be,
and active assistance provided by the international
community and the United Nations.

Uzbekistan adheres to an open and clear policy with
respect to Afghanistan on the basis of the principles
of good-neighbourliness and non-interference in the
country’s internal affairs. Uzbekistan shall further
develop mutually beneficial and friendly ties with
Afghanistan on a bilateral basis, and support the
Government elected by the Afghan people themselves.
We shall also continue to render practical assistance
in restoring the economy of Afghanistan, taking
into account the fact that economic well-being is
an indispensable condition for ensuring peace and
prosperity in that country. These principles and
approaches towards Afghanistan are enshrined in
Uzbekistan’s foreign policy concept, which has the
status of law.

Secondly, today a new global development
agenda is under consideration at the United Nations.
It must reflect the interconnection of human beings
with the environment and contribute to supporting
economic and social development while maintaining
ecological sustainability. Uzbekistan attaches priority
to sustainable development and ecological safety.
We have recently adopted an action programme on
environmental protection for 2013-2017, which serves
as confirmation of that priority. The Government of
Uzbekistan will allocate approximately $2 billion for
implementation of the programme aimed at further
maintaining decent conditions in the environment, the
reasonable use of natural resources, and the introduction
of the ecological basics of sustainable development in
the economic sectors.

The loss of the Aral Sea is one of the largest global
ecological catastrophes in contemporary history. Each
year, it becomes more evident that the problem of the
drying up of the Aral Sea and, above all, its impact on the
environmental, social and humanitarian situation, gene
pool and human health are assuming an increasingly
baneful and irreversible nature. We are grateful to
the United Nations, and to Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon in particular, for the keen attention paid to the
problem of the Aral Sea. That enormous support gives
us the confidence that the countries of the region will
not be left alone in the struggle against that planetary
catastrophe.

I would like to draw public attention today, first,
to the issue of preventing the complete destruction and
protecting the remaining environmental system of the
Aral Sea region, ensuring minimum living conditions
for the people, and preserving the existing flora and
fauna. Those key issues are the focus of the message
of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Chair
of the International Fund for Saving the Aral Sea,
and created as an official document of the General
Assembly (A/67/884, annex).

Secondly, we take this opportunity to call
upon international donors to extend assistance
in implementing the programme of measures on
eliminating the consequences of the drying up of the Aral
Sea and averting a catastrophe in the ecological systems
in the Aral Sea region (A/68/383, annex), which is fully
consonant with the Millennium Development Goals,
particularly, in achieving ecological sustainability,
combating diseases and improving motherhood and
childhood protections.

Thirdly, ensuring the reasonable use of water
resources is an acute problem leading to a worsening
ecological situation and shortage of potable water in
our region and on a global scale. It is an open secret that
the Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers, the two major
transboundary rivers of Central Asia, have historically
been a common good and a source of life for the nations
of the region. The Aral Sea basin is supplied with water
from the flow of those rivers.

In that regard, we cannot but be concerned about
the plans of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to construct
new large hydropower stations with gigantic,
global-scale dams: the Rogun hydropower station with
a 350-metre-high dam upstream in the Amu Darya
River, and the Kambarata-1 hydropower station, with a
275-metre-high dam upstream in the Syr Darya River.
The implementation of such plans, according to many
competent specialists, would lead to the disruption of
the natural flow of the rivers, which is fraught with most
dangerous ecological and socioeconomic consequences.
The already fragile water and ecological balance in
Central Asia will be radically disrupted. Moreover, the
construction of these facilities is planned in areas where
there is a tectonic fracture with a potential seismicity
of not less than 9-10 points on the Richter scale, which
carries a high risk of man-made catastrophes.

Taking that into consideration, we firmly adhere
to our principled position of the unacceptability of
constructing hydropower facilities on international
watercourses without the preliminary endorsement of
all interested countries. It is necessary, in line with
international legal practice, to conduct a mandatory,
fair international expert examination of the Rogun
and Kambarata-1 projects, under the auspices of the
United Nations, to assess the possible impact of new
hydropower facilities on the natural water regime, the
environment, flora and fauna.

Uzbekistan’s position is based on the norms of
international law, in particular the provisions of the
United Nations Convention on the Protection and Use
of Transboundary Watercourses and International
Lakes of 1992 and the Convention on the Law of
Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses
of 1997.

The year 2015 — the deadline for implementing
the Millennium Development Goals set in 2000 — is
approaching. In that regard, it should be underscored
that the achievements of the Republic of Uzbekistan
during its years of independence in the economic
sphere, social policy, addressing specific issues
related to improving the well-being of the population,
the quality of education, health-care services and
ecological sustainability have allowed our country
to ensure priority implementation of the Millennium
Development Goals. I can offer figures and facts that
reflect the current potential and development rates of
our country.

In comparison with the year 2000, the gross
domestic product (GDP) of Uzbekistan grew by a
factor of 3.1 and the GDP per capita by a factor of
2.6. The nominal salary grew by a factor of 22, the
average amount of pensions by a factor of 12.7, and
real income per capita by a factor of 8.4. During the
past six years, the economic growth of Uzbekistan has
steadily exceeded 8 per cent. The State expenditures

for the social sphere and civil protection in Uzbekistan
grew more than fivefold. About 60 per cent of all State
expenditures go towards funding social development,
including more than 34 per cent for education, and over
15 per cent is spent on public health care.

I am confident that Uzbekistan’s continued
participation in United Nations efforts in the sphere
of sustainable development shall contribute to further
raising the living standards of the people, achieving
the high goals of ensuring security and stability in the
entire region.


I will
begin with a simple question: what is the key challenge
facing today’s world? I believe that it is the fact that
humankind’s societal evolution has not kept pace with
globalization. We are constantly lagging behind. Our
failure to adjust quickly and effectively has given rise
to a range of political, economic and social problems.
That mismatch between technological and societal
development has been the norm since the beginning of
the industrial revolution, in the late eighteenth century.
Furthermore, these days it represents a far more serious
threat than ever before. The pace of globalization has
been steadily accelerating, and therefore we have had
to adapt much more quickly.

We need a mechanism that will enable us swiftly
and effectively to address this problem. Such a
mechanism could appropriately be called “a new global
world order”.

Today we can hardly say that we have a global order
at all, as the notion of order implies stability, which
we do not have at present. The old rules are not being
observed, and new ones have not been established.
We permanently find ourselves stricken by various
global crises. The great Powers seek to provide global
governance by means of clubs whose membership
is limited to themselves. Other countries wager on
regionalism, and medium-sized and small countries see
their rights infringed at every turn.

Overall, the current geopolitical situation is
characterized by an increasing dynamic of multilevel
competition as well as by the global governance crisis.
What is even more alarming is that all of this is taking
place against a backdrop of increasing global inequality.
It is clear that if we cannot arrive at an order by design,
anarchy will come to us by default.

Let me state that Belarus has no clear-cut recipe as
to how to build a new global order. After all, this can
hardly be done quickly and simultaneously. The great
Goethe once said:

“Man is not born to solve the problem of the universe,
but to find out what he has to do and to restrain
himself within the limits of his comprehension”.
Let us try to proceed with precisely this logic in
mind. We are convinced of the need to move forward
first and foremost in areas where there is a particular
urgency to do so.

