Twenty- four years have passed since the signing of the Oslo Accords, an interim agreement that set a five-year period for bringing an end to the Israeli occupation, giving hope to the Palestinian people that they would soon achieve independence within their State and peace between Palestinians and Israelis. What is left of that hope today? We recognized the State of Israel within the 1967 borders, but Israel’s continued refusal to do the same has called into question the mutual recognition that we signed in Oslo in 1993.
Since my address to the Assembly last year (see A/71/PV.14), when I urged us to make 2017 the year for ending the Israeli occupation of the territory of the State of Palestine, the Israeli Government has relentlessly pursued its settlement campaign on our land, in contravention of all international conventions and the relevant resolutions on the question of Palestine. It has also persisted in its flagrant disregard for reaching a
17-29395 7/29 two-State solution, resorting to delaying policies and tactics and devising pretexts to evade its responsibility for ending its occupation of the territory of the State of Palestine. Instead of addressing the underlying issues and resolving the root causes of the conflict, it has tried to divert international attention to secondary issues that in fact are caused by its colonial policies.
While we continue to call — as does the international community — for an end to the Israeli occupation of our State’s territory, Israel incites trouble and makes false accusations, pretends that there is no Palestinian partner and imposes unreasonable, obstructive conditions. Israel is well aware, as we all are, that its occupation breeds provocations and violence. Its military occupation of our land has now lasted for more than half a century.
Ten years ago, in a decision made by the United States, we agreed together to establish a tripartite committee to address the issue of incitement, made up of the United States, Palestine and Israel. The committee worked for some time but was eventually disbanded, and since then we have called for its revival, to no avail. Who is committing incitement now? And who is trying to maintain it? It is therefore very strange to hear some of those who should be responsible for ending the occupation refer to it as a half-occupation, or an alleged occupation.
What is meant by “alleged occupation”? For 50 years we have languished under the yoke of occupation, and now someone who is responsible says that this is an alleged occupation. That is unfair, wrong and unacceptable. Israel’s continuation of the occupation is an affront to the international community. The United Nations has a legal, political, moral and humanitarian obligation to end it and enable the Palestinian people to live in freedom and prosperity in their independent State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital and within the 4 June 1967 borders. That is the responsibility of the United Nations and the international community.
There can be no doubt that draining the quagmire of the colonial occupation of our land and ending its unjust, oppressive and illegal practices against our people would have an enormous effect on the fight against terrorism, thereby depriving terrorist groups of one of the key rallying cries they exploit to promote their obscurantist ideas. We therefore reiterate that it is vitally urgent to end the Israeli occupation of our land, since it is an integral part of the efforts that we must all make to confront such groups. Palestinians oppose all internal and international terrorist organizations, whatever their nature, origins or character. We stand against international terrorism and we are fighting it.
We have explored every avenue and exerted enormous efforts to achieve peace with our Israeli neighbours. Together with other Arab and Islamic States, we have adopted the invaluable Arab Peace Initiative, aimed at resolving the Palestinian and Arab-Israeli conflict. The Initiative states that upon Israel’s withdrawal from the Palestinian and Arab territories — the Golan and Shaba’a farmlands — occupied since 1967, the Arab and Islamic States will recognize Israel and normalize relations with it. What has been the Israeli response? Fifty-seven Arab and Islamic States have said that they are ready to recognize and normalize relations with Israel, but Israel is not interested.
In 2003, there was also the 2003 Quartet road map for an Israeli-Palestinian peace, endorsed by the Security Council and accepted by Palestine. It, too, was rejected by the Israeli Government — so apparently Israel is above the law. Next, a French-led initiative for peace attempted to break the stalemate in the peace process and ensure a successful effort to salvage the peace process and a two-State solution. It led to the convening earlier this year in Paris of the Conference for Peace in the Middle East, which was attended by 70 States and four international organizations. Israel has rejected and boycotted all of those efforts. Besides those I have already mentioned, President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Xi Jinping of China have also launched initiatives for peace. The latest of those peace efforts — all of which we are grateful for — is being led by United States President Donald Trump. Where are those initiatives and why will Israel not accept them?
For our part, we have also repeatedly tried to revive the peace process. We have called on the Israeli Prime Minister simply to affirm his commitment to a two- State solution and sit with us at the negotiation table to delineate the borders between Israel and the State of Palestine in order to open a path for meaningful talks on resolving all the other final status issues. Unfortunately, he rejected that offer. We have continued our genuine efforts to achieve a successful peace process, and Israel nonetheless continues to ignore its commitments and obstruct those efforts through its relentless settlement activities. There is no place left for the State of Palestine, and that is unacceptable both to us and to those here in this Hall. The fact is that Israel is rejecting a two-State solution, posing a real threat to Israelis and Palestinians alike. We will therefore be compelled to undertake a comprehensive strategic review of the entire process.
A commitment to peace by one side is never enough to achieve peace. Either we are free or not free. We have issued warnings in the past, and continue to do so today, about the Israeli policies aimed at entrenching the occupation and colonial facts on the ground in East Jerusalem. We have pointed out that those policies fuel religious animosity and could lead to a violent religious conflict. We have called on the Israeli Government to uphold the historic and legal status quo of the city’s holy sites. However, since its occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967, the Israeli Government has repeatedly and unilaterally annexed Jerusalem. Jerusalem is occupied. It also decided to annex Golan, and did so. We rejected that at the time and continue to do so, together with the entier international community, including the Security Council.
The Security Council, the principal world authority on peace and security, has adopted numerous resolutions stating that such annexation processes are illegal. To whom should we turn? Since the Security Council and General Assembly resolutions are not being implemented, to whom should we turn? We have not chosen a path of terrorism or violence. Jerusalem is an occupied city. Israel’s decisions and practices there are null and void and entirely illegal. The same applies to all the Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory.
Israel’s attempts to change the historic status quo in Al-Quds and particularly the status and integrity of the Al-Aqsa Mosque can be described only as playing with fire and an infringement on our responsibilities and those of our brother country Jordan. We are both responsible for the city. We have warned the Israeli Government about the implications of such an act of aggression and will hold it fully responsible for the consequences. We do not desire a religious war, which would be dangerous for everyone. Our conflict is political, not religious, so let us leave religious issues out of the equation.
Despite the ongoing occupation and its oppressive policies and practices, we have been working effectively to build the institutions of our State, which has been recognized by a majority — 138 of those present — of the States Members of the United Nations. I would like to take this opportunity to once again thank all of the countries that have recognized the State of Palestine and have voted for upgrading its status at the United Nations. That is certainly helping to remedy the historic injustice that has befallen our people and showing support for the goal of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East and around the world.
I also stressed in my address to the Assembly last year that the status quo in the occupied territory of the State of Palestine is unsustainable. However, since the situation has only deteriorated, owing to Israel’s insistence on pursuing its occupation, aggressive policies and unending violations of international law, we must once again call on Israel, as the occupying Power, to fully respect and uphold all the obligations that its occupation implies and bear the consequences.
