I would like to begin by congratulating Mr. Mogens Lykketoft on his election to the presidency of General Assembly at its seventieth session. He represents a country, Denmark, whose service to the United Nations and the global community has been exemplary. I anticipate that in upholding those fine traditions, Mr. Lykketoft will guide us judiciously as we embark on the journey towards the Organization’s centenary. I assure him of Barbados’ full support as we begin to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1), striving collectively to address the diverse challenges that States Members of the United Nations are facing. I also take this opportunity to express the sincere admiration
of my delegation for the sterling manner in which his predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Sam Kutesa, so ably guided the work of the General Assembly during its sixty-ninth session.
Three score and ten years ago, 50 delegations, assisted by a temporary Secretariat, gathered in San Francisco to sign the Charter that established the United Nations. That was a moment whose consequences have been felt across space and time and resonate with a unique power to this day. Of course, Barbados, like the overwhelming majority of countries that today make up the United Nations, was not among the countries represented in San Francisco on 26 June 1945. Only 50 delegations gathered then, representing, generally speaking, the victors of the Second World War. In stark contrast to that select group gathered on that summer day in 1945, the membership of this Organization today totals 193 States and represents virtually all of humankind.
In Paris in December, 196 delegations, including that of Barbados, will gather for the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. At that meeting, we will agree on collective action that will make possible the continued survival of our planet. That is an existential issue for all countries, but in particular for those like mine that are small island developing States. Our countries stand on the edge of the yawning abyss opened up by climate change. For those who framed the Charter of the United Nations, the cessation of global wars was the single existential threat. While that threat undeniably remains today, it would be to our peril not to accord climate change the same deadly capacity to threaten our planet.
Barbados and all the countries of the Caribbean Community have made clear their views on what should be the outcome of the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties to the Climate Change Convention. All parties should commit to taking individual and collective action to curb greenhouse gas emissions in line with our ambitious goal to hold the average global temperature increase to well below 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, and all parties should commit to cooperating on taking such action and submitting to regular five-year cycles of reporting, verification and updating on mitigation commitments. All parties should also commit to supporting the particularly vulnerable countries, which are the small island developing States and the least developed
8/45 15-29816

02/10/2015 A/70/PV.25
countries. In short, we need an ambitious, high- performance, legally binding agreement with global participation.
The tragedy that struck our sister Caribbean nation of Dominica, battered last month by Tropical Storm Erika, highlights the urgency of an effective global response to climate change. As we have often seen, a single natural or man-made disaster in a small island developing State can have catastrophic economic, infrastructural and humanitarian effects on a national scale, It has been estimated that the damage caused by Erika set Dominica’s development back by 20 years. As Chairman of the Conference of Heads of Government of the Caribbean Community, I take this opportunity to express the region’s unwavering solidarity with and commitment to our brothers and sisters in Dominica, and I call on the international community to continue to help Dominica in its hour of need.
History is a superb teacher. Seventy years on from the creation of the United Nations, it is appropriate that we reflect on the path that small States like mine have helped to prepare. It is a path made possible in large part by the principles that this Organization has embraced from its inception, which are embodied in the Charter and in the many treaties, resolutions and plans of action of the United Nations. It is a path from exclusivity to universality, a path that has seen a near quadrupling of the Organization’s membership in 70 years, and a path towards an international legal order that seeks to balance the rights of States with their responsibilities, including their responsibilities to their citizens.
Without question, those changes combine to reflect a significant and positive transformation of the international system — a transformation that has seen the country that I have the honour to represent move from subordination under colonial status to full sovereignty. In 2016, Barbados will proudly celebrate the fiftieth year of its independence and its membership in the United Nations. The United Nations has provided a forum where all countries, irrespective of their size or geopolitical influence, can meet, discuss and sometimes argue, always on an equal footing.
The transformation of the United Nations has provided the necessary but hardly the sufficient conditions for the Organization to realize the extraordinary promise expressed in the Preamble and Article 1 of the Charter. Member States have by and large failed to eliminate the scourge of war, and
relations among nations are not everywhere friendly. International cooperation has not, by itself, solved many international economic, social, cultural or humanitarian problems, nor has it everywhere encouraged respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The United Nations has not proven able to harmonize the actions of nations in the attainment of those common ends. And for small developing countries in particular, the promised emphasis on development has yet to be fully realized.
Development is a plant of tender growth and cannot flourish in an environment where there is no peace. It is therefore heartening to learn of the reduction of tensions between the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, which was facilitated by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Over the years the tensions between those two countries had the effect of stymying the development potential of Guyana. I should like to take advantage of this opportunity to express my country’s unwavering commitment to the territorial integrity of Guyana and to state our support for a juridical solution to a dispute that has lasted far too long.
Is it permissible to inquire whether the world is a safer and more peaceful place today than it was in 1945? While there have been no world wars of the kind that precipitated the founding of this Organization, proxy wars and internecine, fratricidal conflicts have proliferated. The United Nations has registered many successes in addressing the myriad challenges to peace and security that have confronted the international community over the past 70 years. However, as Member States, it is our responsibility, and ours alone, to ensure that the United Nations is equipped and empowered to do much more.
Like many around the world, we in the Caribbean are deeply concerned about the connected crises of refugees and internally displaced persons. We regret that the international community has failed to take the firm political action necessary to bring those crises to an end. We underscore that if people are able to live in peace and security and in an environment that respects their human rights, they will feel less compelled to flee their countries, which they have often done under conditions that place their lives, and those of their children, in peril. We cannot afford to be indifferent. As Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel has noted: “Indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor.”
15-29816 9/45

A/70/PV.25 02/10/2015
I have described the contours of an international system radically different from the one established when the United Nations was born 70 years ago. Collectively and individually, we struggle to address many of the problems that we now face.
In 2013, the General Assembly adopted the Arms Trade Treaty (resolution 68/31) to regulate international trade in conventional weapons, with the expectation that it will contribute to the prevention and eradication of the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. Through the determined efforts of the countries of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and other like-minded States, small arms and light weapons and their ammunition, parts and components were included in the scope of the Treaty. Barbados was, therefore, pleased to ratify the Arms Trade Treaty in May of this year.
In July of this year, under the presidency of New Zealand, the Security Council held its first-ever open debate on the particular peace and security challenges facing small island developing States (see S/PV.7499). At that meeting, Barbados indicated that it has always opposed, and continues strongly to oppose, the proliferation and use of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. However, for countries like Barbados, the real weapons of mass destruction are small arms and light weapons, and our focus is necessarily on the trade in those weapons, which often goes arm-in-arm with the traffic in illicit drugs and other forms of organized crime. Both have the capacity to seriously undermine our economies and destabilize our societies. Barbados welcomes the initiative and persistence that made possible the adoption of the Arms Trade Treaty and commits to playing its part in addressing global peace and security challenges.
Also in July of this year, we adopted the Addis Ababa Action Agenda (resolution 69/313, annex), which provides a series of bold measures to overhaul global finance practices and generate investments for tackling a range of economic, social and environmental challenges.
Finally, last week we adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1), which formulates a new development agenda based on the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. The link between the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda is clear: the former sets out the Goals and the latter the means of their attainment. One without the other is bereft of meaning.
I take this opportunity to connect those important initiatives to a concern that the countries of the Caribbean Community and others have been expressing for some time, most recently during our meeting of Heads of Government in July, which, this year, Barbados had the honour to host. The United Nations and the international financial institutions must address the matter of the graduation of middle-income countries, such as Barbados, from access to concessionary and grant-based financing. Now, we contend, is the time to develop and utilize appropriate measurements for development that go beyond a simplistic reliance on a country’s gross domestic product per capita.
It was with especial pleasure that we received the news earlier this year that, 43 years after Barbados and three other CARICOM member States —Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica and Guyana — had ended their diplomatic isolation of Cuba, the United States of America has decided to do the same. For Barbados, that must be seen as a positive development, as we have been calling consistently, insistently and persistently since 1972 for an end to the economic embargo, which has not only retarded the development of Cuba but has also cheated its people of the opportunity to fulfil their aspirations, as they should. My delegation congratulates President Barack Obama of the United States of America for the hindsight, the insight, and the foresight that informed his decision and looks forward to the process of Cuba’s total embrace through the removal, in the near future, of the economic embargo.
In a similar vein, it is not without significance that 21 months before we adopted the 2030 Agenda, the General Assembly adopted resolution 68/237, which proclaimed the International Decade for People of African Descent, under the theme, “People of African descent: recognition, justice and development”, commencing on 1 January 2015 and ending on 31 December 2024. The Decade was launched by the Secretary-General in December 2014, with the keynote address delivered by Barbadian Professor Sir Hilary Beckles, then Pro- Vice Chancellor of the University of the West Indies. My delegation confidently expects that as we pursue the Sustainable Development Goals, due regard will be accorded to the reparative justice contemplated not only by the theme of that very important Decade, but also by its specific mention in the programme of activities for the implementation of the Decade.
Permit me to reach back again into our Organization’s history, for it continues to illuminate our
10/45 15-29816

02/10/2015 A/70/PV.25
present and to set out the way forward for our future. When he took office as the first Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Norwegian diplomat, Trygve Lie, said at one of the earliest meetings of the General Assembly, on 2 February 1946:
“The purpose of the United Nations is the maintenance of peace in an atmosphere of international security and general well-being ... But there is a close connection between the peace problem and the economic and social conditions of the countries of the world.” (A/PV.22, p. 325)
Barbados, a small island developing State, has been and remains a staunch supporter of the United Nations, committed to the principles of multilateralism and the sovereign equality of States and to the inextricable link between peace and security, on the one hand, and economic and social development, on the other. Today those principles, we are proud to say, are nowhere better reflected than in the ideals to which States Members of the United Nations still subscribe in their collective march to promote, for the peoples of the world, social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.