We believe that we should start by strengthening
the role of the State in today’s world. The industrial
revolution once made the State strong and the idea
thereof appealing.

Indeed, the history of the past two centuries has
not been a narrative of military power. Rather, it has
been a story of the growing force of the principle of
self-determination, that is, the aspiration of nations to
establish their own States, which can then effectively
promote the interests of their citizens. It is no wonder
that in times of crisis and uncertainty, the great leaders
of the past saw the strengthening of the State’s role as
a solution. United States President Franklin Roosevelt,
faced with the Great Depression, thought that only
a strong State could address the problems of the
“forgotten man”.

Over the past several decades, globalization,
especially in its unregulated phase, has clearly reduced
the role and importance of the State. We find ourselves
in a paradoxical situation. On the one hand, global
processes have curtailed State power. On the other
hand, tackling the growing transnational challenges
sparked by globalization requires strong States. What
do we mean by this?

Let us start from the premise that we all live in
a very diverse world. States, reflecting this range of
diversity, assume very different forms in their domestic
and internal organization. History has shown that it is
impossible to boil all States down to the same level.

We are convinced that it makes sense to assess
States, and let me here resort to philosophy, on their
content rather than their form. In other words, a strong
State is an accountable State, in both domestic and
foreign policy, regardless of its form.

Let us then build relations based on the notion
of content rather than form. Indeed, why does the
domestic political situation of, say, Belarus or Cuba
serve as a basis for some countries to pursue policies of
sanctions and persecution — policies that contravene
international law — against those States? After all,
it was the people of those countries who determined
their form and they do not wish another, because their
Governments pursue accountable policies. By and
large, the people have no objections to them in terms
of content.

The call for a strong State, of course, has nothing in
common with a call for dictatorship. Franklin Roosevelt
said:

“History proves that dictatorships do not grow out
of strong and successful Governments, but out of
weak and helpless ones”.
State weakness is no longer a humanitarian
concern but a problem of international security. It is a
guarantee that we will fail to cope with the mismatch
generated at the global level by the different paces of
the globalization and societal adaptation processes.

We deem the next area of focus to be efforts to
ensure global convergence. It is worth pointing out
that such attempts have often been undertaken in the
past. Unfortunately, the areas of application were
inappropriate from the start. Convergence basically
occurred in the context of attempts by the mighty of
the world to impose their own political and economic
models on other countries. That was outright coercion.
As a result, all such attempts have backfired.

In today’s world, completely different approaches
are needed — approaches aimed at unity and stability
rather than disunity and anarchy. We need social
convergence. To put it simply, we must work to create
a robust middle class in every State, without coercion.
After all, all countries have an interest in a sizeable
national middle class. History has clearly shown that
success in that area will ensure the domestic stability
of a State and foster its interest in pursuing a foreign
policy of international stability. We are convinced that
the benefits produced by the middle class at the national
level can have a similar impact at the international level.
A large number of middle-income countries worldwide
would be the best safeguard to ensure a truly multipolar,
fair and stable world. Such a group of States would
seek neither diktat nor dominance over others. What
is more, having just recently emerged from the grip of
poverty and domestic instability, many countries have
fully realized the importance of global development
and of solidarity aimed at the least developed countries.

Building on that understanding, Belarus is keen
to rekindle the topic of middle-income countries at
the international level. In May, we held a regional
conference on middle-income countries in the context
of sustainable development. We witnessed immense
interest in that event. Likewise, Belarus welcomes the
high-level international conference on middle-income
countries held in June in Costa Rica. Those and other
relevant events point to the need for more focused
work within the United Nations system on cooperation
with middle-income countries. At the same time, a
number of ongoing trends are working to prevent the
strengthening of the middle class in those States. The
unfettered globalization ardently carried out by the so-
called market fundamentalists has served to increase
inequality in the world and hollow out the middle class.
Many, in both developed and developing countries,
are already confronting the resulting political and
economic consequences.

We pin our hopes for improvement on the ongoing
effort at the United Nations to design a post-2015
United Nations development agenda. The world is
fast approaching the 2015 completion deadline set for
the Millennium Development Goals. My country’s
current view is that the key lesson to be drawn, even
at this stage, is that there can be no lasting progress
in today’s world in any individual area if other areas
are neglected. That is because everyone and every thing
in the world — people, economies and threats — has
become highly interconnected. For instance, one cannot
succeed in tackling migration without addressing
poverty, conflicts and environmental disasters. That
perception, in turn, points to the need to set the stage
for a comprehensive post-2015 development agenda.
It is highly commendable that the United Nations,
its Member States and many other stakeholders have
already been actively engaged in the preparatory
process. Likewise, it is gratifying that everyone views
the paradigm of sustainable development as the basis
for the future agenda. That is the proper course, as
sustainable development — based on its economic,
social and environmental components — is the best
approach to meeting the global development challenges
in a truly comprehensive manner.

Belarus shares the view that the sustainable
development goals should be at the heart of the next
agenda. We see the need to develop such goals in as
many areas as possible. It is particularly crucial that
they address those areas not covered by the Millennium
Development Goals, such as, for example, migration,
energy and employment. We believe that each and every
goal must be achieved through appropriate thematic
global partnerships among States, international
organizations, civil society and the private sector. A
good example of that is the global partnership against
slavery and trafficking in persons initiative, which is
now being successfully implemented. We hope that a
comprehensive approach to development will help in
controlling globalization and, more important, ensure
that it is fair. After all, it must work in the interests of
all rather than of a few. Drawing on a historical analogy,
one can argue that the post-2015 development agenda
represents our future, comprehensive “new deal” — like
the one launched by Franklin D. Roosevelt. The United
Nations serves as the indispensable platform — thanks
to its unquestionable legitimacy, universal membership
and comprehensive scope — for the international
community to appropriately reconcile and subsequently
implement its interests in terms of the new deal.

The greatest danger in geostrategic uncertainty is
not the uncertainty itself; rather, it is the desire to take
action in a complex setting using yesterday’s logic,
namely, a business-as-usual attitude. We are certain
that only by shaking off such an approach will we be
able to forge a global order to benefit all people on
Earth.


I congratulate you,
Mr. President, on your election to the presidency of the
General Assembly. I also wish also to thank you for your
continued strong support for small island developing
States (SIDS) issues, which you have championed for
many years and have once again demonstrated, this
week, in the process and lead-up to the United Nations
Third International Conference on Small Island
Developing States, to be held in the Pacific next year.

From economic woes to outright poverty, from
social instability to acts of violence and ethnic or
religious conflict, and from the devastation of natural
disasters to deadly acts of terrorism, no country is
spared or completely shielded. The events in Kenya,
Iraq, Pakistan and here in the United States over the past
week demonstrate the multiple risks we face in today’s
world. Our sympathies go to the Governments and
people of those countries, and our deepest condolences
to the people who lost family and friends in those tragic
events.

While the Organization continues to grapple with
various serious problems that require collective, United
Nations-led action for their resolution, perhaps the
greatest threat we face today is climate change. Climate
change is a security risk of far greater proportions than

many people are prepared to admit. For some low-lying
Pacific island countries, climate change may well lead
to their eventual extinction as sovereign States.