We cannot continue to be an Authority that has no authority or to allow the occupation to continue at no cost. We are fast approaching that point. If Israel does not want a two-State solution, if it does not want peace, let it assume its responsibilities and bear their consequences, because we will not bear those responsibilities for them. Today a two-State solution is in jeopardy. As Palestinians, we cannot stand still in the face of that threat, which is targeting our national, political and social existence on our land and endangering regional and international peace and security. We will have to take steps or look for alternatives in order to preserve our national existence and maintain the prospects for peace and security. But any option we try will be peaceful.
In such a situation, we have the right to seek alternatives that preserve our rights and protect our land and our people from a hardening system of the type of apartheid that ended in South Africa long ago but that continues to persist in Palestine. Is that acceptable? Can the world accept an apartheid regime in the twenty-first century in Palestine? Why, then, is there one?
On the other hand, we have called on the International Criminal Court, which is our right. If nobody wants to listen to us, then we will pursue all avenues to justice. We have called on the International Criminal Court to open an investigation and prosecute Israeli officials for their involvement in settlement activities and aggressions against our people. We will continue to pursue our accessions to international conventions, protocols and organizations, as Palestine has acquired observer status pursuant to resolution of 2012. I will convene the Palestinian National Council in the near future to operationalize a strategic review of these efforts.
Palestinians, Arabs and the world as a whole have a choice as to whether to respect international law and implement the two-State solution based on the 1967 borders. We will give the efforts being undertaken by President Donald Trump, the Quartet and the international community at large every chance to succeed so that a historic agreement or deal may be reached. We have heard that they are trying to strike a historic deal. We would like to thank them and hope that it will come to fruition soon.
We stress the two-State solution, which would enable the State of Palestine to live side-by-side with the State of Israel in security and peace. But if the two-State solution were to be fall apart due to the establishment of a one-State reality with two systems — a system of apartheid — following the unchecked imposition of the occupation that our people and the international community reject, that would be a failure, and neither the international community nor we will have any other choice but to continue the struggle and demand full and equal rights for all inhabitants of historic Palestine. This is not a threat, but we are warning Israel of the realities and the consequences of its ongoing policies that are gravely undermining the two-State solution. What do the Israelis want? Even if they talk about other issues, we continue to choose the two-State solution.
Our problem is with the Israeli colonial occupation, not with Judaism as a religion. Judaism for us Palestinians, be they Christian or Muslim, will never be considered a threat. It is an Abrahamic religion, like Islam and Christianity. God Almighty tells us in the Qur’an that, in the name of God the Compassionate and the Merciful, we should not distinguish between his messengers. Indeed, all His messengers — Mohammed, Jesus and others — are equal. All these religions are equal, and we do not make distinctions between prophets or messengers. On this occasion, we congratulate the Jews on their new year. We would also like to congratulate Muslims for their new Hijri year starting tomorrow. This is proof of our desire for a rapprochement among religions.
We have dutifully upheld our responsibilities towards our people in the Gaza Strip despite the split with Hamas that has been in place since 2007. Since that time, we have provided all forms of support on our own to our people in Gaza, who are gravely suffering from the cruel Israeli blockade. We have repeatedly affirmed that no one is more aware of the interests of our people in Gaza Strip than we are. We are eager to see to the interests of the people in Gaza served. We have said that there will be no State in Gaza alone and there will be no Palestinian State without the Gaza Strip. A State in Gaza alone is a false dream, and our State will be complete only when the Gaza Strip is part of it.
I must express my relief at the agreement reached in Cairo as a result of Egyptian efforts. We are grateful for those efforts aimed at nullifying the measures taken by Hamas following the split with us, including the formation of a Government. The Hamas Government has been cancelled, and there is now a commitment to the National Unity Government, which is a Government of national consensus, which will enable it to exercise its authority in the Gaza Strip and allow for general elections to be held. This agreement has met with our satisfaction. Next week, our Government is going to the Gaza Strip to assume its responsibilities. We wish the Government every success.
In my address to the General Assembly last year, I appealed to the Government of the United Kingdom to rectify the grave injustice it inflicted upon the Palestinian people when, in 1917, it issued the Balfour Declaration, promising Jews a national homeland in Palestine, despite the fact that Palestine was inhabited by the Palestinian people. Some 97 per cent of the population of Palestine at that time were Palestinians, who were disregarded. Again, Palestine at that time was inhabited by the Palestinian people and was among the most progressive and prosperous countries in the region. It should not have been colonized or placed under the mandate of a great Power. The British Government has not taken a single step to date to correct this historical injustice against our people. It should apologize, provide us with reparations and recognize the State of Palestine. We talked to its representatives at length and so far they have not provided a response. What is even worse is that in November they want to celebrate the centenary of this crime against our people.
The silence of the international community with respect to Israel’s aggressive policies has emboldened the country to continue its policies. I would remind the Assembly that, since its establishment, Israel has violated numerous provisions of international law. It has violated the Charter of the United Nations and continues to do so. It has violated General Assembly resolutions 181 (II), 194 (III) and Security Council resolution 242 (1967). We would recall that Article 42 of the Charter of the United Nations provides for the possible use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security. This could apply to those who conduct acts of aggression against the land of others.
Israel has taken a large part of our territory and was not deterred from doing so by the United Nations. Resolution 194 (III) provided for the return of refugees at that time. However, the United Nations did not adopt any follow-up resolution. Security Council resolutions have called for withdrawal from the occupied territories. Where are those resolutions? If the United Nations cannot implement its resolutions, who will? Israel does not want to. Is Israel above the law? There are double standards in dealing with different countries. That is the Assembly’s responsibility.
To salvage the peace process and the two-State solution, I urge the Organization and its Member States to adopt the following measures.
First, they should actively pursue efforts to bring an end to the Israeli occupation of the State of Palestine within a set time frame. It is no longer enough to issue generic statements calling for the end to the occupation and the achievement of peace without a deadline. Efforts must be made to implement the Arab Peace Initiative, including a just solution for the Palestinian refugee question, in accordance with resolution 194 (III). The Arab Peace Initiative addressed the issue of refugees very well in referring to a just and agreed- upon solution, not one imposed upon a certain party, in accordance with resolution 194 (III). Israel disregarded those resolutions, riding roughshod over them. To whom should we complain?
Second, they should act to bring to a halt to all settlement activities in occupied Palestinian land, as demanded in numerous United Nations resolutions, including the most recent Security Council resolution, 2334 (2016), in addition to the operative paragraphs of the Fourth Geneva Convention. An occupying Power should not expel the people from their land. This is in the text of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Who is responsible for implementing those texts? Israel refuses to do so. What is the international community doing?
Third, the Organization and Member States should ensure international protection to the lands and people of the State of Palestine until the occupation ends, as we are unable to provide protection to our people. Given all the forces, the arms that we are facing every day, who will protect us if the Member States do not? Many times we have put forward draft resolutions, but they are in vain.
Fourth, they should demand that Israel endorse and commit to the borders of 1967 as the basis for the two-State solution and set such borders in line with international resolutions. Once we delineate the borders, each party can act in its territory as it pleases without affecting or damaging the rights of the other party. Israel builds wherever it wants today, demolishing houses every day; even schools and hospitals are being demolished. Nobody raises an eyebrow.