Seventy years ago, this Organization was born out of the chaos and ruins of the Second World War. It was born with the hope and a vision that the future would be better and more peaceful than the past. Small and large countries signed the Charter of the United Nations; my own country was signatory number 50. It was a commitment to solving common problems through cooperation and dialogue. How is today’s world compared to that of our grandparents? The answer is simple. Much progress has been made.
We live in a world that is wealthier. Millions have been lifted out of poverty. There is a dramatic increase in the number of children — and in particular girls — attending schools. We continue to witness horrible conflicts in many parts of the world, but the number and magnitude of armed conflicts between States have decreased. Our fight against deadly diseases has saved millions. This is one side of the coin. We also live in a changing world. Conflicts remain the greatest threat to human development. The number of refugees and displaced persons is growing at an alarming speed. Violent extremism is spreading. Human rights are being violated. Our planet is under stress due to scarce resources and climate change. That is the other side of the coin.
The world is complex, as it has always been. There are no simple solutions and there never were. We need to engage actively and cooperate closely to address the challenges today, as we did 70 years ago. From my perspective, there are three main priorities for the United Nations in the coming years. First, peace and security. Like many others in my generation, my political view of the world was shaped by 1989. The wall came down. The Iron Curtain disappeared. Today, once again, the world faces a situation where cooperation and dialogue are all too often replaced by force and violence. We must ensure that the United Nations can effectively provide security in the face of ever more complex crises and threats.
In Ukraine, we have seen completely unacceptable violations of international law and principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. In Syria, civilians suffer from horrific abuses committed by the terrorist organization, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and by the Al-Assad regime. The Danish Government continues to support efforts for a political solution to the conflict, and we are proud to be a member of the international coalition against ISIL. We need a strong and unified response to violent extremism and terrorism, not just in Syria and Iraq, but also in parts of Africa, where violent extremism and armed conflicts are growing. Denmark will do its part. We plan to increase our contribution to the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali.
Massive refugee and migration flows are a visible consequence of these conflicts. Almost 60 million people are fleeing their homes. We have an international responsibility to provide the necessary protection
for refugees. Many of them have no food, medicine, schools for their children or hope for the future. They need our support. Denmark takes this responsibility very seriously. Last year, we were the second-largest recipient of Syrian refugees, per capita, in the European Union.
I also welcome the initiative of the Secretary- General to strengthen United Nations peace operations, but we need more than Blue Helmets to ensure lasting peace. We need a Security Council that is ready to take the necessary decisions to maintain international peace and security, and effectively address conflicts in a timely manner and that reflects the world as it is today. The international community must have the right instruments to adequately tackle the situation, and we must keep an open mind when we evaluate the instruments we have at hand.
Many people migrate for economic reasons, in search of a better life, and their hopes are indeed understandable. But mass migration is obviously an immense challenge for our societies, our international cooperation and our solidarity. First and foremost, mass migration is a global challenge, and we must address its root causes. People migrate because they have lost hope at home. Inclusive economic growth in developing countries should be our common goal. There are no easy solutions.
The United Nations is an important part of the answer. Member States have the primary responsibility for development and progress in their own countries. But we must all do our part and provide the necessary financial contributions to ensure that they succeed. Denmark is ready to do its part, as we have done since 1978. We remain committed to the United Nations target of providing development assistance amounting to 0.7 per cent of our gross domestic product. Denmark is widely recognized as a leading humanitarian donor, and we will continue to give the area high priority. Last week, my Government decided to allocate an additional €100 million to humanitarian assistance and to measures that support European efforts to address the mass migration from Syria and its neighbourhood. I am deeply concerned about the probability that the humanitarian needs associated with this will far outgrow the available financing, and I call on all States to increase their humanitarian efforts. The international community must find solutions to this extraordinary situation.
That leads me to our next priority, human rights and gender equality. The Charter of the United Nations says very clearly that the equal and indispensable rights of all people are the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. The best way to build a better world is to unleash the power of the individual for the sake of the common good. Today, more people live in democracies than ever before, but the lives of many are still threatened because of who they are or what they believe. Denmark has always pursued an active human rights policy, based on dialogue as the key tool to progress.
My Government is a strong advocate of women’s rights. Women are key drivers in our efforts to ensure sustainable development and end poverty. Denmark will have the honour of hosting the Women Deliver Conference in May of next year, and I hope that many of those here will join us in Copenhagen. Denmark is also engaged in the global fight against torture, and we are proud to be part of the Convention against Torture Initiative, whose goal is universal ratification and better implementation of the Convention by 2024. We call on all States to join with us in working for that goal.
To put it clearly, Denmark is entirely committed to upholding the core values of the United Nations. That is why we have decided to run for a seat on the Human Rights Council for the period from 2019 to 2021. Our candidacy enjoys the support of all the Nordic countries, and I hope all here today will find us worthy of their vote. I can assure them that we will aspire to be a strong partner for all in advancing human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The third and final major challenge for the United Nations is implementing the development agenda and effectively addressing climate change. This weekend, I had the privilege and honour of co-chairing the Sustainable Development Summit. We have adopted the new 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1), and now we need to act, through national policies and by supporting the countries that need the most help. The Sustainable Development Goals carry a multi-trillion-dollar price tag, and that cannot be met by Governments or aid alone. We need the support of all actors — private enterprises, civil society, non-governmental and international organizations and many others. We must find new and innovative ways of engaging these actors if we are serious about delivering on the development agenda.
That is particularly true when it comes to addressing climate change. To give a small example, Denmark has established a climate investment fund to promote private investments in developing countries and emerging markets. Danish pension savings now contribute to financing Africa’s largest wind farm, in Lake Turkana in Kenya. We need more such solutions if we are to deliver on the development agenda and reach an ambitious, binding climate agreement in Paris later this year.
The need for an effective United Nations has never been greater. If we fail to deal with the enormous tasks facing us, there is a risk that we will undermine the key values and principles of the Charter. Throughout the history of the United Nations, Denmark has been one of the strongest supporters of our world Organization, and that will not change. I am honoured that a Dane has assumed the presidency of the General Assembly, and my Government is fully committed to supporting Mr. Lykketoft in his important work.
Seventy years ago our grandparents had a bold vision. They believed it was possible to create a better future for the peoples of the world. The achievements during those 70 years have been remarkable. This anniversary is a historic opportunity to set ambitious goals for the future. We have agreed on a new development agenda. Now we must act to show our grandchildren that we are able to deliver on our promises today, tomorrow and 70 years from now.