The singular importance and urgency of climate
change to our region was given added prominence today
when Pacific Forum leaders met with Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon. Our Chair, the President of the Republic
of the Marshall Islands, presented to the Secretary-
General the Majuro Declaration for Climate Leadership,
which is an effort by our region — the most likely to be
first and worst affected by climate change — to launch
a new wave of more determined leadership across the
globe, aimed at accelerating the reduction and phasing
down of the world’s greenhouse-gas pollution before it
is too late.

The root causes of climate change and the means for
addressing them are widely known. We in the Pacific
know already from bitter and harsh experience, as will
many other parts of the world, what the consequences
of climate change are, and they will only become more
severe if not enough is done.

Sadly, what is evident to us in the climate change
negotiations is the continued triumph of vested interests
in preventing and delaying the action that should be
taken. In a diverse world of different capacities and
capabilities, those least able to mitigate and adapt to
the impacts of climate change look to Member States
in leadership roles to rise to the challenge and lead by
example, to ensure that the post-2020 climate change
convention currently being negotiated will effectively
address the mounting fears of countries like mine of
the catastrophic effects of climate change if it is not
tackled collectively and with determination. As world
leaders, we have the responsibility for fashioning a new
agreement that will reassure low-lying islands that we
have their interests and priorities at heart. Let us rise to
the occasion and be part of the solution.

In June, during the historic event of the signing of
the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), Samoa announced that
it would sign the Treaty at the highest political level
during the Treaty event at the General Assembly’s
current session. We kept that promise, and I signed
for Samoa in a special ceremony two days ago. We
welcome the fact that more than 100 nations, including
the United States, have now signed the Treaty.

For small island countries like Samoa, it takes
only a few small arms and light weapons in the wrong
hands to cause instability. Indeed, within our own
Pacific region, such so-called small arms have fuelled
conflicts, disrupted the lives of communities and
impeded countries’ development. The Arms Trade
Treaty, when fully implemented, will greatly help small
island States like mine in their efforts to sustain our
communities’ security and stability. Our signing of the
ATT is also further testimony to our firm commitment
to general and complete disarmament, since it will
contribute significantly to saving lives, stopping human
rights abuses and avoiding crises, and is an important
step in reducing and eventually eliminating altogether
the human cost of conventional arms.

Samoa remains fully committed to the peacekeeping
work of the United Nations, one of the Organization’s
most effective and successful mandates. For more than
10 years, Samoa has been contributing civilian police
officers to peacekeeping operations in countries such
as South Sudan, Timor-Leste, Liberia, the Sudan and,
in the Pacific, the Regional Assistance Mission to
the Solomon Islands. We will be in a better position
to increase our contribution to peacekeeping missions
after a United Nations selection, assistance and
assessment team has completed its evaluation, which is
planned to take place before the end of 2013, of eligible
officers from our police force.

Samoa looks forward to next week’s High-level
Dialogue on International Migration and Development.
International migration poses both challenges and
opportunities for countries of origin, transit and
destination. Its contribution to sustainable development
will therefore ultimately depend upon the willingness
of source and destination countries to work out
imaginative and humane arrangements that benefit
both those countries and migrants. Samoa is working
closely with New Zealand and Australia, through
their seasonal-worker schemes, to ensure that those
important initiatives result in mutual benefit for both
the sending and receiving parties in the arrangements.

Yesterday’s High-level Meeting on Nuclear
Disarmament (A/68/PV.11) highlighted yet again the
urgent need for a treaty banning nuclear weapons,
given the catastrophic humanitarian consequences
of any use of such weapons. Such weapons represent
the great paradox of our time. While nations desire
peace and talk of peace, far more of the national wealth
goes towards the development and acquisition of ever
more sophisticated and destructive weapons of mass
destruction. Our Pacific region was the scene of a great

deal of nuclear testing, with some islands still bearing
the scars of those tests. Our regional response was the
South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, the Rarotonga
Treaty, to ensure that nuclear testing in the Pacific
would be a thing of the past.

Samoa reaffirms its continued support for a
nuclear-test-free world. Early agreement must be
reached to ban nuclear testing and to cease the creation
and manufacture of more nuclear weapons.

We place great faith in the rule of law and the vital
protection it offers to all States, especially to weak
and small countries such as mine, with no armed force
and not affiliated with any military grouping. The
International Criminal Court (ICC) is an important
part of the architecture of world peace based on the
rule of law, and we are pleased to have been the second
State party to ratify the two Kampala amendments to
the Rome Statute last year. With the deposit yesterday
of the ninth instrument of ratification, we hope that
the Kampala amendments will come into force soon
and that the ICC will become the first court since the
international military tribunals in Nuremburg and
Tokyo to hold individuals responsible for crimes of
aggression.

The United Nations needs to adapt to the changing
contemporary international environment or risk being
bypassed in favour of institutions and groupings that
are more responsive to the needs of Member States. The
High-level Political Forum is one such welcome reform,
and Samoa is very pleased to have participated in its
inaugural meeting this week.

Still more fundamental reform is required to address
the existing imbalances in the current power structure
of the Security Council through the enlargement of
both categories of membership and improvements to
its working methods, so as to reflect the realities of
the present time and to enhance the Council’s role and
effectiveness.

The renewed efforts made and great courage
shown in the process of restarting the stalled Middle
East peace plan for the Israeli and Palestinian peoples
has our strongest endorsement. It gives rise to hope
that the two-State solution, which is the only option
with realistic prospects for lasting peace, can still be
achieved.

The number of areas of tension and trouble
spots around the globe is increasing, and they are
getting deadlier. The availability of weapons of mass
destruction and, now, their use in Syria is unnerving.
The untold suffering brought about by the Syrian
crisis has touched many hearts, and the latest episode,
where we watched in utter disbelief the use of chemical
weapons to kill indiscriminately defenceless victims
and even children, is incomprehensible.

We therefore welcome the joint proposal by the
United States and Russia and the willingness of
Syria to have its chemical weapons destroyed under
the competent United Nations authority. We expect
total compliance, which is required for this initiative
to succeed. As long as weapons of mass destruction
such as chemical weapons continue to exist, some
megalomaniac will sooner or later resort to their use,
with deadly consequences for the world. The ultimate
safeguard is, of course, the destruction of all such
weapons, whether chemical, biological or nuclear.

The United Nations Conference on Sustainable
Development called for the convening in 2014 of a Third
International Conference on Small Island Developing
States, to remind the international community that small
island developing States (SIDS) face unique challenges
and vulnerabilities requiring dedicated support and to
help build their resilience.

Samoa is honoured to host that Conference in
September 2014, on behalf of the Pacific small island
developing countries. The Barbados interregional
meeting endorsed “The sustainable development of
small island developing States through genuine and
durable partnerships” as the overarching theme of the
Conference. A renewed global partnership will help
SIDS to manage a multitude of risks, so that they can
pursue inclusive economic growth, social development
and environmental sustainability.

Samoa has also proposed to utilize the Conference
as a platform to launch specific, concrete SIDS
partnerships as the most effective means to implement
some of the group’s challenges and as a legacy of the
Conference.

In advancing the SIDS development agenda,
the Samoa Conference strategically provides a
window for SIDS as a group to agree on their
priorities and to consolidate their positions ahead of
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s leaders’ summit on
climate change in 2014, the post-2015 United Nations
development agenda now under discussion, and the
negotiations for a successor climate-change treaty post-
2020, which are in progress.