Fifth, I must ask all the Member States of the United Nations that have recognized Israel to state that they have recognized Israel on the basis of the 1967 borders, thereby aligning themselves with international resolutions and reaffirming their commitment to those resolutions — even those who recognized Israel on the basis of resolution 181 (II). Resolution 181 (II) was violated. Hence my question: where are the borders of Israel that Member States are recognizing? How can Member States recognize a State that has no borders? Israel has not even decided on its own borders. Yet international law states that a State is a land with borders. But Israel has no borders. How can one recognize a State that has no clearly demarcated borders?
Sixth, I call on all States to end all forms of direct and indirect involvement with, and support to, the illegal Israeli colonial settlement regime on the land of the occupied State of Palestine, in accordance with United Nations resolutions and the affirmed positions of States in that regard. Such action would be similar to the international community’s approach to the apartheid regime in South Africa. We should not deal with settlements. We should not condone settlements. The black list of countries that are dealing illegally with Israeli settlements should be exposed.
Seventh, I urge those States that have not yet recognized the State of Palestine to do so. I do not understand how recognizing the State of Palestine within the 1967 borders harms the chances of peace. There could be minor amendments agreed between the two parties, but the basis is 1967, so our borders are well known. Where are the borders of Israel? How can recognizing the State of Palestine harm the chances of peace, especially since we Palestinians have recognized the State of Israel within the 1967 borders?
Eighth, we look to the Security Council to approve our application for full membership of the State of Palestine in the United Nations. What do we lack? What is missing? Every day we prove that we are eligible for such status. All those who support the two-State solution should recognize two States, not one State — Palestine and Israel. If a Member State recognizes Israel, it should recognize Palestine.
Ninth, we urge the international community to continue providing economic and financial support to the Palestinian people to achieve self-reliance. If the occupation ends we will say “thank you”. We will be self-reliant. Unfortunately, because we are under occupation, we can only seek assistance, and we are grateful to the international community because it is providing assistance. Help us to rid ourselves of the occupation, and we will thank Member States for their help.
We also urge the international community to continue providing support to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to enable it to continue providing humanitarian assistance. In that connection, we warn against attempts to eliminate item 7 on the agenda of the Human Rights Council, or to change the mandate of UNRWA.
Efforts are also under way to obstruct the issuance of the list of companies operating in Israeli settlements. That is a black list. Why should we hide that list? It is similar to terrorism. Everybody should see the list to know who violates international law and who respects such law.
Tenth, we once again affirm our commitment to respecting human rights and international conventions, and to implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and all other treaties and conventions that we have acceded to. We respect everything that we have acceded to or adopted, and we go hand in hand with the international community, of which we are part of.
The State of Palestine will reflect those imperatives, where appropriate, in the draft resolutions to be presented to the General Assembly. We call on the Assembly to vote in favour of those draft resolutions, with the clear aim of preserving the two-State solution, salvaging and promoting peace and achieving security and stability and prosperity for both Israelis and Palestinians and for the people of the entire region.
In conclusion, allow me to salute our great people, who remain steadfast in their homeland despite their suffering and peaceful struggle against foreign occupation. The culture of peace is prevailing among Palestinians. Those joining Da’esh and the Al-Nusra Front are not from Palestine.
I salute our people of Jerusalem, who exhibited one of the most shining examples of peaceful popular resistance against the Israeli colonial occupation. When they were prevented from praying, they prayed outside — they prayed and were victorious. I salute our people in exile and in the diaspora. I salute our people who remain steadfast in the West Bank and the besieged Gaza Strip. I salute our glorious martyrs and our courageous prisoners in Israeli prisons.
I tell them all that freedom is coming and is inevitable and that the occupation will come to an end. That will come about either with the independence of the State of Palestine, living side by side in peace and security with the State of Israel on the 1967 borders, or, if Israel chooses, with equal rights for all of the inhabitants of the land of historic Palestine from the river to the sea. Which will they accept?
When South Africa was liberated from the apartheid regime, Nelson Mandela said that he was grateful to the whole world and the United Nations, which contributed to and supported the end of apartheid in South Africa. Mandela added that their victory would not be complete until the Palestinian people were victorious. We, together with the Assembly, are entrusted to end the apartheid in Palestine — person by person, State by State, including the super-Powers. All of us should stand together. It is a commitment that should be fulfilled. Will the Assembly fulfil its duty? I very much hope so.


We seem to be going through a phase in which we are confronted with hurricanes and earthquakes, both political and natural, upheavals that are getting harsher and more intransigent and belligerent from day to day and from speech to speech. As responsible politicians, it is vital that we ask ourselves how we can bring about a change in direction that will lead to more peace and stability, less hunger and better prospects for everyone in the world.
How do we ensure that globalization will ultimately deliver justice for all rather than riches to the few? One answer as to how we can achieve that change in direction can be found in a report addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. It states that we must not limit ourselves to the “traditional questions of peace and war” but must also work to overcome “world hunger, mass misery and alarming disparities between the living conditions of rich and poor”. I find the analysis very apt. The painful thing about that excerpt is that it comes not from a recent report to the Secretary-General but from one that goes back nearly 40 years. Its apt analysis of the global situation can be found in North-South: A Program for Survival, commissioned almost 40 years ago to the day, the report of the North-South Commission, which began its work in 1977. The Chairman of the Commission was former German Chancellor Willy Brandt.
Humankind is still dealing with more or less the same structural difficulties today, but it seems to have become rather more difficult to change the world for the better. Looking around the globe today, it seems that a world view that puts one’s own national interests first and which refuses to engage in a balancing of interests among the nations of the world is gaining ever more ground. National egotism, I believe, is worthless as an organizing principle for our world of the twenty-first century. Such egotism sees the world as an arena, a battleground in which everyone is fighting against everyone else and in which everyone has to assert his or her own interests, either alone or in alliances of convenience. In this world view, it is the law of the strongest that prevails, not the strength of international law. I firmly believe that we have to rise up against this world view. We need more international cooperation and less national egotism, not the other way around.
Some 40 years ago, the North-South Commission recognized that global problems cannot be resolved through confrontation but only through often arduous efforts to compromise and identify common interests. Ultimately, no country can win if it strives only to assert its own interests. If we all did that, looking out only for our own national interests, confrontations and conflicts would increase and global prosperity would falter. The motto “Our country first” would not only lead to more national confrontations and less prosperity; in the end, we would all be the losers. As Germans, our historical experience is quite unusual. Only after two terrible world wars did we learn to see our former enemies as neighbours and partners with whom we wanted to share and shoulder responsibility for a peaceful coexistence. Only since then have our own citizens in Germany had a better life. We have learned that it was not “Germany first” that made our country strong and prosperous; rather, it was “European and international responsibility first” that gave us Germans peace and prosperity.