I bring you, Sir, and the Assembly warm fraternal and sisterly greetings from the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, the country which one of our most famous sons, the Reverend Dr. Myles Munroe, now sadly deceased, described as the place where God resides.
I would like to pause just for a few minutes to acknowledge the expressions of concern that have come from across the world about the fact that there is a hurricane sitting over the southern part of the Bahamas. There has been considerable flooding. We have not heard of any loss of life. There is likely to be some property damage. I suppose that by morning we will know the true impact of the hurricane. I would like to thank the Assembly for its expressions of concern.
We return this year, on the seventieth anniversary of the Organization, to reaffirm the values we committed to in 1973 when we subscribed to the Charter of the United Nations — from democracy, the rule of law, the protection of the weak and vulnerable to the elimination of all forms of discrimination. Each year at this time we join the struggle anew to fight to uphold those values. Tonight, I pause to reflect on the progress we have made in some areas.
This year, for example, marks the thirtieth year since the Nassau Accord was agreed and signed by the Heads of Government of the Commonwealth of Nations in our capital city, in October 1985. That Accord led to a comprehensive set of sanctions on the apartheid regime of South Africa and helped free Nelson Mandela and establish full democracy in the Republic of South Africa.
As we look back, despite the world’s troubles, we can repeat the words of the old African American preacher: “I know we ain’t what we want to be, but thank God we ain’t what we was.” I also repeat the concerns that I raised last year: the environment, climate change, crime and security, the economy and the development of our young people (see A/69/PV.20).
I want to turn to the Sustainable Development Goals. Our Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Perry Christie, was among the world leaders who last week unanimously adopted the ambitious, transformative and universal 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1), which will chart our way forward for the next 15 years and solidify and reaffirm our commitment to the pillars of the Organization and to environmental protection.
With respect to crime and security, I recall the words of a former Prime Minister of Jamaica, the late Michael Manley, who often spoke of a symbiotic relationship between the developed world and the Caribbean region. He said that each year, millions of people from the developed world travelled to our region to have a peaceful, quiet and salubrious vacation. That, he argued, was a benefit to them. The Caribbean region, including the Bahamas, provides a tourist experience that is unparalleled in the world. However, the world must pay attention to the underlying development issues that the region faces, lest that benefit be threatened. For example, we must stop the escalating crime and violence from drug trafficking, human trafficking and smuggling and juvenile gangs. That is why we have
18/26 15-29876

01/10/2015 A/70/PV.24
been so strong in our support of the small arms trade treaty. The carnage of our young people, which is due in particular to the fact that guns are easily available to young males, is not acceptable and is unsustainable.
The Bahamas was pleased to have participated actively in the First Conference of States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), held in Mexico in August. While we are disappointed that the ATT secretariat will not be located in our region, in our sister Caribbean Community (CARICOM) country of Trinidad and Tobago, we, nevertheless, are committed to the full and effective implementation of that Treaty. We call on the producers of these weapons to do more to stop their illegal export to our region and end the carnage. As Mr. Manley rightly pointed out many years ago, the developed world will not be immune if the matter is not brought under control.
With regard to development and reform, there can be no economic and social development unless we achieve gender equality and empower women and girls. The Bahamas is committed to this achievement and empowerment and has actively participated in various meetings on gender equality and the advancement of women, regionally and here at the United Nations. We were represented on 27 September at the Global Leaders Meeting on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment by our Minister for Gender Affairs, the Honourable Melanie Griffin. The Bahamas is proud to have now ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocols to the Convention of the Rights of the Child. These acts, in our view, enhance our commitment to human rights.
Scales of assessment for peacekeeping are being reviewed. The Bahamas attaches great importance to the United Nations peacekeeping operations as these, in part, underpin the purposes of the United Nations. It remains fully committed to meeting its financial obligations to the Organization in a full and timely manner and without any conditions. The Bahamas is, however, of the view that those scales of assessment should take into consideration the unique circumstances of small island developing States, particularly those that are most vulnerable. It also maintains that gross domestic product and gross national income per capita, should not serve as the main component in determining the levels of assessment for peacekeeping operations and, furthermore, that no developing country should be categorized above level C.
I would now like to address the issues of human rights, the human rights aspects of national development and the fact that we are presenting our candidature for election to the Human Rights Council. With the same critical sense of direction, commitment and urgency expressed earlier with regard to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and reform within the Organization, the Bahamas is actively crafting, with a critical eye, a 25-year citizen-driven national development plan — Vision 2040. The national development plan will provide a comprehensive overview of the economy, set policy direction for economic growth and identify strategies, programmes and projects to improve the overall health and sustainability of the Bahamian economy. It is being led by one of our young Ministers, Khaalis Rolle. It will also reinvigorate our national outlook and set new priorities for our international engagement going forward. We will enhance our expertise in the areas of maritime affairs and ocean conservation, environmental sustainability and economic and tax matters to assist in the further development and execution of our national priorities, both regionally and internationally. We are continuing to try to build a stronger Bahamas.
The Bahamas is seeking a seat on the Human Rights Council in the election to be held on 28 October. The Bahamas is the first State member of the Caribbean Community and the first English-speaking country in the Latin American and Caribbean region to do so. We do not do so lightly. Our election to the Human Rights Council would provide a unique opportunity to bring balance in the promotion and consideration of global human rights issues in that we would provide the perspective of a small State. We hope that we can count on the support of Member States for our candidature for election both to the Human Rights Council and to the Council of the International Maritime Organization.
I speak up again this year for the right of the people of the Turks and Caicos islands to self-determination. The Bahamas is among those justly demanding reparations for the damage inflicted on Caribbean societies by slavery. In the words of our poet and singer Tony McKay: “I come to collect everything that you owe me ... pay me what you owe me.” The Bahamas supports our sister CARICOM State, Belize, in its quest to live within secure and recognized borders. Similarly, we are deeply concerned about the attempt to undermine the territorial integrity of our sister CARICOM State, Guyana.
15-29876 19/26

A/70/PV.24 01/10/2015
The Bahamas is pleased at the rapprochement between the United States of America and Cuba. President Barack Obama of the United States has made the right, courageous decision. This enhances the peace in our neighbourhood, and our officials are working with Cuba on synergies for the development of our economies. This year we will once again support an end to the economic embargo when the draft resolution is voted on in the General Assembly.
Concerning the environment and climate change, I would like to say that we welcome the launch on 30 September of the Small Island Developing States Sustainable Energy Initiative (SIDS DOCK), which was jointly developed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre and the secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme, in cooperation with the Alliance of Small Island States. SIDS DOCK is meant to assist small island developing States in the Pacific and Caribbean regions in addressing the effects of climate change, providing them with a collective institutional mechanism to help them transform their national energy sectors into catalysts for sustainable economic development and generating financial resources for addressing adaptation to climate change.
We affirm our commitment to a binding agreement in Paris at the forthcoming Climate Change Conference and urge all countries to work to that end. As I said earlier, even as we speak the Bahamas is under the threat of flooding and a hurricane. When one realizes that 80 per cent of our land is lower than five feet above sea level, one understands that a tidal surge is certainly an existential threat to our country and an example of a threat posed by climate change. We urge continued support for the people of Dominica, our sister CARICOM State, which suffered enormous damage and loss of life from Tropical Storm Erika in August. We would also like to express our solidarity with the people of Chile, who suffered damage and loss of life during the recent earthquake there.
Migration and the global refugee crisis are an increasing problem around the world. In the view of the Bahamas, we are facing the most pressing refugee crisis since the Second World War. In recent months, we have seen hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees from conflict- and war-torn areas throughout the Middle East embarking on perilous journeys in their search for refuge in Western Europe.
For the Bahamas, illegal migration through its territory is an awful reality. We are resolute in our task
of ensuring that migration is lawful, safe and orderly, and that it involves increased dialogue and greater participation in the process by all countries of origin, transit and destination. We are equally mindful of our international obligations, in tandem with our sovereign right to protect our borders. We strive to ensure that respect for human rights is integral to our migration policies. The Bahamas will, however, take all measures within the law and international norms to protect its borders and ensure that it is not overrun by illegal migrants.
I end with a plea for the young people of the world. We must commit to them afresh, here at the United Nations. They are the future, and everything we do must be done keeping in mind the fact that, whether we like it or not, we are handing things over to them. Now is the time to act to end their sense of hopelessness and their joblessness. The Prime Minister of the Bahamas said it here again last week: if we ignore them, we do so at our peril (see A/70/PV.4).
Back in 1919, the Irish poet William Butler Yeats, speaking to his generation, lamented that the centre could not hold. That poem was written before the United Nations came into being. Today, this body is at the centre of the human endeavour, so let us ensure that the centre does hold. The Bahamas is committed to the United Nations and to a sustainable future for our world. Where better than in this building, and who better than the United Nations? I say again, now more than ever we need the United Nations.