Let me conclude by conveying our gratitude to
all our partners — developed and developing, big
and small, Governments and non-governmental
organizations, civil society and the private sector — for
their dedicated support, which has helped my country
to reach a new threshold in its journey as a State
Member of the United Nations. Our new status as a
non-least developed country beyond January 2014 can
be sustained only with the support of Samoa’s truly
genuine and durable partners.


It is with a heavy heart that
I address the Assembly today. Just before I left Ghana
to attend this general debate, I learned of the terrorist
attack that took place in Nairobi. I was shocked and
deeply saddened to hear of the many lives that were lost
to those senseless and cowardly acts of violence. As the
death toll increased, so too did my grief, knowing that
each additional number symbolized one more human
life. Those numbers symbolized individuals who
may have been strangers to those of us here but were
of prime significance in the lives of the people who
loved them — their parents, children, husbands, wives,
friends and colleagues.

Soon enough, I got word that one of the people
massacred was a person of significance in my life
and in the lives of so many other Ghanaians. Kofi
Awoonor was a 78-year-old gentleman who had served
his country loyally as a poet and professor, ambassador
to Brazil and Cuba, and Chairman of our Council of
State, a presidential advisory body. Professor Awoonor
had once even been our country’s envoy to the United
Nations. On this fateful day, however, Professor
Awoonor was in Nairobi to perform his poetry at a
writers’ conference. He had travelled there with his
son, and they had decided before the day’s scheduled
events to do what should have been one of the most
ordinary and uneventful of activities — to make a stop
at a shopping mall.

Unfortunately, what happened that day at the
Westgate Premier Shopping Mall was anything but
ordinary. Professor Awoonor’s life was taken from
him and those who loved him, just as the lives of
dozens of others were taken away from them and their
communities. Each of them had a unique story and
accomplishments or aspirations for which they will
be remembered. Professor Awoonor’s son, though
injured, was among the many who were lucky enough
to escape the attack. It is a day they will never forget.
They will carry the scars, physical and emotional, with
them. We who watched from a distance should never
allow ourselves to forget, because we have also been
irrevocably marked by this tragedy.

When independence was upon us and our
possibilities felt endless, the world saw how brightly
Africa could shine. Then, for decades, that light was
dimmed. There was a time when killing seemed almost

commonplace in Africa. Indeed, there are plenty of
graves that remain unmarked. There was a time when
the ruthlessness of dictators seemed to be the order of the
day. For decades, the corruption, greed and depravity of
a few caused the suffering of an entire continent. We so
easily could have succumbed to the wars, the poverty
and the diseases, but we did not. We staggered our way
through, year after year, and eventually we made it. We
have survived.

Last year when I addressed the General Assembly
(see A/67/PV.9), I began with the assurance that I had
come with good news from Ghana, with stories of
success from the African continent. This year, it gives
me great pleasure to do the same — even on the heels
of the dastardly terrorist attack — because I know
that today’s Africa will not be divided or deterred by
the heinous crimes of those who wish to disrupt our
progress. I know that our borders will no longer be
used to undermine the brotherhood and sisterhood of
our citizens.

The days of massacres must remain in our past.
Our rivers will no longer run red. Our children must be
students now; we will no longer allow their childhoods
to be stolen from them by those who wish to turn them
into soldiers. Africa is standing tall, walking confidently
towards political stability, walking confidently towards
economic prosperity, walking proudly towards ethnic
and religious harmony and coexistence. There is no
place in today’s Africa for hatred and intolerance and
the murder of innocent people — not anymore, not ever
again. So we will mourn our dead. We will console
ourselves and each other through our grief. We cannot
allow terror to defeat us. That must strengthen our
resolve. Our stride will not be broken.

Last year from this stage, I also declared Ghana’s
resolve to be a beacon of peace and democracy in the
West African subregion. On behalf of the citizens whom
I serve, I promised the world that Ghana would not
allow its territory to be used in any manner whatsoever
to destabilize other nations. Ghana has been steadfast
in its cooperation with its regional neighbours to
maintain the security of those nations that are enjoying
stability and to restore security to those, such as
Côte d’Ivoire and Mali, that have recently emerged
from turmoil. Currently, Côte d’Ivoire is in a stage of
rebuilding. The recent overtures towards reconciliation
made by President Ouattara are a major step towards
bridging the country’s political divide. After its own
bout with terror, Mali made a solid return to democracy
by conducting an election that all observers, even the
sceptics and the cynics, hailed as being free, fair and
peaceful.

West Africa has seen enough war and strife. We
want peace and security to persist in our subregion.
Ghana will continue to play its role in strengthening the
Economic Community of West African States to make
sure that it is able to meet that objective.

With all that I have said in my statement today, I
am sure it will not come as a surprise to anyone that
Ghana enthusiastically threw its support behind the
Arms Trade Treaty adopted by the General Assembly
at the sixty-seventh session. International trade in
conventional arms and ammunition must be regulated.
We like to mention how the world has become a global
village, especially when speaking of technology, culture
and travel. The ease of communication in that global
village also exists for warmongers and terrorist groups,
who are using it to recruit new members, expand their
cells, create intercontinental networks, obtain weapons
and conceal their identities and locations. If we are to
fight back, we must also work cooperatively. Nations in
the developed world must align themselves with nations
in the developing world. We must form partnerships
and work together. Ghana is prepared to do that. We
have signed the Arms Trade Treaty and we intend to do
everything possible to see that it is ratified in a timely
manner.

Fledgling democracies tend to be fragile. Their
limits are still being tested; their characteristics are
still being defined. Democracy is not a one-size-fits-all
venture, nor is it a one-time event. It is a system that
takes decades to build, a process that pushes a country
towards a perfection it will never reach, but countries
must try nonetheless. This past year, the limits of
Ghana’s democracy were tested, and I am proud to
report that we passed with flying colours.

The results of our recent elections were contested.
Since our return to constitutional rule, Ghana has
conducted six successful elections. Last year’s elections
were the first whose results were formally challenged
and heard by the Supreme Court. What made that
situation noteworthy was the reliance of all parties
involved on the rule of law. The proceedings were
televised for the sake of transparency. The verdicts were
readily accepted, and there was not a single reported
incident of violence.

Ghana’s victory is not an aberration. Other
countries, like Kenya, have had similar experiences.
That indicates that democratic institutions in Africa are
growing stronger. It indicates that the balance of power
in African countries is shifting from the authority of a
sole individual to the more equitable process of properly
designed systems. Strong institutions are the hallmark
of every nation’s stability. They are crucial tools in the
fight for human rights.

It is our intention to bring an end to youth
unemployment. In Ghana today, we are about to launch
the Youth Jobs and Enterprise Development Fund,
a programme that will provide young people with
entrepreneurial skills and access to the funds needed
to establish businesses of their own or expand existing
ones, thereby creating new employment opportunities
for themselves.

Six of the ten fastest growing economies in the
world today are on the African continent. However,
that growth has not yet been translated into sustainable
employment opportunities. Over the course of the past
decade, African economies created over 37 million
wage-paying jobs, yet 63 per cent of workers remain
trapped in low-paying subsistence or self-employment
endeavours. With those realities come the very real
possibilities of income instability, exclusion from
the benefits of economic growth and social security
benefits tied to formal sector employment.