In international cooperation, no one loses sovereignty. Rather, we all gain a new sovereignty together that we cannot possess as nation States on our own in today’s world. That is why the European Union today provides the framework for our German policies. The road has often been rocky and arduous, for nothing is more difficult than turning former enemies into friends. Often the way is not popular, and one needs considerable political courage to take it. Indeed, the call for international cooperation and for efforts to balance interests is not always popular in our own countries. However, that courage finally led to peace and prosperity in Europe after centuries of war. Today we Germans are grateful to the courageous people in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Italy and many other countries of Europe for having the courage to befriend us — their former enemies — as new and lasting partners after the Second World War. It is precisely because of that experience in Germany and Europe that we support the work of strong, functioning collective institutions, above all the United Nations.
The urgent need for us to work together to establish a safer world has been vividly demonstrated by North Korea’s current irresponsible actions, which pose a serious threat to world peace. We must send a clear message that the international community will not accept its nuclear provocations. Germany welcomes the sanctions adopted by the Security Council and calls for their speedy implementation in Europe, and we also support European initiatives calling for additional measures. At the same time, we should use all the diplomatic means at our disposal, first to defuse the situation and then to find a starting point for long-term solutions. Resolving this international crisis is crucial because if we do not, others will be encouraged to emulate North Korea. If a country can build up a nuclear arsenal while the international community stands helplessly by, other political leaders and countries will follow its example. That would bring about new nuclear crises emerging all over the world, and our children and grandchildren would grow up in a very dangerous world. That is why North Korea’s acquisition of nuclear weapons is neither a bilateral nor a regional problem, but rather a global challenge that we have to overcome together.
We cannot accept the possibility that efforts to build a nuclear arsenal can be rewarded on the international stage. It is therefore more important than ever that the international architecture for arms control and disarmament does not crumble. Existing treaties and agreements must not be called into question. That applies in particular to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) for Iran’s nuclear programme. The Plan is a way out of the impasse of a nuclear confrontation that would jeopardize security in the region and have an impact far beyond it. However, we can reach the level of confidence that we so urgently need only if all obligations are rigorously met and the transparency we have agreed on is established. Germany will work within the E3+3 framework to ensure that the JCPOA is strictly implemented and upheld. That is not just about Iran; it is about the credibility of the entire international community. For what State would renounce the development of its own nuclear programme if it were shown that negotiated agreements did not last and that a binding agreement with the international community was not worth the paper it was written on? How can we convince countries such as North Korea that international agreements make them more secure and will therefore encourage them to commit to further disarmament efforts if the agreement with Iran, the sole international example of such an endeavour, is not upheld?
What the world needs most urgently now is renewed trust. With particular regard to the implementation of the ban on the proliferation of nuclear weapons, we have a request for the United States, Russia, China and every country possessing nuclear weapons. They will be instrumental to ensuring the implementation of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and of arms control and disarmament. To that end, trust among them must be restored.
Statements by Presidents of the United States are always important and interesting, and always worth listening to and even reading after they have been delivered. I found a passage in one such statement that I especially liked. In it, the President of the United States of America called for general and complete disarmament. Every year, he said, billions of dollars were spent on weapons that were acquired for the purpose of making sure we never need to use them. That, he went on to say, was clearly not the most efficient means of ensuring peace. I have to admit that the statement dates back even further than the report of the North-South Commission. It was delivered by John F. Kennedy in 1963. We can see that everything that we need for a safer future has already been considered, written and said. I believe that today we should focus on the bold visions of the North-South Commission and President Kennedy, and have the courage to come up with new proposals for disarmament, arms control and confidence-building.
One of our tasks is to resolve emerging crises early on. A recent example is the escalating violence against the Rohingya people and the resulting refugee flows in the region. We should act as quickly as possible on the issue to offer both political and humanitarian support for alleviating the suffering and ending the conflict. Germany will again increase its aid to the Rohingya through the International Red Cross. We are committed to providing political and humanitarian support, as well as to practical peacebuilding, in many crisis regions around the world. And while military engagement under United Nations auspices is also sometimes necessary, we must ensure that we do not create any imbalances in that regard.
To bring up the North-South Commission again, its report included the impressive finding that, at the time it appeared, a half-day of the world’s military expenditure would have sufficed to finance the entire malaria eradication programme. I suspect that today we would not even need that much. The world’s current annual spending on weapons is just under $1.7 trillion. To achieve Sustainable Development Goal 1 and thereby eradicate extreme poverty in the world by 2030, we would need only 10 per cent of that. Sustainable Development Goal 4, on education, would require even less per year. With that in mind, Germany has tripled its funding for civilian peacebuilding measures in the past few years.
Thankfully, progress has been made in some areas, for example in Iraq. We must work fast to consolidate the successes achieved there in combating the so- called Islamic State by initiating reconstruction and stabilization measures in the cities and regions that have been liberated. Germany has therefore decided to make an additional €250 million available for the reconstruction of Mosul. We cannot abandon the victims of the thugs of the Islamic State. We must help them return to their country. It is also important to strengthen a democratic and inclusive Iraqi State and ensure that the actions of an individual region do not leave it exposed to a relapse into destabilization or civil war. We can only ask the Kurdistan Regional Government in northern Iraq not to trigger any new conflicts, which are the very last thing that the country needs.
We also have to make progress in the Ukraine conflict. The Minsk agreements, which Germany played a key role in drafting, provide a clear road map for peace, based on the principles of the peaceful settlement of disputes and the inviolability of borders. If proposals are now put forward for deploying a United Nations peacekeeping mission involving Blue Helmets, I think we should pursue that idea resolutely. While there is certainly not yet sufficient consensus on what such a mission should look like, the idea is worth testing if it can help achieve a ceasefire and the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the conflict zone. We would like to ask the Secretary-General to press for the proposal to be realized.
The North-South Commission pointed out that focusing solely on questions of war and peace was not enough. Those issues are also inextricably linked to the fair distribution of resources and to economic and social development and respect for universal human rights. Only a world in which solidarity prevails will ultimately bring us security and stability. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development shows that the international community sees that as a common interest. If we want to make a reality of major ambitions such as peace, security and justice, we need stronger joint international institutions, and especially a stronger United Nations.
The founders of the United Nations were not naive. They had experienced the horrors of the first half of the twentieth century. For that very reason, they bequeathed to us the Charter of the United Nations, with its timeless principles and maxims. But while the principles of the United Nations are not outdated, the Organization has to adapt to the challenges of our times. We therefore support the Secretary-General’s efforts to push ahead with bold reforms within the United Nations. He is setting the right priorities. The success of United Nations reform is largely up to us, the Member States. We have to work together to ensure that the United Nations is more efficient and has greater clout. In my view, reform efforts should not focus primarily on budget cuts. On the contrary, the United Nations will need more resources if it is to fulfil its mandate. We must therefore provide it with the means it needs to be successful. However, at present the figures tell a different story. The World Food Programme currently receives less than 50 per cent of the funding it needs to combat hunger crises around the world. Today a mere 15 per cent of contributions to the United Nations Development Programme are voluntary, non-tied payments, although in 2011 they were still at 50 per cent. The same is true for other United Nations aid programmes, and sometimes the outlook is even bleaker.