At the outset, allow me to congratulate His Excellency Mr. Mogens Lykketoft, as well as his country, the Kingdom of Denmark, on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly. With his wisdom and experience, I am confident that he will successfully steer the proceedings of the Assembly. I assure him of my delegation’s cooperation and support.
I would also like to extend my heartfelt thanks to His Excellency Mr. Sam Kutesa, who has just concluded his mission as President of the Assembly at its sixty- ninth session. Mr. Kutesa worked tirelessly to promote the work of the General Assembly and we are grateful to him for his dedicated service.
Finally, I would like to thank our Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Ban Ki-moon, for his leadership, dedication and personal commitment to advancing the agenda of the Organization.
I take this opportunity to pay a warm tribute to the memory of His Excellency Mr. Roble Olhaye, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Djibouti to the United Nations and Ambassador of the Republic of Djibouti to the United States. My country and I myself have lost a brother and a great patriot. The United Nations family has also lost a colleague and a friend. The late Roble Olhaye was the epitome of a seasoned and experienced diplomat. His background is impressive; his life rich in teachings and his success immense. I would like to particularly emphasize his constant struggle for economic and commercial development for the African continent. He represented our country and all of Africa with pride. The grief and
sorrow we feel today following his death are alleviated by the many expressions of respect and compassion we have received from around the world. He be profoundly missed by all. May God Almighty welcome him into his eternal paradise.
It is a great honour for me to take the floor before the Assembly of peoples to celebrate, with men and women of all countries, races, languages and cultures, the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. When the Charter of the United Nations was drafted in 1946, it sent a message of hope for tomorrow from one of the darkest chapters in human history. It symbolized, in fact, the international community’s aspiration for peace and cooperation. This year, we celebrate not only the seventieth birthday of our beloved Organization, which is a historic date in itself, but also the twentieth anniversary of the Fourth World Conference on Women and the fifteenth anniversary of the adoption of the Millennium Declaration.
This is a crucial year that carries many hopes. Despite the sustained efforts made to achieve a world of prosperity, equity, freedom, dignity and peace for all people, we all know, unfortunately, we still have a long way to go. The international community undeniably remains faced with an unprecedented range of major challenges: poverty and hunger, persistent unemployment and violent armed conflict, and climate change. As recently as last year, we saw the health-care systems of brotherly countries being overwhelmed by new terrible threats, such as the Ebola virus, while new challenges have emerged constantly threatening peace and security. We will have the opportunity to return to this, but allow me now to address the implications of the macroeconomic fragility in the global economy, the many and varied challenges facing our country and the importance of establishing a credible and beneficial multilateral trading system for all.
The global economic and financial environment is more alarming than ever. The 2008 financial and economic crisis has had multidimensional consequences and many developing countries continue to face difficult macroeconomic situations. Any response designed to resolve this situation should take into account the special needs of Africa, and especially those of the least developed countries, and ensure that the commitments undertaken at international meetings can be implemented.
15-29568 9/33

A/70/PV.20 30/09/2015
In that regard, we continue to observe with concern the current difficulties faced by States members of the World Trade Organization in efforts to identify ways and means to overcome the impasse in the Doha Round of negotiations and establish a significant post-Bali programme of work. Major issues are at stake because it is our responsibility to build a credible multilateral trading system that enables everyone, in particular developing countries, to identify their objectives in the areas of industrialization and the structural transformation of their economies.
Climate change is not only the greatest challenge that humankind faces, but also the most important one of our day in terms of development. It threatens to undermine life for future generations. The many meetings on climate change and the lack of progress achieved illustrate the extent to which this issue is a source of controversy and division. It is true that our claims are legitimate and understandable. However, it is also true that Africa has more to lose than others. That is why we are ready to assume our responsibility to reduce our emissions and we hope that the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities will be scrupulously respected.
Each region has its specificities and environmental concerns that are not necessarily the same as those of countries in other regions. My country is particularly exposed to many natural hazards, the most frequent and destructive being droughts and floods. The Republic of Djibouti, despite its marginal contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, is contributing to global efforts to fight against this devastating scourge. To that end, we recently hosted a conference in partnership with the Climate and Energy Institute of the prestigious Yale University, which has developed a very relevant climate model illustrating all the scenarios of the climate change impact on our region.
It is in this spirit that we proposed to establish and host in Djibouti a regional environmental observatory. Moreover, my country has for several years carried out a policy of renewable energy use with the stated goal of excluding fossil fuels by the year 2020. That is why, together with Ethiopia, we have already put in place a hydropower project and begun to use the tremendous potential of our country’s geothermal, wind, solar and tidal energy.
The environment is a cross-cutting and transnational element. Consequently and logically, we need cross-
cutting, transnational and interdisciplinary policies commensurate with the challenge. It is therefore time to adopt just, fair and scientific climate goals. We hope that the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which will be held soon in Paris, will mark a decisive turning point.
Violent extremism is the product of a deadly ideology that openly advocates the destruction and elimination of others on behalf of a supposed religious belief, whereas Islam is a religion which essentially advocates openness, tolerance and love of one’s neighbour. Our region, East Africa, is one of the primary targets of terrorist attacks. Al-Shabaab poses a major threat to our region and is at the root of terrorist attacks and many attempted attacks in most countries of our region. This painful experience has enabled us to develop a knowledge of the workings, practices and strategies of terrorist groups, which deserves to be shared.
The causes that encourage the spread of the scourge of extremism and, in effect, terrorist groups, are deep and diverse. Cracks and fractures seen in the international security architecture and conflict zones in the Middle East and Africa, as well as economic hardship, extreme poverty and the perception, justified or not, of marginalization, all generate a feeling of uncertainty and a strong desire to belong that can make groups sensitive to the extremist rhetoric and lead to violent attacks. We all know the human costs and the countless security, economic and social problems that they bring about.
Yesterday, President Obama took the initiative to organize a summit on this topic, which concerns us all. We thank him for that because the international context shows us the need and relevance of such consultations on a daily basis. No country can fight this scourge alone, because terrorism knows no borders. To neutralize this threat, we must work together concretely and decisively. Strategies to combat and prevent extremist violence must be perfectly calibrated while also avoiding overreaction. They must be based on an analysis of the root causes and an understanding of the reasons driving extremism.
Governments, regional and international organizations, religious leaders and leaders of academia and civil society must join forces to strengthen resilience in the face of terrorism and establish security and stability
10/33 15-29568

30/09/2015 A/70/PV.20
in our countries. In that regard, my country will soon create, within the framework of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, a centre of excellence to combat violent extremism. The centre will seek to strengthen the capacities of governmental and non-governmental actors and provide a space for dialogue and a platform for the exchange of information among researchers and specialists.
Since 2008, the Member States represented in this Hall have witnessed the tense and so far unresolved situation prevailing in the north of my country following the unjustified and incomprehensible occupation by Eritrean forces of part of our territory. Members of my Government and I have come here on several occasions to brief the international community about the situation and to inform it about the unreasonable behaviour of Eritrea, which continues to ignore the gravity of the situation and reject any attempts at discussion. To resolve this conflict peacefully, my country, from the beginning, has sought out the good offices of the African Union, the League of Arab States, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the United Nations. We finally agreed to mediation by His Highness the Amir of the State of Qatar, in the belief that Eritrea would listen to reason, but that was in vain.
To date, more than five years after the signing of the mediation Agreement, we are still awaiting the demarcation of the border and the return of our prisoners of war. Despite the call to reason by the international community and the adoption of resolutions 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and 2023 (2011), Eritrea has refused to recognize the existence of Djiboutian prisoners, even though two of them have, fortunately, managed to escape. This attitude of denial, even after the return and the testimony of these prisoners, and the refusal of any discussion is contrary to international standards and conduct. It demonstrates the danger that this country represents for the region and the international community as a whole. My country has always managed to preserve peace and we believe in the virtues of dialogue and mediation. However, the territorial integrity of my country is non-negotiable.
With regard to Yemen, we are deeply concerned about the tragic situation currently facing that brotherly country and especially about the deterioration of the humanitarian situation, which has been catastrophic since the beginning of the conflict. The Republic of Djibouti reaffirms its solidarity with the Yemeni
people and has taken all necessary measures to assist and welcome the displaced people fleeing the fighting.
The situation prevailing today in Yemen is the result of the refusal of the rebellion to accept and respect the political transition period, as negotiated during the National Dialogue process. By taking up arms, they have wrought havoc in this country and have forced the legitimate President to leave the country. We condemn the actions of the rebellion and especially the threats that these elements pose to the unity, integrity, stability and sovereignty of Yemen. In addition, the escalating violence in Yemen is a grave threat to the security and stability of the region and opens up a new front of radicalization, including the rise in power of Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula along our eastern border, which poses a distinct threat to my country throughout the Bab-al-Mandab strait.
In this connection, we welcome the military intervention of brotherly countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council, led by Saudi Arabia in Yemen, at the request of President Hadi Mansour. We thank Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and, through him, Mr. Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, his Special Envoy for Yemen, for their dedication and the tireless efforts they have shown since the beginning this conflict. We ask the United Nations to redouble its efforts and the activities of its good offices to enable the resumption of a peaceful political transition process because the settlement of the crisis in Yemen requires dialogue. Lastly, we urge all Yemeni parties to participate in good faith in the dialogue being conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.
Despite the difficulties and daily obstacles of which we are all aware, Somalia has made significant progress, most notably in federal training and the establishment of regional administrations and an independent National Electoral Commission. However, the Somali Government still faces significant challenges. It is clear to us that rebuilding Somalia depends on guaranteeing a stable security environment. Of course, over the past two years, great progress has been made on the ground, but the extremist threat remains in view of the increase in attacks in recent months. The attack on 26 July against Jazeera Hotel is proof of that.
Such attacks have demonstrated that the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) needs the support of the Somali security forces. I therefore reiterate our belief that establishing a properly equipped, trained
15-29568 11/33