Africa has a fast-growing population, more than
50 per cent of which is below the age of 35. That means
we must create more jobs for our growing numbers of
youth. They must have opportunities available to them.
We cannot do that unless we transform the economies
of Africa. It all comes down to value. We must value
our resources, including our human resource — we
must value our people.

We cannot continue to be exporters of raw materials
and primary produce. We need to add value to our
exports. We cannot continue to export raw cocoa beans
in Ghana; what we need to do instead is process more
of those beans into value-added products. We cannot
continue to export unrefined gold; we need to add value
to our gold exports. We cannot continue to export oil
and gas; we need to integrate that industry into our
economy; we need to process petroleum products and
produce power with the gas. We cannot continue to
export bauxite and then in return import alumina to
feed our local aluminium smelter; we need to work
towards creating an integrated bauxite and aluminium
industry in Ghana.

In that way, by keeping the concept of value at the
forefront of our economy, we can create new jobs for
our young people. We can do that with local and foreign
investors who share our vision. Often the rest of the
world wrongly assumes that we in Africa do not know
our worth. But we do. It is not sympathy we want; it is
partnership — and the ability to stand on our own feet.
It is not handouts we are in search of; it is opportunities.
We have already shown that with time and the right
opportunity, Africa can make it.

Ghana achieved the Millennium Development Goal
(MDG) targets for reducing poverty and hunger far
ahead of the scheduled date of 2015. We are on track for
achieving MDGs 2, 3, and 6 as well. School enrolment,
gender parity and the reduction of HIV/AIDS have
all seen dramatic progress and statistical shifts as a
result of the work to reach our targets. While we are
lagging behind in MDGs 4, 5, and 7 — infant mortality,
maternal health and environmental sustainability — the
figures show that there has been a vast improvement.
Since 2000, the number of maternal deaths for every
100,000 births has decreased by more than half, from
740 to 320. We recognize that when we are talking
about human lives, even a 50 per cent decrease is too
little; it is not enough. That is why in 2010 we launched
the MDG Accelerated Framework and Country Action
Plan.

Women account for more than 50 per cent of
Ghana’s population. We believe that empowering them
through education and encouraging them to take full
control of their reproductive rights will help us not only
to attain the MDGs faster, but also to build a better
nation. It is not enough to put girls in school and allow
them just enough education to be deemed literate; we
must keep them in school. Removing teenaged girls
from school for any reason, let alone to marry them off,
is an unacceptable practice that must end.

African women have always been the backbone
of our societies. Let us imagine the change they could
effect in our countries if we would only help them to
reach their full potential. As a President and a father, I
owe it to my children — my sons and my daughter — and
all the children of Ghana to create a country where
they may walk with their dignity intact and heads held
high, standing shoulder to shoulder with the children of
Europe, South America, Asia, North America and the
rest of the world.

Ghana is encouraged by the new initiative to resolve
the Israeli-Palestinian issue. We are still firm in our
belief that an independent Palestinian State, existing
side by side with a peaceful and secure Israeli State,
is a desirable outcome that we must all support and
work towards. In working towards that goal, we must
realize that the continuous construction of settlements
in Palestinian territory increasingly shuts the door on a
two-State solution.

Ghana calls once again for the embargo against
Cuba to be lifted. It is a relic of the Cold War era and
has no place in our current global dispensation.

We have come a long way since the end of the last
global war, yet the makeup of the Security Council
does not reflect those developments. Ghana therefore
supports the reform of the Security Council.

Ghana will continue to pursue the principle of
constructive engagement in our relations with the
other countries in the world. We are fully committed
to promoting honest global partnership that is informed
by mutual respect and reciprocity.

In closing, I would like once again to pay my
respects to those who have lost their lives in Kenya,
Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Libya, Pakistan, Iraq, Nigeria,
Mali, Somalia, Turkey, India, the United States and all
the other places where terrorists have attacked just this
year alone. The reason we are all gathered here today is
to find the ways and the means to create a better, more
peaceful and prosperous world.


I
would like to join previous speakers in congratulating
Mr. John William Ashe on his election as President of
the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session and to
thank the outgoing President, Mr. Vuk Jeremi..

During the past two decades, the international
community has made great strides towards the
development of a cohesive approach aimed at
addressing the political, social and economic
challenges that the international community is facing
today. We need to analyse our commitments, keeping
in mind the difficulties that we have encountered while
implementing the Millennium Development Goals.
The world economic and financial crises are partially
responsible for our straying from the charted path.
However, they brought to light some of the underlying
issues that had either been overlooked or underestimated
and which turned out to be important for the overall
success.

We are all aware that, in the context of
interdependence and the growing interconnectedness
of the world economy, no country can achieve the
Millennium Development Goals in isolation. The
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development
enriched our understanding of the ways of achieving
the overall progress towards the political, social and
economic development.

Armenia welcomes the inclusion of “The post-2015
development agenda: setting the stage” as the main
theme of our deliberations in the current session.

(spoke in English)
Despite the fact that most of us share the
understanding that the elimination of violence and
terror is essential for building peaceful, sustainable and
prosperous societies, peace seems to remain an elusive
phenomenon in many parts of the world.

Armenia remains alarmed by the worsening of the
humanitarian situation in Syria. The number of refugees
Armenia continues to receive already exceeds 10,000,
but tens of thousands of Syrian-Armenians remain in
Syria, a country that had become their second home
after the genocide of 1915, and they are struggling for
their survival in unbearable conditions together with
their fellow Syrians.

Armenia welcomes the unanimous adoption
yesterday of Security Council resolution 2118 (2013),
based on the agreement reached in Geneva between
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and United States
Secretary of State Kerry. The resolution could lead to
the elimination of chemical weapons and the exclusion
of their use in Syria and pave the way for a political
solution of the Syrian crisis, putting an end to the
suffering of the Syrian people.

It is our strong belief that there is no alternative
to the peaceful solution of conflicts. The resolution
of conflicts requires political will and determination.
Three months ago, on 18 June the Presidents of the
three co-Chair countries of the Minsk Group of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe

(OSCE) — Russia, United States and France — made a
new statement on Nagorno Karabakh in the framework
of the Group of Eight Summit in Enniskillen.

In Armenia, we welcomed that statement and
affirmed that, like the co-Chairs, we continued to
believe that the elements outlined in the statements of
the Heads of State of the co-Chair countries over the
past five years can form the basis for reaching a fair and
lasting settlement of the conflict. We share the position
of the co-Chair countries that those elements should
be seen as an integrated whole and that any attempt
to select some elements over others would make it
impossible to achieve a solution. We absolutely agree
that peoples should be prepared for peace, not war.
Unfortunately, to date the Azerbaijani leadership has
been doing just the opposite, increasing warmongering
and anti-Armenian hate speech on a daily basis, even
using the lofty rostrum of the United Nations for its
purposes.

We absolutely agree with the Heads of the three
co-Chair countries — which are also three permanent
members of the Security Council — that the use of force
will not resolve the conflict and that only a negotiated
settlement can lead to peace and stability. However,
through its unprecedented accumulation of offensive
weaponry at a massive scale, Azerbaijan seriously
endangers regional and international security, despite
its membership in the Security Council.