It should not be the job of those in positions of responsibility at the United Nations to spend more time sending begging letters seeking the necessary funding than in organizing effective assistance. We must change course and grant the United Nations more freedom with resources in exchange for greater transparency in its use of funds. Germany at any rate intends to maintain its financial support for the United Nations. As the country that is the fourth-largest provider of assessed contributions to the United Nations and that goes far beyond that, being one of the biggest donors of global humanitarian assistance generally, our input is substantial.
I believe that as Member States we should now take on another reform project that is long overdue. That is the composition of the Security Council, which should finally reflect the realities of the twenty-first-century world. Today many more States than at the time of the establishment of the United Nations, more than 70 years ago, are shouldering the responsibility for peace and security and are prepared to live up to that responsibility as Members of the Organization. Germany is ready and willing to take on additional responsibilities, which is why we are seeking a non-permanent seat on the Council for the 2019-2020 term. We have clear goals in mind. Peace and security, global justice and human rights are indivisibly linked. We are preparing for reform of the United Nations and its Security Council, and we intend to work in partnership with all countries of the United Nations in Africa, Asia, the Americas and Europe, for we can resolve global problems only if we refrain from focusing solely on national interests and instead work to reach a fair and peaceful balance of interests among all nations. Yes, that is an arduous process. But we must muster the courage to go down that path. For as Willy Brandt, who headed the North-South Commission after he left office as Chancellor, once said, “We firmly believe that problems created by men can also be solved by men”. Let us work on that together.


This is the eighth and last time I address the General Assembly in my capacity as President of Colombia. A lot has happened since 24 September 2010, when I made my first speech (see A/65/PV.15). Colombia has been transformed positively, and the world has experienced progress and setbacks, of which we have all been witnesses, victims or protagonists.
Here is a paradox: I did my first televised address to Colombians as their leader from New York in September 2010, one day before addressing the Assembly. What was the reason for that intervention? I announced to Colombia and to the international community that our armed forces had taken down the head of the guerrillas of the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC). Today, seven years later, I feel very happy that the news I bring from Colombia does not have to do with death, but with life. Today I come to tell the Assembly that the peace process with the FARC culminated not only in an agreement, but with something bigger and more important: thousands and thousands of human lives saved.
Therefore, the news today is not about death. It is about life, and we want that to be the news in the whole world. If in Colombia we were able to end an armed conflict that left hundreds of thousands dead and millions as victims and displaced persons, there is hope for the conflicts that still exist in the world. It was not easy. Ending a war, overcoming hatred and vanquishing fears involve a complex process of dialogue and compromise. However, we did it because we had the will and because we were aware of a fundamental premise: peace is a necessary condition for progress and the happiness of any society.
I want to acknowledge and thank the United Nations, because it has fully fulfilled the mission for which it was created, which is none other than to end the scourge of war. On behalf of some 50 million Colombians, I want to thank the Secretary-General, the Security Council and the Assembly.
A special mission set up by the Security Council was in charge of verifying and monitoring the FARC disarmament process and its compliance with the ceasefire and the cessation of hostilities between that group and the Colombian State. Today we can say, with immense satisfaction, that its mission has been fulfilled. The ceasefire and cessation of hostilities were respected, and the FARC delivered to the United Nations more than 9,000 weapons that were stored in containers. Those weapons are being destroyed. The members of that former guerrilla group — without detriment to their responsibilities with regard to justice and to the victims — have now formed a political movement to defend their ideas and proposals in the forums of democracy.
That is what a peace process is all about: replacing violence with reasoning, exchanging bullets for votes. Never again will arms be used as a means of political pressure. Now we are faced with the challenge of
implementing what has been agreed and guaranteeing victims’ rights to truth, justice, reparations and non-repetition.
In that regard, we can once again count on the friendly hand of the United Nations. In a few days, a second mission, authorized last week by the Security Council, will begin operations in our country. It will accompany the reintegration of guerrillas into civilian life and will help us to verify the safety of ex-combatants and the communities that have suffered from the armed conflict. And something very important: the United Nations will also verify compliance with the ceasefire and the temporary cessation of hostilities, which will begin 1 October, by the Ejército de Liberación Nacional, the other guerrilla group with which we are in negotiations to achieve a complete peace.
Building peace is a long process with political, economic and social dimensions. It is a process in which, fortunately, we have already had positive results. With innovative programmes in education, health, housing and infrastructure, we are beginning to close the deep social gaps of our society.
The Economic Commission for Latin America has highlighted Colombia’s progress in reducing poverty and indigence. In seven years, more than 5 million Colombians overcame poverty — that is more than a tenth of our population. We have turned health into a fundamental right, and education has been our highest budgetary priority for the past four years, above security and defence. International organizations also highlight the soundness of our economic and social indicators in the face of fluctuations in the global economy.
This is indeed a special moment for Colombia, and a special moment for the United Nations, which is successfully fulfilling, in our country, its main objective.
But this time of hope in Colombia does not prevent us from viewing with concern the difficult situations for peace and democracy in other parts of the planet. We emphatically deplore and condemn the ballistic- missile launches and the nuclear tests of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Those actions are a threat to international peace and security.
We are very concerned about the precarious situation in our sister and neighbour Republic of Venezuela, with which we share an immense border, a common history and human ties that do not allow us to be indifferent to its fate. Venezuela pains us. We are pained at the gradual destruction of its democracy. We are pained at the persecution of the political opposition and the systematic violation of the rights of Venezuelans. Today I repeat my call on the Secretary-General and the entire international community to support the Venezuelan people in the search for a peaceful solution that will return them to the path of progress, democracy and freedom.
We are also pained at the terrorist attacks carried out by intolerant fanatics, sowing fear and pain, and we condemn them. On that topic I would like to speak in two capacities: as President of the only country where instead of increasing weaponry we melt them to build monuments to harmony, and as the most recent Nobel Peace Prize recipient.
Beyond the differences of race, religion and thought, human beings are actually one. What happens to one happens to us all. We have to understand that beyond divisions, beyond borders, our people is called the world. Our race is called humankind. We must understand this truth if we are to respect one another and respect life.
We must fight terrorism forcefully — with military and police power, with intelligence and international cooperation. But we must also eradicate its roots, which are fear, exclusion and hatred, with the positive forces of love, compassion and respect for differences. In Colombia we are proving that it is possible; war can be overcome. Ancient enemies can speak and work together for a greater cause. If we are succeeding in Colombia, it can be done all over the world.
I cannot conclude without addressing an issue that I have highlighted before at this rostrum: the world drug problem. I have said many times that the war on drugs has not been won and is not being won, that we need new approaches and new strategies.
At the General Assembly’s thirtieth special session, on the world drug problem — which met last year at the initiative of Colombia — there was progress, such as the call for States to protect human rights in their drug policies. But we still have a great deal to do. We must reach consensus on central issues, such as not criminalizing addicts and understanding drug use as a matter of public health and not criminal policy.
The war on drugs has claimed too many lives. We in Colombia have paid a very high price, perhaps the highest of any nation, and what we are seeing is that the remedy is often worse than the disease. Let us undertake a serious and rigorous follow-up of the regulatory experiences that have been implemented in different places and learn from both their successes and their difficulties.