A/70/PV.20 30/09/2015
and led Somali army that, above all, benefits from the necessary financial support is imperative. Indeed, the project to integrate armed elements into a regular force capable of responding to threats to the unity and territorial integrity of Somalia should, in my view, be a priority for the Somali Government and for the international community. I take this opportunity to commend the tireless efforts and heavy sacrifices made by AMISOM troops and Somali forces, despite the gravity of the security situation.
We feel the scale of the Palestinian suffering in our very being. We are all aware that, after more than half a century of tragedy and resistance, the Palestinian people continue to suffer from the Israeli occupation and to live in inhumane conditions before our eyes. Each time a glimmer of hope of resuming peace negotiations appears, the Israeli State puts an end to it by resuming the building of new settlements. We, as Governments and members of the General Assembly, have a moral duty and political responsibility to say “no” and to give these brotherly Palestine people the right to be free from occupation, the right to live in dignity and peace and the right to aspire to the goals that each and everyone of us has. An independent and viable Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital and full membership of the United Nations, is an imperative for peace and stability in that region and will change the course and image of history.
It is undeniable that we are now at a crucial moment in the history of our Organization and that the world in which we live is very different from that of 1945. It is also undeniable that this evolution requires us to adapt to new and changing realities. In that regard, the revitalization of the General Assembly and Security Council reform are paramount. We welcome, in this regard, the adoption by the General Assembly of resolution 69/321 on the revitalization of its work. Following the landmark achievement of the founding fathers of creating the United Nations, we must tirelessly pursue our quest to fulfil all the promises contained in their visions.
With regard to Security Council reform, it is imperative that at the start of the seventieth anniversary of the Organization, the African continent, which has the largest number of countries, have a permanent voice in the conduct of international affairs. That is why my country reiterates its full commitment to the conclusions of the Summit of the African Union Committee of Ten Heads of State, held on 9 May in Livingstone,
Zambia, in particular the need to continue promoting the Africa Common Position on United Nations reform and on preserving the unity of the Group of African States. Over 15 years after its adoption, the Ezulwini Consensus remains relevant, especially in this context where African issues are more than ever on the Security Council’s agenda.


The seventieth anniversary of the United Nations is a good opportunity both to consider our history and to talk about our collective future. In 1945, the countries that had defeated Nazism united their efforts to lay firm foundations for the post-war world order. I should point out here that the key decisions about the principles for guiding cooperation among States and the creation of the United Nations were made in our country, at the meeting in Yalta of the leaders of the coalition against Hitler. The Yalta system emerged out of genuine travail, paid for with tens of millions of lives and the two world wars that engulfed the world in the twentieth century. And in all fairness to it, it has helped humankind traverse the turbulent and sometimes dramatic events of the past seven decades and has spared the world major cataclysms.
The United Nations is an Organization unique in its legitimacy, representativeness and universality. True, it has recently been much criticized for its perceived insufficient effectiveness and for decision-making on fundamental issues that can be stymied by insuperable differences, particularly among members of the Security Council. I would like to point out, however, that over the 70 years of the existence of the United Nations there have always been disagreements, and the right to the veto has always been exercised — by the United States, Great Britain, France, China, the Soviet Union and later Russia, alike. That is entirely natural for such a diverse and representative Organization. When the United Nations was established, there was