Unlike Azerbaijan, Armenia has on several
occasions reiterated its commitment to the principles
of international law and, in response to the Enniskillen
appeal of the Presidents of the United States, the Russian
Federation and France, once again reaffirmed that
commitment, particularly with respect to the non-use
of force or the threat of force, equal rights and the self-
determination of peoples and territorial integrity.

Azerbaijan keeps misinterpreting the 1993
resolutions of the Security Council — resolutions 822
(1993), 853 (1993), 874 (1993) and 884 (1993) — the
core requirement of which was the immediate cessation
of all hostilities and hostile acts and the establishment
of a durable ceasefire. Azerbaijan has not only failed
to comply with the latter requirement, but further
intensified its aggression and the military operations
against Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia using
mercenaries closely linked to notorious terrorist
organizations. It is not surprising that since the
ceasefire agreement was signed in 1994, the mediators,
the three permanent members of the Security Council,
have never made another reference to those resolutions.

Azerbaijan is acting as if the international
community shared its approach and as if it shared
the approach of the international community. In
reality, Azerbaijan continuously rejects all proposals
of the internationally mandated OSCE Minsk Group
co-Chair countries. Baku has rejected all versions of
the Basic Principles of the settlement of the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict proposed by the co-Chairs of the
OSCE Minsk Group, including those presented at
the Kazan, Sochi, Astrakhan and Saint Petersburg
summits. Baku refuses not only the Basic Principles,
but also the confidence-building measures proposed
by the co-Chairs on consolidation of the ceasefire,
withdrawal of the snipers from the line of contact and
the establishment of a mechanism for investigating
ceasefire violations. Azerbaijan not only obstructs
confidence-building measures, but also periodically
organizes provocations on the line of contact with
Nagorno Karabakh and on the border with Armenia,
which has resulted in new casualties.

At the previous session of the General Assembly
(see A/67/PV.19), I spoke about the Azerbaijani
leadership’s release and glorification of an axe-murderer
named Ramil Safarov, which was strongly condemned
by the entire international community and by the
human rights commissions of the United Nations and
other international organizations. Even today, more
than a year after Safarov’s release, the Azerbaijani
leadership continues to declare that what they did is
just and right and dares to criticize the stance of the
international community. That clearly demonstrates the
deepening gap between the Azerbaijani leadership and
the international community in terms of perceptions of
what is good and what is bad.

Most recently, Azerbaijani authorities at the
national level have ostracized the eminent Azerbaijani
writer Akram Aylisli for publishing a novel in which he
talks about the pogroms against Armenians in Baku,
Sumgait and other parts of Azerbaijan. Aylisli’s books
were publicly burned, and the writer had to leave the
country after receiving death threats.

Just last week the Azerbaijani leadership once
again came up with new threats against Armenia and
Nagorno Karabakh and made claims to Armenian
territories, including its nearly 3,000-year-old capital
city, Yerevan. Notwithstanding Azerbaijan’s destructive

stance, Armenia will continue to make efforts towards
the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
exclusively through peaceful means and on the basis
of the purposes and principles and norms set forth in
the United Nations Charter and the provisions of the
statements made by the Presidents of the three co-Chair
countries’ at L’Aquila, Muskoka, Deauville, Los Cabos
and Enniskillen.

In March, the Human Rights Council adopted
by consensus a resolution initiated by Armenia and
co-sponsored by over 60 countries on the prevention
of genocide. The recognition, condemnation and
prevention of genocide remain a priority for Armenia,
and we will take the necessary actions to prevent new
occurrences of the crime of genocide, while keeping the
issue of responsibility for crimes against humanity and
the denial thereof high on its agenda. As the nation that
survived the first genocide of the twentieth century,
Armenia unequivocally welcomes the clear position
adopted by the States Members of the United Nations
that precludes any possibility of immunity or pardon
for perpetrators of crimes against humanity.

In May 2013, Armenia assumed the chairmanship
of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe,
a regional organization that is a key partner of the
United Nations in our shared global quest to advance
the principles of fundamental freedoms, the defence
and promotion of human rights and the continuous
efforts for peace and security.

Cooperation between the two organizations is also
well established in the fight against racism, xenophobia,
hate speech and intolerance. Those issues are also
among the priorities established during Armenia’s
chairmanship, elaborated in response to the challenges
that Member States of both the United Nations and the
Council of Europe are facing today.

Armenia is committed to strengthening the
institutional capacities of the United Nations. In that
regard, we support the United Nations reform process
and are ready to contribute to it. We believe that the
reforms provide an opportunity to enhance the role of
the Organization in addressing the crucial issues facing
the world.


First, I would like to
congratulate you, Sir, on assuming the presidency of
the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session.

I would now like to make a new pledge about
the situation in Syria. The use of chemical weapons
has caused profound shock and anger on the part
of the people of Japan, including myself. Chemical
weapons must never be used again. I hereby declare
that Japan will provide thorough support to, and the
greatest possible cooperation with, the international
community’s efforts to dispose of Syria’s chemical
weapons. We feel righteous indignation about innocent
civilians continuing to be victims. Japan regards the
cessation of violence, the initiation of political dialogue
and the improvement of the appalling humanitarian
conditions as issues of the utmost urgency.

At this very moment, the number of refugees
is soaring. To them, Japan will provide still greater
assistance. We will act in cooperation with the
international community to extend a helping hand
to internally displaced persons and refugees fleeing
across national borders. I take pride in the fact that
Japan’s non-governmental organizations and volunteer
organizations are working around the clock to help
them.

Japan will also continue to provide assistance to
areas under the control of the opposition groups, where
it is difficult for assistance from the international
community to reach. We are working to undertake the
training of staff working at medical centres. We will
also deliver portable X-ray devices and other medical
equipment to those areas.

With the escalating despair of refugees now as
they head for a harsh winter, I would like to announce
that the Government of Japan will provide and make
immediately available approximately $60 million in
additional humanitarian assistance to Syria and its
surrounding countries. We are determined to conduct
such assistance in parallel with the process of political
dialogue, notably the “Geneva II” conference, and to
move forward in cooperation with the international
community.

Our nation, Japan, and its capital, Tokyo, have
been granted the honour of hosting the 2020 Olympic
and Paralympic Games, seven years from now. To
reciprocate that good fortune we have come to enjoy, my
obligation first of all is to rebuild the Japanese economy
to be vibrant, and then to make Japan a dependable
force that works for good in the world. I pledge here
that I will make Japan a force for peace and stability
in the world, just as it has been until now — or, rather,
make it an even greater such force than it has been thus
far, given the increasingly tragic state of the globe.

Japan will newly bear the flag of proactive
contributor to peace, anchored in the undeniable record
of and the solid appreciation for our country, which has
endeavoured to bring peace and prosperity to the world
while emphasizing cooperation with the international
community.

The balance of power in the world has been
changing rapidly, and technological innovations are
now removing all borders from both new opportunities
and new types of threats. It is now impossible for any
one country, no matter which one it may be, to safeguard
its own peace and security acting entirely by itself.
That is why Japan is working to garner trust from the
world as a creator of added value and a net contributor
to regional and global peace and stability. Under those
circumstances, the role of the United Nations will
become even more important than it is today.

Japan has continually promoted the concept of
human security, and the implications of the concept will
surely expand. Through the accumulated discussions
over the nine years since the submission of a report
by the Commission on Human Security, the resolution
on a common understanding on the notion of human
security was adopted, here at the General Assembly,
in September 2012 (resolution 66/290). Guided by the
wisdom of its forerunners, Japan is determined to
further spread the concept and build actual practices.