It is time to accept realistically that as long as there is consumption there will be supply, and that consumption will not end. It is not a simplistic matter of pointing out who is solely responsible. We all are, under the principle of the common and shared responsibility that we assumed several decades ago. It is time to talk about responsible regulation by States, to seek ways to weaken the mafias and to confront consumption with more resources for prevention, care and reduction of damage to health and to the social fabric. Colombia will continue to fight this scourge decisively. For us it has been and continues to be a matter of national security.
Peace has allowed us for the first time to initiate the process of voluntary substitution of coca crops. Those processes, along with the forced eradication we are promoting and the seizures, which have increased to unprecedented levels, will allow us to achieve results that are even more conclusive and long-term. But we must advance in this struggle with a more open mind. We have to be smarter and more innovative.
We can say much the same about climate change. Colombia, the most biodiverse country in the world for its size, is also one of the most vulnerable to climate change. That is why we have been proactive on this matter. At the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development we pushed for the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals, which the Assembly approved in 2015. Today we are pleased to see that those Goals are the backbone of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development promoted by the United Nations.
We also enthusiastically support the Paris Climate Agreement, whose goals are a national commitment and should be for all if we want to preserve our common home — the Earth. Humankind cannot close its eyes in the face of the most pressing challenge of our times.
In this, my last statement before the General Assembly, I want to offer the world — with humility and much gratitude — the example and model of peace that we are beginning to build in Colombia. And I want to reiterate our gratitude for the international community’s generous support.
With the strength of love we can overcome fear. With the strength of life we can overcome the tyranny of violence and death. With the strength of unity we can make the world a decent place to live.


I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of His Excellency Mr. Francisco Guterres Lu-Olo, President of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste.
“At the outset, I would like to congratulate President Miroslav Lajcak on his election and wish him every success in carrying out his duties. I welcome the theme of the seventy-second session of the General Assembly, ‘Focusing on people: Striving for peace and a decent life for all on a sustainable planet’. Conflict prevention and peacebuilding are without a doubt the tasks of our generation. I am confident that the President’s capable leadership, together with that of Secretary- General Antonio Guterres, will encourage and inspire our strong commitment and help us succeed in our common objective.
“It is a happy coincidence that I have been given the opportunity to address the General Assembly today, the same day on which, 18 years ago, the first members of the International Force in East Timor arrived in my country from Australia and New Zealand. The arrival on 20 September 1999 of that United Nations-mandated Force paved the way for our attainment of national independence, which a majority of the Timorese people voted for in a referendum on self-determination held under United Nations supervision. On behalf of the Timorese people, I reiterate my gratitude to the United Nations and to all the civilians and military officers under the flag of the United Nations who protect innocent people and save lives.
“Another happy coincidence is that there is another key player in the process that led to the self-determination of the Timorese people among us today — Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. The determined efforts of Mr. Guterres, then Prime Minister of Portugal, guided by his values and ethical imperatives, were decisive in ensuring that today Timor-Leste is considered a joint success story for the Timorese people and the United Nations.
“The history of Timor-Leste is a vivid reminder that when the values of civilization, on which the very existence of the United Nations is founded, lead us and inspire our decisions on the international scene, the United Nations and international law become powerful and decisive forces for settling conflicts and restoring peace. This year Timor- Leste is celebrating the fifteenth anniversary of the restoration of its independence, on 20 May 2002. Over the past 15 years, the partnerships we have established with the United Nations and its specialized agencies and development partners have produced important and inspiring results. We have achieved what few thought possible.
“The mortality rates of children under the age of 5 have fallen by half. According to the World Health Organization, Timor-Leste succeeded in reducing malaria rates from 220 out of 1,000 cases in 2006 to one in 1,000 in 2012. In 2002 there were 19 doctors in Timor-Leste; today we have nearly 1,000, trained thanks to the cooperation and solidarity of the people and the Government of Cuba. We have doctors in every village and several new hospitals. My country has been declared leprosy-free by the World Health Organization for the first time in centuries. In 2002, life expectancy at birth was 60 years; today it has reached 68.5.
“We consider education, like health care, a key priority. Our primary-education enrolment rates stand at nearly 100 per cent of school-age children and youth. We have recently introduced a new curriculum at the primary-school level and we given special priority in the past few years to building new schools and improving school equipment, with the primary objective of these and many other measures being improving the quality of public schools.
“The progress we have made is reflected in the United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index, in which our score during the past six years has averaged 0.610. In 2002, it was 0.375.
“The State of Timor-Leste has also undertaken initiatives to increase women’s participation in and contribution to the process of social and economic development, including by enacting legal measures against discrimination. Many East Timorese women occupy important positions in Government, the justice system, other public institutions and civil society. A third of the members of Timor- Leste’s national Parliament are women. However, ensuring that women are protected against exploitation and violence, as well as giving full recognition to their role in society, still requires the Government’s attention.
“The Timorese people’s most important achievement during the past 15 years has been in building peace and reconciliation at both the national and international levels. Peace and reconciliation have been made possible thanks to the vision of our national leaders and the courage of Timorese society as a whole to reject vengeance and genuinely adhere to that vision.
“We have established solid relations of friendship and close cooperation with Indonesia and Australia. We are working to further strengthen our relations with our neighbours in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, to which we have submitted our application for membership. Strengthening Timor-Leste’s regional integration is a key priority of our foreign policy.“In Timor-Leste, now that peace and stability have been achieved, we are putting our efforts into creating better conditions for economic and social development. In particular, we have improved development conditions for small and medium-sized enterprises and the private sector, and we are promoting the diversification of the non-oil economy. This year we also strengthened democracy through our most recent presidential and legislative elections, which were organized entirely by the Timorese people.
“We believe that a key condition for the development of the country is ensuring stable and solid institutions that provide quality public services. This is why my country supported the inclusion in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development of Sustainable Development Goal 16 on peace, justice and strong institutions. We believe that there can be no development without peace, and the importance of peace for development is a priority for us that has been reflected in Timor- Leste’s commitment to establishing the g7+ since 2009. The g7+ brings together a couple of dozen States that are emerging from conflict or in a situation of fragility. The Group’s action has had tangible, positive results in relationships with development partners and in bilateral and multilateral cooperation. We have seen these mutual advantages in the cooperation that has resulted among fragile States in relevant areas such as peace and reconciliation, the management of natural resources and the stewardship of public finances. Many of the member States of the g7+ have also hosted or are hosting United Nations peacekeeping missions, putting them in the privileged position of being able to share their valuable experience with regard to areas of peacekeeping that have been successful and those that need improvement.
“Our national experience has taught us to value multilateralism as an important instrument for responding to challenges within the international system, but that is not the only reason we value it. Another is the 2030 Agenda, which embodies multilateralism’s potential for improving the planet and the well-being of its peoples. The 2030 Agenda has benefited from the overall experience of the process of the Millennium Development Goals, and its success will benefit the many millions who have been deprived of basic human rights through poverty. Only through dialogue, negotiation, multilateral cooperation and respect for democracy can we meet the ambitious goals we have established for 2030.