no suggestion that unanimity would reign. Indeed, the essence of the Organization consists in seeking and reaching compromise. Its strength lies in taking account of different opinions and points of view. The decisions that are discussed in the United Nations are either adopted as resolutions or they are not. As the diplomats say, they either go through or do not go through. Any action on the part of any State that bypasses that procedure is illegitimate and runs counter to the Charter of the United Nations and in defiance of international law.
We all know that a single dominating power centre emerged in the world after the end of the Cold War. Those who found themselves at the top of that pyramid were tempted to think that if they were so strong and exceptional, they knew better than anyone else what should be done. As a consequence, they thought, why should they bother with the United Nations, which instead of automatically sanctioning and legitimizing necessary decisions frequently just stands in the way or, as we say, gets underfoot? It has become commonplace to say that the Organization, as originally conceived, has become obsolete and that its historical mission has been accomplished.
The world is changing, of course, and the United Nations must keep up with that natural transformation. Russia is ready to work on that, based on a broad consensus with all its partners, but we consider efforts to undermine the authority and legitimacy of the United Nations to be extremely dangerous. They could lead to the collapse of the entire architecture of international relations. Then we would indeed be left with no rules beyond might is right. That would be a world ruled by selfishness rather than collective effort; a world ever more dictatorial and less about equality, genuine democracy and freedom; a world where an ever-growing number of de facto protectorates and externally controlled territories would replace truly independent States.
What, after all, is State sovereignty, about which some of our colleagues have already spoken? More than anything it is about freedom — the freedom of every person, people or State to choose their own destiny. And by the way, the issue of the so-called legitimacy of State power also falls into this category. We should never play with words or manipulate them. Every term of international law and international affairs should be clear and transparent and possess uniformly understood criteria.
We are all different, and we should respect that. Nobody is obliged to conform once and for all to a single model of development that someone has deemed to be the only right one. We should all remember what we have learned from past experience. For example, we remember instances from the history of the Soviet Union. Attempts to export social experiments and to push for change in one country or another based on our own ideological positions often led to tragic consequences and to deterioration rather than progress.
It seems, however, that no one learns from others’ mistakes. They just repeat them, and the export of revolutions, this time so-called democratic revolutions, continues. We have only to look at the situation in the Middle East and North Africa, which the speaker before me discussed. Certainly, the political and social problems of the region have been brewing for a long time, and people there naturally wanted change.
But how has it actually turned out? Instead of reforming Government institutions, aggressive foreign interference has resulted in the abrupt destruction of the very fabric of life. Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress we got violence, poverty and social catastrophe. And human rights, including the right to life, are simply ignored. One cannot help wanting to ask those who created this situation if they at least realize now what they have done. But I am afraid the question would go unanswered, because policies based on complacency and a belief in one’s exceptionality and impunity are never abandoned.
It is now obvious that the power vacuum that has appeared in a number of the countries of the Middle East and North Africa has led to the emergence of areas of anarchy that immediately began to fill with extremists and terrorists. Tens of thousands of militants are now fighting under the banners of the so-called Islamic State. They include former Iraqi servicemen who were thrown out into the street in the wake of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Another supplier of recruits is Libya, whose statehood was destroyed as a result of a gross violation of Security Council resolution 1973 (2011). And now members of the so-called moderate Syrian opposition, supported by the West, are joining the radical ranks. First they arm and train them, and now they are defecting to the so-called Islamic State. Indeed, the Islamic State itself did not come from nowhere. It, too, was initially forged as a tool against undesirable secular regimes. Having established a foothold in Syria and Iraq, the Islamic State is actively expanding into
other regions, with the aim of dominating the Islamic world, and not just there. It is clearly not limiting itself to those plans alone.
The situation is more than dangerous. In such circumstances, it is hypocritical and irresponsible to make loud declarations about the threat of international terrorism while turning a blind eye to the channels that are financing and supporting terrorists, including through the proceeds of drug trafficking and illicit trading in oil and arms, or to attempt to manipulate extremist groups and make them do one’s bidding in order to achieve one’s own political goals, in the hope of dealing with them — or, to put it more simply, liquidating them — later. What I have to say to those people is this: Sirs, while you are certainly dealing with cruel people, they are in no way stupid or primitive. They are just as smart as you, and you cannot yet tell who is using whom for his own ends. The recent information on the transfer of arms to the terrorists by that moderate opposition itself is the best proof of that.
We believe that any attempt to flirt with terrorists, let alone arm them, is not just short-sighted; it is incendiary. It could result in a dramatic increase in the global terrorist threat and its critical spread to new regions, especially considering the fact that militants from many countries, including Europe, are passing through Islamic State training camps. Nor, unfortunately, I must admit frankly to my colleagues, is Russia an exception. We cannot allow such criminals, who have already smelled blood, to return home and continue their evil deeds there. We do not want that. And after all, would anyone want that?
Russia has always been firm and consistent in opposing terrorism in all its forms. Today we are providing military and technical assistance to Iraq, Syria and other countries of the region that are fighting terrorist groups. We think it is an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian authorities and the State armed forces, who are valiantly combating terrorism face to face. Finally, we should acknowledge that no one except President Al-Assad’s Government armed forces and the Kurdish militia is truly fighting the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria. We are aware of all the problems and contradictions in the region, but we must nonetheless be realistic.
I feel obliged to point out that Russia’s honest and straightforward approach has recently been used as a pretext for accusing us of harbouring increasing ambitions — as if the people saying that have no
ambitions at all themselves. But the real issue is not Russia’s ambitions but the fact that we can no longer tolerate the current state of affairs in the world. In reality, we are proposing that we should be guided by our shared values and interests rather than ambitions. We should unite our efforts to address, on the basis of international law, these new problems we face and create a genuinely broad international coalition against terrorism. Like the coalition against Hitler, it could unite all the diverse forces willing to resolutely resist those who, like the Nazis, sow evil and hatred of humankind.
And, naturally, Muslim countries should play a key role in that coalition. Not only is the Islamic State a direct threat to them, it also desecrates one of the world’s greatest religions with its bloody crimes. The militants’ ideologists make a mockery of Islam and pervert its true humanistic values. In that regard, I would also like to address Muslim spiritual leaders. Their authority and tutelage are vital at this moment. It is essential to prevent those whom militants try to recruit from making hasty decisions. And those who have been deceived and who by force of circumstance have ended up in the terrorists’ ranks must be helped to find a path back to normal life, lay down their arms and cease their fratricide.
In the next few days Russia, as the current President of the Security Council, will convene a ministerial-level meeting aimed at conducting a comprehensive analysis of threats in the Middle East. First, we propose to discuss the possibility of agreeing on a draft resolution designed to coordinate the actions of all the forces confronting the Islamic State and other terrorist groups. Once again, that coordination should be based on the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
We believe that the international community can develop a comprehensive strategy for the political stabilization and social and economic recovery of the Middle East. Then there would be no need to build camps for refugees. The flood of people forced to leave their homelands has literally engulfed first the country’s neighbours and now Europe. Now they number in the hundreds of thousands, but they could soon be millions. This is a great and tragic new migration of peoples, and a harsh lesson for all of us, including Europe.
I would like to stress that the refugees unquestionably need our compassion and support. However, any fundamental solution to the problem must involve restoring statehood where it has been
destroyed, strengthening Government institutions where they still exist or are being re-established, and providing comprehensive military, economic and material assistance to countries in difficulties — and, of course, to those who have not abandoned their homes despite all their ordeals. Naturally, any assistance to sovereign States can and must be offered rather than imposed, and only in accordance with the United Nations Charter. In other words, everything being done or to be done in this area in accordance with the norms of international law must be backed by our universal Organization, and anything contravening the Charter must be rejected. More than anything, I believe it is vital to help restore Government institutions in Libya, support the new Government of Iraq and provide comprehensive assistance to the legitimate Government of Syria.
Ensuring peace and regional and global stability remains the key task of the international community, with the United Nations at its helm. In our view, that means creating a space of equal and indivisible security that is not for the select few, but for everyone. Yes, it is a complex, difficult and time-consuming task, but there are no alternatives to it. However, for some of our colleagues the Cold War bloc mindset and desire to assimilate new geopolitical areas are still paramount. They began by continuing to expand NATO — and one wonders why, with the Warsaw Pact bloc no longer in existence and the Soviet Union broken up. And yet NATO is not only still there; like its military infrastructure, it is still expanding. Then they offered post-Soviet countries a false choice — to be either with the West or the East. Sooner or later, that logic of confrontation was bound to turn into a serious geopolitical crisis, and that is what happened in Ukraine, where the people’s dissatisfaction with the authorities was exploited and a military coup provoked from outside. A civil war erupted as a result.
We firmly believe that we can end the bloodshed and find a way out of this deadlock only through full implementation, in good faith, of the Minsk agreements of 12 February. Ukraine’s territorial integrity cannot be ensured by threats and force of arms, but it must be done. What is needed is respect for the choice of the people of the Donbas region, genuine consideration of their interests and rights and their engagement in devising the key elements of the country’s political structure, in line with the Minsk agreements that will guarantee that Ukraine can develop as a civilized State and an essential link in the construction of a common
area of security and economic cooperation in both Europe and Eurasia.
I have a reason for speaking of a common area for economic cooperation. Only recently, it seemed that in the economic sphere, where the objective laws of the market apply, we would learn to live without dividing lines and to act on the basis of transparent rules, jointly devised, including the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which stand for freedom of trade and investment and open competition. Today, however, unilateral sanctions that circumvent the United Nations Charter have almost become the norm. They not only serve political aims, they act as a way of pushing competitors out of the market.
I would like to note another sign of growing economic selfishness. A number of countries have chosen to create closed, exclusive economic associations, with negotiations conducted behind closed doors and in secret, undisclosed to their own citizens and business communities. Nor do they inform other countries and Governments whose interests may be affected. Perhaps they want all of us to be left with the fait accompli that the rules of the game have been changed in favour of a small group, and without the participation of the WTO. That could completely unbalance the trade system and lead to the disintegration of the global economic environment. These issues affect the interests of all States and influence the future of the entire world economy. That is why we propose discussing them within the United Nations, the WTO and the Group of 20.
In opposition to a policy of exclusiveness, Russia proposes harmonizing regional economic projects through what is known as the integration of integrations, based on the universal and transparent rules of international trade. One example is our plan to link the Eurasian Economic Union with China’s initiative in creating a Silk Road economic belt. And we continue to believe the possibility of harmonizing integration processes within the Eurasian Economic Union and the European Union to be very promising.
Among the issues affecting the future of all humankind is the challenge of global climate change. It is in our interests to ensure that we get results at the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to be held in Paris in December. As part of our national contribution, by 2030 we plan to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions to between 70 and 75 per cent of their 1990 levels. I
suggest, however, that we should take a broader view of this issue. By establishing quotas on harmful emissions or taking other steps that by their very nature are still only tactical, we may mitigate the problem for a certain amount of time, but fundamentally we will not solve it.
We need a completely different approach. We should be focusing on introducing fundamentally new technologies, inspired by nature, that rather than damaging the environment will be in harmony with it and will enable us to restore the balance between the biosphere and the technosphere that human activities have destroyed. It is indeed a challenge on a planetary scale, but I am confident that humankind has the intellectual wherewithal to respond to it. We must unite our efforts, most of all those States possessing solid research capacities and fundamental scientific achievements. We propose convening a special forum under United Nations auspices for a comprehensive consideration of the issues related to the depletion of natural resources, the destruction of habitats and climate change. Russia is ready to be one of the organizers of such a forum.
On 10 January 1946, the General Assembly of the United Nations gathered in London to begin work on its first session. Eduardo Zuleta Ángel, a Colombian diplomat and the Chairman of the Preparatory Commission, opened the session by giving what I believe was a concise definition of the basic principles by which the United Nations should be guided in its activities. They are free will, disdain for scheming and trickery, and a spirit of cooperation. Today his words can be a guide for us all. Russia believes in the huge potential of the United Nations to help us avoid a new global confrontation and engage in strategic cooperation. We will work consistently with other countries to strengthen the central coordinating role of the United Nations. I am confident that together we can make the world a stable and safe place and ensure conditions conducive to the development of every State and nation.