I will enable Japan, as a proactive contributor to
peace, to be even more actively engaged in United
Nations collective security measures, including
peacekeeping operations. I believe that Japan must
continually cultivate our human resources so that they
are appropriate for use in United Nations activities.

For Japan, whose national interests are firmly
connected to the stability of open seas, changes to the
maritime order through the use of force or coercion
cannot be condoned under any circumstances. Japan
has great expectations that public spaces, ranging
from outer space and cyberspace to the skies and the
seas, will be rigorously preserved as global commons
governed by rules and laws.

Japan, as a country that understands the horror and
devastation wrought by atomic bombs, will utterly devote
itself to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation and
the total elimination of nuclear weapons. North Korea’s
nuclear and missile development cannot be condoned.
Japan also maintains serious concerns with respect to
other weapons of mass destruction that North Korea is
likely to possess. Pyongyang should listen to the unified
voice of the international community and rectify its
own actions by taking a tangible step. We demand that
North Korea return every Japanese national whom it
has abducted, without exception. While in office, I
am determined to resolve that issue completely. The
normalization of diplomatic relations with North Korea
remains unthinkable without the resolution of that
issue.

As for the nuclear issue of Iran, Japan hopes that
the country’s new Administration will move forward
with concrete actions. We are ready to continue to play
a role in resolving the issue.

In the Middle East region, a cornerstone for world
peace and prosperity, Japan will continue its unique
contributions towards the Middle East peace process.

Japan will also continue to extend cooperation to
the countries of Africa, which are certain to become a
growth engine in the twenty-first century. Firmly rooted
in our own experiences, that cooperation takes the
fostering of human resources as its main emphasis and
seeks to achieve sustainable growth while cultivating
ownership by Africa itself. In June, my Government
invited African Heads of State and Government and
representatives of international organizations to
Japan, where it convened the fifth Tokyo International
Conference on African Development (TICAD V). On
that occasion, I was deeply struck by the eagerness
expressed by representatives of African nations for
private sector investment.

Investment flow to Africa now exceeds the flow
of assistance. I also heard from the African leaders
time and again that assistance should be utilized
strategically as a catalyst for attracting investment.
That is the evolution that discussions in the 20-year-
long TICAD process have witnessed and given rise to.
TICAD V became a forum where we celebrated the
path that Africa has walked down, and together we
reconfirmed that Japan has been an enduring partner
weaving dreams side by side with Africa.

I hold the firm conviction that the future course
of Japan’s diplomacy will begin here, by sparing
no pains — and with our regained strength and
capacity — to become actively engaged in meeting the
historic challenges that today’s world faces. I consider
“sparing no pains” to be nothing less than the basso
continuo notes that set the basic tone for Japan’s actions,
be they in diplomacy or any other field.

As a country with such intentions, strengths and
achievements, Japan considers it extremely regrettable
that the structure of the Security Council is still frozen
in a state that reflects the realities of some 70 years ago.
Security Council reform must proceed without delay.
Japan’s aspirations to becoming a permanent member
of the Council have not changed in the slightest.

Everything begins with Japan refortifying its true
abilities and its economy. The growth of Japan will
benefit the world. Japan’s decline would be a loss for
people everywhere. How, then, does Japan aim to
realize its growth? Mobilizing the power of women will
serve as both a source and outcome of growth, a point
almost self-evident at this gathering.

There is a theory called “womenomics”, which
asserts that the more the advancement of women
in society is promoted, the more growth increases.
Creating an environment in which women find it
comfortable to work and enhancing opportunities for
women to work and to be active in society is no longer
a matter of choice for Japan. It is instead a matter of the
greatest urgency.

Having declared my intention to create a society
in which women shine, I have been working to change
Japan’s domestic structures. However, that is not
confined merely to domestic matters. I would now

like to discuss how it is also an issue guiding Japan’s
diplomacy. To begin with, I would like to state four
contributions through which Japan aspires to remain a
leading member within the international community.

First, Japan respects the activities of UN-Women
and intends to become one of its leading contributors,
and therefore an exemplary country in that area. Japan
will also work closely with the relevant international
organizations.

Secondly, as other like-minded countries have
already done, Japan also intends to develop a national
action plan with regard to women, peace and security,
in cooperation with people working at the grass-roots
level.

Thirdly, Japan will cooperate closely with not
only UN-Women, but also the International Criminal
Court and the Office of the Special Representative of
the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict,
Ms. Zainab Hawa Bangura. It is an outrage that there
continues to be sexual violence against women during
times of armed conflict even now, in the twenty-first
century. Japan will do everything possible to prevent
such crimes against women and to support — both
materially and psychologically — those people who
unfortunately become victims of such acts.

Fourthly, Japan will submit once more at the next
session of the Commission on the Status of Women
a draft resolution that gives careful consideration to
women in natural disasters, as they are likely to be
vulnerable. Japan, which experienced a major natural
disaster two years ago, wishes to garner support for
the draft resolution, which embodies our outpouring of
support for the matter.

I would now like to make use of the examples
of three individuals to clarify Japan’s development
concept aimed at bringing about a society in which
women shine, and also to shed light on some issues that
must be tackled. I will first introduce the examples of
a Japanese woman and a Bangladeshi woman, and then
that of an Afghan woman, as the third example.

Ms. Tokiko Sato was an expert at the Japan
International Cooperation Agency, responsible for
improving maternal, newborn and child health for
over 15 years in a remote village in Jordan. Undaunted
by the suspicious looks she initially received from
the villagers, Ms. Sato would speak with anyone,
anywhere. Devoted to her ideas, including making
use of public entertainment to persuade the villagers,
Ms. Sato finally found herself accepted by the village
community. Ms. Sato’s tenacity gradually transformed
the traditional idea that the one who decides the number
of children is the husband, not the wife, into a mindset
that values the health of women.

As the Assembly is aware, my country played
a leading role in the establishment of the the Global
Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Japan
intends to continue to make an appropriate contribution
at the upcoming Fourth Replenishment, which seeks to
secure additional financing for the Fund. However, as
for the post-2015 development agenda, it would be most
appropriate to broaden the focus to encompass those
diseases individually.

Japan regards approaches that address individuals
holistically as better able to meet their broader health
needs. That is why Japan decided to promote universal
health coverage — “UHC — on the occasion of TICAD
V. To address health issues in the African region,
we have readied $500 million and are at present
concentrating on setting up training for 120,000 health
and medical services providers. With regard to medical
care for all, there can be no doubt that the people who
give the human touch to the three letters in “UHC” are,
in concrete terms, people like Ms. Sato, who without
hesitation go into local communities.

The second person I would like to introduce is
Ms. Nilufa Yeasmin, a young Bangladeshi woman and
the mother of two. Her professional title is “Poly-Glu
Lady”. Poly-Glu is a made-in-Japan water purifier
derived from a food that can be found in Japan in great
abundance. One simply adds it to turbid water. Poly-Glu
acts as an adsorbent, adhering to excess substances in
the water, and then falls to the bottom as a precipitate,
leaving the water clear. It is necessary to teach people
how to use it correctly at the outset, and Ms. Yeasmin
and other Poly-Glu ladies serve as both salespersons
and instructors.