“Today the international community is facing unprecedented challenge that require multilateral cooperation and a global response. Climate change is already having a growing impact on the development conditions for society and on the future of the planet. The effect on food security, among other things, is central to our concerns and has been the target of several Government measures, including within the scope of multilateral cooperation in the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries, which we recently had the honour of presidi ng over. For small island developing States, the effects of climate change represent an existential issue that requires attention and effort from us all.
“International cooperation in the fight against transnational crime at all levels is a top priority for Timor-Leste. We, the international community, have an inalienable duty to work to realize the values of civilization enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and its conventions. Timor-Leste is a participant in a number of important multilateral processes for regional and international stability and security, and we will continue to expand and deepen that participation.
“The world is facing threats that were unimaginable when the United Nations was first established. The Organization must be capable of responding to the new challenges facing humankind. In that context, I would like to express Timor- Leste’s full support for the ongoing reform process led by the Secretary-General, particularly with regard to the United Nations development system and its management of areas such as peacekeeping, security, gender parity and strategies against sexual exploitation and abuse, as well as his recent establishment of a High-level Advisory Board on Mediation and the Office of Counter-Terrorism
“The world is currently confronting two huge threats to international peace, the hotbeds of war in the Middle East and the nuclearization of the Korean peninsula and escalating tensions there. My country urges all the parties involved, in both regions, to show the greatest possible restraint inorder to avoid any steps that could aggravate the situation. Timor-Leste calls on all the parties to fully respect the relevant international conventions and Security Council resolutions. In particular, I call for dialogue and negotiation to help defuse the tensions and promote a peaceful settlement of the conflict on the Korean peninsula. Timor- Leste supports non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament and is in the process of signing and ratifying the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which it expects to conclude in the near future.
“My country welcomes the prospect of the holding of an intergovernmental conference on migration next year and considers it urgent to improve the coordination of the international community and the quality of the shelter for these massive movements of migrants and refugees. We must also tackle the root of the problem by increasing development opportunities in depressed regions and reducing the drivers of migration flows.
“Ensuring that the people of Western Sahara can finally exercise their right to self-determination continues to be postponed. For 26 years, the Sahrawi have been peacefully waiting for the parties to comply with the relevant United Nations resolutions. I call for dialogue between the Kingdom of Morocco, the legitimate representatives of the Sahrawi people and the United Nations aimed at arriving at a solution as soon as possible that can ensure the holding of a referendum on the self- determination of the people of Western Sahara. I also call for the lifting of the embargo on the Republic of Cuba, an anachronistic situation that the international community has broadly rejected.
“I am very pleased to inform the General Assembly that Timor-Leste and Australia have made important and decisive progress in the talks on the demarcation of our shared maritime border. Timor- Leste initiated the settlement process required under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in April of last year. This mechanism, initiated for the first time in history, has enabled both countries to recently agree in principle on the central elements of the delimitation of the maritime borders of the Timor Sea. It has reaffirmed our faith in the ability of the international legal system, and in particular the United Nations, to support all States. We want to point out that thanks to the United Nations and its procedures, it will now be possible for us to take one of our final steps towards achieving full sovereignty. We also hope that in these times of global complexity and uncertainty, our success in that process will set a small but positive example for the international community.
“In conclusion, I would like to emphasize Timor-Leste’s commitment to the multilateral system. Timor-Leste will continue to cooperate closely and at every level with efforts to maintain regional and international security and stability. Our people greatly appreciate the support of the international community.”


I would like to congratulate Mr. Lajčák on his assumption of the presidency of the General Assembly at its seventy-second session and to assure him that the Tonga delegation will fully support his able leadership in revitalizing and enhancing the crucial role of the United Nations. I am grateful to his predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Peter Thomson, a distinguished son of the Pacific islands region, for advancing the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and successfully convening the inaugural Ocean Conference this year. I also commend His Excellency Secretary-General António Guterres for his sterling stewardship since he began his first year at the helm of the United Nations. The Tonga delegation will fully support his important reform work.
We send our message of solidarity and sympathy to the people of Mexico and to their families and friends affected by the devastating earthquake, as well as to the millions of people in the Caribbean and all those affected in recent weeks by the ravages of successive hurricanes.
My delegation and I welcome the timely and relevant theme of this year’s session — “Focusing on people: Striving for peace and a decent life for all on a sustainable planet”. It essentially emphasizes the peaceful well-being of all people and the conservation and sustainable use of our global resources for present and future generations. What is now crucial is implementation, through sincere partnerships, to collectively achieve the targets, goals and objectives set under international law and the internationally agreed outcomes. In contributing to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, including the internationally agreed blueprint for the sustainable development of small island developing States (SIDS) and the SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action (SAMOA) Pathway, Tonga has established a national monitoring mechanism, for which we would like to acknowledge the support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
The United Nations Development Assistance Framework 2013-2017 will conclude at the end of this year. The five-year programme cycle for 14 Pacific island countries, the United Nations Pacific Strategy 2018- 2022, which was signed in August 2017 at the UNDP Pacific Office, will commence after that. The close partnership between the Government of Tonga and the United Nations system for effectively implementing the integrated Tonga strategic development framework and the 2030 Agenda is reinforced, through the coordination of United Nations Pacific Strategy 2018-2022, by the United Nations Joint Presence Office delivering as one, led by UNDP in Tonga. It is strategically positioned to provide technical advice to the Government, non-governmental organizations, civil society and the private sector.
We also note the Secretary-General’s new senior-management appointments and welcome the appointment of the first woman from Tonga and the Pacific islands region to shepherd the important advocacy and facilitation work in the years ahead for the United Nations Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States. We fully support the goal of gender parity, including at all levels in the Organization.
The 2017 High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development enabled us to review seven of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular Goal 3, on good health and well-being; Goal 5 on gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls; and Goal 14 on the ocean and its resources. We commend the President of the Economic and Social Council for his initiative in devoting adequate time to underscore and examine the complex sustainability challenges facing SIDS, as a special case, and thereby enhancing efforts to implement the commitments called for in the Samoa Pathway. The High-level Political Forum remains an important way to assess the follow-up, monitoring and accountability of commitments to SIDS, which are essentially linked to the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda.
We fully support Fiji’s presidency this year of the twenty-third Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, with a view to strongly addressing the adverse impacts of climate change and the urgent need for innovation in adaptation for SIDS. We note the role of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank in making disaster finance and other financial tools available to all SIDS. While we acknowledge their work on expanding the definition of fragility, we urge for further refinement of operational financing decisions so as to include the drivers of vulnerability that the Pacific islands region experiences, particularly natural disasters and adverse economic shocks. We reiterate our call for the appointment of a special representative for climate and security to ensure that the United Nations system has the appropriate tools to respond effectively and efficiently to climate change as an existential threat and a mounting security challenge for SIDS and the entire international community.