I am enormously happy to be here, on behalf of the Bolivian people, to express our feelings and to talk about our experiences and our actions to date. As everyone else has mentioned, we are here on the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. The Organization was founded to seek peace after the two World Wars.
I feel it is important to make an in-depth economic, political, social, cultural and environmental assessment following 70 years of the existence of the United Nations. What has it achieved? In the eyes of the people, wars and invasions continue even after 70 years of the United Nations. What is the cause of those wars and invasions on several continents? It is due to the ambition of some regions and nations and to policies that concentrate capital in only a few hands and in only some countries, which are administered by oligarchies along with transnational companies. I therefore feel that, 70 years after its founding, the United Nations has not fulfilled its goals of peace and stability in the world.
This morning we heard various statements. Starting with President Obama (see A/70/PV.13) and then other Presidents from other continents, all of us are seeking peace. But I want to say to everyone here, representatives of all the peoples of the world, that there will be no peace without social justice. Calls were
26/34 15-29425

28/09/2015 A/70/PV.15
made against terrorism and armed insurgent groups on several continents — that they have never been able to understand their demands — while certain Powers want to understand how those problems can be solved. I also heard statements condemning social movements and confusing them with terrorist movements. I came out of social movements and the indigenous movement. Those of us from social movements are not terrorists, but rather contribute to social peace with results, as well as equality, dignity and justice.
I also want to say to those who have championed capitalism for the past 70 years that capitalism has failed. It is a failed model because, as many also said this morning, it has brought humankind only crises —humanitarian, financial, energy and food crises. The common thread of the various statements was that nearly half the inhabitants of the world are going hungry and that untold billions of dollars in economic resources are being devoted to destroying Mother Earth — or Planet Earth, as it is called in the West. Some have said that $100 billion is needed to confront and reduce global warming. Has it occurred to anyone how much money is being spent to destroy the planet, and how many countless billions are spent to invade countries?
I listened intently to the words of my brother Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, as he despaired at what the Libyan and Syrian peoples were going through. What is the cause for their suffering? Let us not forget that the United States Government overthrew Al-Qadhafi. This morning they called him a tyrant: the military intervention by the United States and NATO was to target the tyrant, the President at the time. But Mr. Al-Qadhafi was not really the target. The goal was Libya’s oil. I ask members to ask themselves to whom Lybia’s oil belongs. Does it belong to the Libyan people or the Libyan State? Or does it belong, in fact, to a few American and European transnational corporations? Imagine: they used fallacious arguments to intervene and, now that the poor Libyan people have been torn apart, they are no longer interested in them, for the economic and natural resources are now in the hands of the transnationals. That is capitalism.
I could speak about the many countries that were taken over before and since the founding of the United Nations, not to mention the situation in Syria and other countries. That is why we are convinced that capitalism is not the solution for life, and even less for humankind. That is the profound difference between us.
Some presidents at times speak in half-truths here; they do not speak the truth about what is happening in the world. While some may think that they are going to live better, such a policy is not going to resolve social problems or humanitarian issues. Living well, as our brother the President of Ecuador says, is the very synthesis of community-based socialism, while living better is the synthesis of capitalism. There is a profound difference between the two. By living well I mean living in solidarity and in complementarity — not just in solidarity with other human beings, but living in harmony with Mother Earth. For us in social movements, especially the indigenous movement, it is about Mother Earth. We are convinced that the human being will be unable to live without Mother Earth, and that Mother Earth would get along better without human beings.
There is one other thing that many may not understand, but I still want to say it. Under this way of living, basic services cannot be under private business. That comes from our significant experience. Basic services were once privatized in Bolivia — water, energy, electricity and telecommunications. Through our Constitution we decided that basic services were a human right and could never be private businesses. For we are talking about water, which is life.
Also with respect to living well, we are convinced that natural resources can never belong to foreigners or to transnational corporations. Let me comment from my own experience. After coming to power, we heard from the vigorous voices of my people and social forces in Bolivia. On 1 May 2006, in due homage to workers, we nationalized the fossil fuel industry and recovered our natural resources. During the campaign we said that there could be no masters or owners, and maybe just partners.
I shall give just one statistic in that regard. Prior to our taking office, income from oil leases stood at barely $300 million. Since the law on hydrocarbons was changed and we nationalized the industry, that income had risen to $5.6 billion by 2014. Imagine how much money was stolen from us in Bolivia under imperial domination and the neoliberal model. We went from $300 million in 2005 to $5.6 billion in 2014. For a country of 10 million inhabitants, those economic resources are exceedingly importance for economic freedom.
That is why we are convinced that natural resources should belong to the people and be under
15-29425 27/34

A/70/PV.15 28/09/2015
the administration of the State. That is our experience and that is how we have freed ourselves economically. That is why we do not believe in capitalism. Why the interventions into other countries? To take dominion over natural resources so that they can then continue to concentrate capital in the hands of a few.
Secondly, let me also say that we will face a huge responsibility in December in Paris concerning the environment. As Presidents — at least as I see it — it will be important that we take with us proposals from our peoples. After consulting my brothers and sisters in Bolivia, we will take with us policies, projects and programmes aimed at cleaning up and healing Mother Earth. If we do not take on the responsibility for saving Mother Earth, future generations will hold us responsible.
I will mention another personal experience, and I apologize for speaking even more about myself. When I travel to the countryside in Bolivia, one can no longer tell what season it is. A friend from the tropics called me at one or two in the morning one day and asked what I was doing. I said that I was in bed, and asked the same question in turn. He told me he was leaving the house to go to the river because it was too hot to sleep, and of course they still had no shower. The entire family was going to the river at that hour to protect themselves from such a high temperature. The current increase in global temperature is less than 1°C; what will happen if the temperature rises 2°C? Some experts have predicted that, if we do not stop global warming, by 2030 the temperature could rise 4°C or 5°C.
I feel that future generations will become anti-imperialists and anti-capitalists because that is the legacy of capitalism. Northern countries are now telling us that we should be the stewards of the forests for them. But we are not going to be their stewards, and they should not transfer their obligations and responsibilities to us in developing countries.
So that is another responsibility we have. We must go to Paris bearing our awareness of the responsibility to find a way to save Mother Earth. I invite participants to attend the international event of the worldwide social movement that will be held in Bolivia from 10 to 12 October, and to bring with them the proposals and ideas of their peoples. We need not be subjected to the initiatives of the American empire or of the multinationals. Now is not the time to be pursuing alien policies.
Today I heard two very interesting and very different statements: one by President Obama and the other by the President of China. What did President Obama say to us about providing security to his country and to his allies? What did he say about combating terrorism? He said that he could provide war and interference. What did the President of China offer us? Assistance and cooperation. That State is not an expansionist one.
I commend social movements. Our movements engender unity and integration for liberation, not invasion policies for the purposes of domination. We have profound differences. We welcome the words of the Chinese President, who again has offered us assistance and cooperation. We acknowledge his country’s leadership. From the media, we are also aware that the United States is in hock to China. Well, that is their problem. I hope the press is not lying. But they still threaten interference as a way to dominate the peoples of the world.
There is a debate under way. Some this morning talked about democracy. I would say that there are two types of democracy. There is the democracy of the people and there is the democracy of transnationals. The democracy of the people involves the social movements in which people organize themselves. But what does social movement democracy consist of? We do not just have representative and participatory democracy. In my experience, first as a union leader and now as President, we have always taken decisions with the leaders. There have always been differences: some sectors are more ambitious than others, and some of their demands can be both unattainable and undesirable. But the people understand. Policies are decided and programmes proposed in a joint manner. Our responsibility lies in how to meet the demands and carry out the economic and social proposals and programmes.
In the other type of democracy, which is supposedly representative, voting ends on the day of the elections. But who governs then? Let us be honest. It is not President Obama who governs, but the bankers, businessmen and transnationals who govern. What kind of democracy is that? They deceive the people into voting, and then they do not govern. I heard a candidate say in the media that he financed both Republicans and Democrats: “I command them”. That is not democracy; that is capitalism. Humankind faces serious problems. That is why we are convinced that, if we want to end poverty, we need to end the capitalist system. There is no other way.
28/34 15-29425