As members can see, as with what is called a “base of
the pyramid” business, that endeavour is characterized
by the expectations placed on the power of women. By
combining her income with her husband’s, Ms. Yeasmin
has been able to send her children to an institution of
higher education. Poverty caused her to give up on the
dream she had cherished as a little girl of becoming a
doctor someday. But I understand that now she proudly
states she has become a doctor of clean water. Can we

not say that Ms. Yeasmin has acquired self-esteem, the
most precious asset of all? My Government wishes to
create as many Ms. Nilufa Yeasmins as possible.

By the way, the company that makes Poly-Glu is a
very small Japanese company. We will work to enhance
the assistance to such companies and organizations to
allow their ideas to bear fruit.

Finally, there is one more woman I would like to
introduce to everyone in the Hall today, but this Afghan
lady is no longer with us. Her name is Ms. Islam Bibi,
and on 4 July she was gunned down and assassinated.
She was 37 years old and is survived by three children.
Ms. Islam Bibi was a proud female police officer
with the Afghan police. She came to shoulder heavy
responsibilities through her nine years of service. She
guarded polling stations to monitor elections and was a
trainer to young female officers coming after her. We
have much work to be done. However, we must proceed
undaunted.

Under the auspices of the Law and Order Trust Fund
for Afghanistan, Japan has been one of the countries that
have always taken great pains to improve the capacity
of the Afghan police force and cultivate female police
officers, whose number will finally reach 1,800 — still
far from enough. I have renewed my determination to
continue to provide support in order to prevent another
case like that of Islam Bibi.

I wanted to emphasize — through the real-life
example of Ms. Nilufa Yeasmin in Bangladesh — the
necessity of promoting women’s participation in society
and their empowerment. My Government has prioritized
that as its foremost policy and will continue to undertake
highly inventive efforts, including launching start-up
businesses in Africa.

Through her actions, Ms. Tokiko Sato, the
Japanese aid specialist, has highlighted the importance
of maternal, newborn and child health, an MDG
whose attainment has been conspicuously slow. My
Administration will, as its second priority policy area,
engage greater efforts towards women’s health and
medical care.

Finally, what I hoped to convey through the tragic
example of Islam Bibi is the importance of women’s
participation and their protection in the context
of peace and security. Japan intends to promote
measures to ensure women’s participation at all
stages — including in conflict prevention and resolution
and in peacebuilding — and to safeguard their rights
and the physical well-being of women who are exposed
to danger in times of conflict.

I would like to state here that in establishing those
three pillars, the Government of Japan will direct
official development assistance in excess of $3 billion
over the next three years, to target the pillars.

In conclusion, if we were to follow the wisdom
of the so-called “womenomics” theory, as mentioned
earlier, the development concept aimed at cultivating
the power of women would generate greater peace and
well-being in the world. I wish to bring about a society
where women shine, within Japan and in conflict
regions and countries suffering from poverty. In that
context, I do not consider the outlook to be optimistic.
However, I know one thing: in Japan a considerable
number of people are working unsparingly towards that
end. They are the people who are making every effort to
ready themselves to be able to work together, in unity.


Thirteen years ago, the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) established
humanitarian principles for the twenty-first century.
Together, Member States and international organizations
stood for the idea that the world’s poorest nations and
poorest people should not have to live without dignity
and hope.

The world is a different place now. We have
witnessed the struggles of a global economy reeling
from a financial crisis and, indeed, a recession. But
we have seen a billion people lifted out of poverty,
more children in schools, greater care for the sick. And
we have observed a generation born in a new age of
information, ready to embrace ever-expanding frontiers
of technology.

But the transformative effect is not yet complete.
The list of shortcomings is as long as that of the
successes, and as we think about the theme of “The
post-2015 development agenda: setting the stage”, we
must have the courage to go beyond business as usual.
The report of the High-level Panel on the Post-2015
Development Agenda, A New Global Partnership:
Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through
Sustainable Development, has laid out an ambitious
vision for the future, and I congratulate the eminent
persons who worked to produce it.

But together we must now take an honest look
at the MDGs, determine what worked and what did
not, and commit to forging a new global partnership
founded on mutual responsibility and trust. That will
require developing nations to take greater ownership
of the post-2015 agenda. One of the failings of aid has
been the lack of attention to country-specific context
in agreements. So now is the time for the developing
world to make its voice heard in order to shape the
debate and ensure that policies and programmes are
demand-driven.

It will also require Governments to empower those
whose lives we are trying to transform, to give them a

stake in the process and a say in their countries’ progress.
In Rwanda, we have found that empowering local
leaders while demanding accountability is an effective
catalyst of development. But for decentralization to
work, the centre must remain stable. That is why we
continue to place such emphasis on good governance.
It has inspired trust in our institutions and been a
foundation for our development. We know it is the best
way to achieve inclusive and sustainable development.

There must also be a far greater focus on the role of
the private sector and recognition of its power to create
prosperity. For that, we need a global environment
without trade barriers and one that facilitates
investment in infrastructure. Greater investment is
particularly needed in roads, railways and airports
in order to connect domestic markets to regional and
global ones. Investment is also needed in energy.
Electricity, something taken so much for granted in the
developed world, is still a luxury for far too many people
and businesses. Access to knowledge, information
and technology will also play an important role. It is
levelling the economic playing field for developing
countries and is beginning to break the cycle of poverty.

Post-2015 presents an opportunity to turn that new
sense of possibility into a reality, to give people in
developing nations increased opportunity. In Rwanda
we are on course to meet all the MDG targets, but for us
they are the floor, not the ceiling. We remain tireless in
our pursuit of progress, because we know all too well the
cost of failure. Next April, Rwanda will commemorate
the twentieth anniversary of the genocide. Over three
long months, flickers of life went out all over the
country, but today Rwandans are standing strong,
having overcome adversity. In building a new nation,
we have a purpose that is shaped by a tragic past but
focused firmly on the future. And as within the larger
African and world community we move towards the
next chapter of global development, we must create
strong and meaningful partnerships that have a positive
impact on the lives of all. Together, we can make sure
that the post-2015 era is defined by opportunity and
optimism, prosperity and progress, dignity and hope.

On another issue of critical importance, Africans
supported the global consensus against impunity and
the creation of an international justice system to fight
it. We did so on the understanding that such a system
would promote peace and security within and between
nations, and that it would uphold the principle of the
equal sovereignty of nations. In practice, however,
the International Criminal Court (ICC) has flouted
those principles. It has shown an open bias against
Africans. Instead of promoting justice and peace, it
has undermined reconciliation efforts and helped to
humiliate Africans and leaders, as well as serving the
political interests of the powerful.

Nowhere have the shortcomings of the ICC been
more evident than in the ongoing trial of Kenyan leaders.
The people of Kenya have shown their eagerness to heal
the wounds of their past, reconcile and move on. That
is why they elected the current leaders who are on trial.
Those efforts to reconcile their communities and move
forward should be supported, and development of the
national judicial capacity to fight impunity should be
promoted rather than undermined.

The General Assembly and the Security Council
should be examining this matter as well as the wider
issues of universal jurisdiction that have already been
brought before them. That is the least we can do to
uphold the principles of justice and the equality of
nations, support reconciliation processes and respect
the dignity of Africans.