28/09/2015 A/70/PV.15
Moreover, I am also convinced that the new millennium should be a millennium of the peoples, not that of hierarchies or monarchies. However, I respect their rights. If monarchy is their way, we respect that. But it cannot be monarchy exported from Europe to Latin America. That must end. This is not the time for oligarchies, and much less the financial oligarchies that exist today. That is why we have an obligation to work together to combat the problems we face. While 70 years after the inception of the United Nations there may no longer be coups d’état and military takeovers, what we now have are soft coups, espionage and the stopping of presidential planes. I do not understand these times. Now there are military bases. That is why, honestly, I do not share such policies.
I do not know the degree of certainty or resolve with which they said it, but those detained for their opposition in the past have expressed the notion that ideas could not be imprisoned. We see so many terrorists, criminals and corrupt presidents who violate human rights — after killing 30, 40, 50 or 70 people — coming to the United States. If we are fighting against terrorism, crime and drug traffickers, why are those drug-traffickers, terrorists and corrupt politicians who violated human rights not thrown out of the United States and tried in their own countries? I cannot comprehend how the United States has become a graveyard for corrupt people and criminals, but that is what has happened. And some authorities and Governments wonder why they do not agree with imperialism and capitalism.
I also want to take this opportunity to address the serious issue of migration, which I did not hear other Presidents mention. Migrants are being criminalized and deported. I speak as an inhabitant of Abya Yala, our home continent called America. Europeans invaded us 500 years ago. Did my grandparents criminalize those who invaded us? But they put in place policies to exterminate indigenous peoples. They pillaged our natural resources. Yet there were never provisions or programmes in place to expel them. Some of our brothers are today leaving Latin America for Europe or the United States to work, and are finding themselves criminalized and persecuted.
Money has its tax havens under capitalism, while human beings suffer hellish poverty, and migrants are expelled. That is why we propose to work together to create universal citizenship. We all have a right to live wherever we wish in the world. Globalization should
not simply be a matter of trade and money, but it ought be for all human beings around the world. Our brother migrants should never be expelled. On its part, Bolivia never deports anyone. Our companies are now no longer the masters or the owners, now they simply provide services in our country.
The important issue of drug trafficking is another legacy of capitalism. We have nationalized the fight against drug trafficking and, in cooperation with several South American countries, have also regionalized the effort. It is very important to be aware of United Nations statistics. Drug trafficking has been guided by purely geopolitical interests. Look at the United Nations statistics. Look at those of South American countries and to those on other continents. What are the results where military bases are set up and many billions of dollars are invested? Zero. Instead, drug trafficking has increased. After having genuinely nationalized, we in Bolivia are better off without military bases, the American Drug Enforcement Administration or the economic resources that the United States should provide as part of a shared responsibility. I am not calling for such aid, but we welcome Europe’s unconditional contribution to the fight against drug trafficking. We see the results of the fight against drug trafficking.
I wish to reiterate that we countries with anti-imperialist Governments are accused of not complying with certain regulations and of being drug traffickers, while pro-imperialist and pro-capitalist countries, where drug trafficking has increased, are congratulated for their efforts. What a lie! I am not complaining, but I would simply ask members to take a look at the United Nations statistics on the fight against drug trafficking.
Fortunately, other countries have already understood the results we have achieved in Bolivia, and we are now debating the model of combating drug trafficking in Bolivia. We never said that we would attain zero coca production, but also that we cannot be free cultivation of coca. If we had more technology, such as radars, the results would be much better than at present. I inherited from the former Government more than 30,000 hectares of coca leaf plantations. This year, without the death of a single peasant, we have 24,400 hectares for traditional consumption. Look at the United Nations statistics and at those of other countries of the world.
I join the many other presidents in welcoming the agreement between Cuba and the United States of
15-29425 29/34

A/70/PV.15 28/09/2015
America to establish diplomatic relations. But I have something I would like to share with everyone, and I hope that I am not tiring members.
When I took up my functions of President, I visited the Ambassador of the United States of America, when we still had an Ambassador. He was giving me instructions: “President Evo, you cannot have diplomatic relations with Cuba, Venezuela or Iran.” Then a group of United States Congressmen came and they instructed me, “President Evo, you cannot have relations with those three countries.” Of course, I refused. I said, “If we had the economic resources, we would have Embassies in every country of the world. No one is going to tell me with whom I can and cannot have diplomatic relations.” Since then, I have never accepted the instructions of the United States authorizing or not authorizing me to have diplomatic relations with Cuba or Iran. But now I congratulate the United States of America for having diplomatic relations with Iran and Cuba, and hopefully soon they will even have relations with Venezuela.
Diplomatic relations with Cuba should not end with just an exchange of Ambassadors. Our great dream as the Bolivian people is that the United States will return Guantánamo to Cuba and that the economic blockade will be lifted once and for all. We hope that the words we heard this morning from President Obama will be followed up with action to lifte the economic blockade.
President Castro, my brother, rightly said that with the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States we have declared a zone of peace. We might have a little problem in Colombia with the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) but, fortunately, thanks to the support and mediation of Cuba, we were very pleased to hear about the preliminary agreement between FARC and the Government of Colombia. We commend the efforts and patience of President Santos Calderón in reaching that agreement. But I want to say to my FARC companions that we have had 50, 60, 70 years of revolutions with arms and bullets; now a revolution is achieved through the vote, awareness and the democratic struggle. That is our experience.
Change can be made to the social and economic situation, not only here on this continent but also on other continents. When groups or social sectors are in the right and fight for the dignity and sovereignty of the people, people support that struggle, that quest to achieve liberation. We genuinely welcome that agreement.
There is another issue in our continent, that of the Malvinas Islands. With apologies to Argentina, however, the Malvinas Islands do not just belong Argentina, but to all Latin America. How can they control an island that is so many thousands of kilometres away, and so near to our continent? That has to end. We hope for understanding in putting an end to such problems that we continue to have.
We also have another pending matter, at The Hague. I welcome the presence of my Chilean brothers, who are filming me and listening attentively. One hundred and thirty-six years ago, through no fault of the Chilean people, a group of oligarchs, supported by British multinationals, invaded us for economic reasons. Just to refresh members’ memories, the invasion began on 14 February 1879. The first resistance took place on 23 March, after more than a month of invasion. I want to highlight this: after many commitments and offers from Chile, which I commend, I very much regret to say that none have been fulfilled.
That is why we turned to the International Court of Justice, because Bolivia is a peaceful country under its Constitution. We do not have an expansionist mentality that makes us want to invade neighbouring countries. That is why we are petitioning the Court. Unfortunately, certain Chilean officials — not all — say they have no pending issues with Bolivia. Recently, the Court said there was a pending issue in our continent and it deemed itself competent to resolve the case between Chile and Bolivia. It is with humility and great dignity that Bolivia welcomes that the fact that the Court has acknowledged a pending case, as this is the world’s highest judicial body, created by the United Nations.
I want to say to my Chilean brothers, and especially the Chilean people, that we do not want there to be any winners or losers. All we want is to resolve the question through dialogue and for the good of our peoples. That our great desire as Bolivians. It is not a matter of pitting anyone against each other. We are two neighbours, two brothers. How could be at odds all life-long? All we want is for what has been on offer to be fulfilled.
I welcome the support of everyone. I very well understand the great solidarity that exists on this matter, and not only on the part of former presidents, Governments, social movements and institutions. Kofi Annan, a former Secretary-General of the United Nations, gave his timely support to the case, saying “resolve the matter of access to the sea”. Not just Pope Francis, but John Paul II also expressed his support.
30/34 15-29425

28/09/2015 A/70/PV.15
It is a matter of record. Four former United States Presidents and three Nobel Peace Prize laureates said that the issues of access to the sea should be resolved. This is not just a claim, but our right. Sooner or later, as a matter of justice and with the support of the entire world, we will return to the Pacific with sovereignty. We hope that it will be through an agreed dialogue, for the good of all our peoples.
I want to conclude by commending the work of the United Nations. Two weeks ago, we found out from the media that the Ambassadors and Government representatives from all over the world had adopted the principles and values of the Andean indigenous movement: do not steal, do not lie and do not be idle. Those are values from my family. I as President, as well as the Vice-President and Cabinet, apply those values. That is why we have moved ahead in such little time.
Bolivia is no longer as it was before. We came to power when Bolivia was ranked the second-to-last country of the continent, the last country in South America. Thanks to the struggle of the Bolivian people, to our social movements and to the programme now in place, Bolivia is no longer a poorly viewed, small country, as it was before. I referred to our policies briefly a few moments ago. Those three values should the standard for transparent and honest governance in the service of our peoples throughout the world. In the name of the indigenous movement of Bolivia and the Andean region, we are happy and grateful to the United Nations for having endorsed those values.
I also want to take this opportunity to commend and show my estimation for the joint efforts undertaken by Argentina, the Group of 77 and the General Assembly for adopting the Basic Principles on Sovereign Debt Restructuring Processes (resolution 69/319) and the necessary limits on the voracious transnational vulture funds. Such funds are yet another means to strangle and suppress the economies of sovereign countries, which we reject categorically. That is a way of defending the economic sovereignty of countries.
Lastly, I thank Pope Francis for everything contained in his message. My mother raised me to be Catholic. Unfortunately, because of the shortcomings of some leaders of the Catholic Church, I have been disappointed by it. Because of Pope Francis, a brother who questions capitalism and does not submit to the god of money, my morale has been uplifted, and I feel more Catholic today. And so I want to commend Pope
Francis’ message of peace. I now really do have a Pope. I know that Pope Francis, through masses and religious ceremonies, sends us his blessings and prayers. Because for the sake of life and for the sake of peace he is risking his life, we have the obligation to defend and help him. That is all I ask.