Enhanced access to modern and clean sustainable-energy services, energy efficiency and the use of economically viable and environmentally sound technology and research play a critical role in our sustainable development. Mitigation efforts are also essential to overcoming the challenges of excessive dependence on imported fossil fuels. To further strengthen international and regional cooperation, the Pacific Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency was established in Tonga in April. The Centre provides valuable support to Pacific island countries and territories in advancing their various priorities and commitments in achieving sustainable energy and contributing to SDGs 7, 9 and 13. It is a partnership that includes the Pacific Community, the Government of Austria, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization and the SIDS Sustainable Energy Initiative, among others. The General Assembly acknowledged the Centre at its adoption in July of the biennial resolution entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Pacific Islands Forum” (resolution 71/316).
However, we continue to experience the negative effects of ocean degradation on our livelihoods and culture, owing to anthropogenic activities and the devastating interrelated effects of climate change. We are already actively contributing to the implementation of SDG 14, and look forward to a strong collaboration with all interested parties. This year we hosted an international whaling meeting. Through a far-sighted royal decree in 1978, His Majesty the late King Tupou IV had already banned whaling in Tongan waters four years before the international ban on whale hunting came into effect. That was reaffirmed during the April 2017 international conference on “Whales in a changing ocean” that we were honoured to host.
We may be a small island State, but all small island developing States are large-ocean States. For us and our people, the successful implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14 is critical to our pathway towards sustainable development and its interconnection with other goals, such as those related to food security, water and sanitation, health, economic growth, and sustainable production and consumption. We need strong political will for a whole-of-Government approach to mainstreaming ocean-related actions from international, regional, and national development plans and strategies, in order to ensure the inclusive participation and efforts of all stakeholders, including local communities and the private sector.
Tonga joined the international community in endorsing the call-for-action outcome document (resolution 71/312) of the Ocean Conference in June, which includes almost 1,400 voluntary commitments by stakeholders, including eight from Tonga. It is a foundation for the development of a blue economy or “blue charter”, as proposed by the Commonwealth secretariat. It is urgent that we begin working to develop practical guidelines and toolkits to assist States in delivering on all the targets under Goal 14 in an integrated manner.
We acknowledge the completion of the work of the Preparatory Committee established by General Assembly resolution 69/292 on the development of a legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. Tonga maintains its support for the commencement of an intergovernmental conference to initiate negotiations on a substantive text as soon as possible. We embrace the ongoing work of the International Seabed Authority in its administration and management of resources in that area in accordance with the common heritage of mankind. Tonga congratulates the Secretary-General of the Authority in his first year in office as he works with member States to develop important exploitation regulations, which must strike the appropriate balance between conservation of the natural environment in which mineral resources exist and its sustainable use. The consultations must be transparent and inclusive if such a balance is to be achieved.
Tonga continues its engagement as a member State of the Authority and will seek re-election to the Council at the Authority’s twenty-fourth session in 2018. A Tongan national, together with other members of the Legal and Technical Commission, provides expert views for facilitating the work of the Commission in developing an important financial mechanism for ensuring the fair and equitable distribution of returns from seabed mining.
Tonga reiterates the call made under the Samoa Pathway for genuine and durable partnerships that can help to ensure that no one is left behind. A very credible partnership mechanism between the 12 Pacific SIDS and Italy, Austria, Luxembourg and Spain is exemplified through the Joint Committee. It has been ably co-chaired by Italy and the Chair of the Pacific SIDS every year since 2006. Tonga has therefore benefited thanks to projects related to renewable energy, water, the strengthening of young Government officials’ capacities and, more recently, protected maritime areas.
We welcome the establishment of the India-United Nations Development Fund through the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation, which launched a project implemented by UNDP for establishing early warning systems in Tonga and other Pacific island countries. The system relies on the timely provision of disaster-risk information, guidance on how to act on warnings and ensuring a constant state of preparedness. Sustainable development is possible where there is peace and security, and sustainable development is key to peace and security.
Finally, we urge all leaders to focus and reflect on the best ways to ensure that their power and legitimacy can benefit their own people and the entire world. We appeal for a speedy resolution to the current tensions on the Korean peninsula, which are affecting global peace and security. I congratulate the Secretary-General on the recent establishment of the High-level Advisory Board for Mediation, designed to advise him on specific initiatives and related efforts around the world.
May Almighty God guide and bless the President of the General Assembly, all the States Members of the United Nations and their respective Governments and peoples.


On	behalf of the
Government of the Republic of Angola, allow me to congratulate Mr. Miroslav Lajcak on having been elected to preside over the General Assembly at its seventy-second session and to assure him of Angola’s full support in the fulfilment of his mission, so that he may successfully provide us with the leadership we need at this time.
I also congratulate Mr. Peter Thomson, President of the Assembly at its seventy-first session, on the capable manner in which he conducted the work of the previous session; and Mr. Antonio Guterres on his appointment to the post of Secretary-General. Allow me to wish Mr. Guterres every success in his mandate and assure him of the full support and cooperation of Angola.
As has been reiterated several times in this forum, peace and security are fundamental premises for stability, sustainable development, democracy and the promotion of and respect for human rights. The theme chosen for this session — “Focusing on people: Striving for peace and a decent life for all on a sustainable planet” — is timely and compels us to collectively reflect on the actions of the United Nations to solve the main problems affecting humankind.
We need an Organization capable of promoting international peace and security by acting swiftly to prevent potential conflict situations, improving the global strategy to combat international terrorism, and placing economic and social development issues at the centre of its action. In this context, we appreciate the relevance of the four axes defined in the agenda of this session, namely, the prevention and mediation of conflicts to achieve sustainable peace, the promotion of human rights, the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.
We reiterate Angola’s support for the Secretary- General’s proposals for reforms with a view to revitalizing and rationalizing the resources of the Organization. The United Nations should act as the first instance in the promotion of peace diplomacy at the global level.
We also reiterate the need to reform the Security Council in order to have it reflect the reality of the contemporary world. Its current composition is outdated and needs to be urgently reformed. In line with the African position represented in the Ezulwini Consensus, Angola reiterates the need to increase the number of permanent members to ensure a fair geographical balance. It is unfair that the African continent, which accounts for almost 40 per cent of the States Members of the United Nations, is not represented among the permanent members in the main organ in charge of maintaining peace and security in the world.
Angola underlines the importance of multilateralism in solving global problems, in accordance with the logic of shared responsibility and benefits, in recognition of the legitimate interests of all and in concertation towards realistic solutions. Angola’s attachment to multilateralism is strongly emphasized in its role in solving problems that threaten peace and security on the African continent, particularly in the Great Lakes region.
In the context of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, Angola has been leading diplomatic efforts, with its regional and international partners, to find a lasting political solution capable of guaranteeing security, stability, economic and social development, and democracy for the countries and peoples of the region. This joint engagement has allowed for a substantial reduction of tensions in the region, with notable advances such as the continuation of the inter-Burundi dialogue, encouraging signs in the resolution of the political crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and positive developments in the peace process in the Central African Republic, which have made it possible to hold elections in the country leading to the normalization of its institutions.
Despite these advances, we still have a long way to go on the path towards fully stabilizing that part of our continent, and the parties involved carry the main responsibility for ending the violence, respecting the human rights and fundamental freedoms of the citizens of their respective countries, and building their national political institutions. In this context, they must demonstrate through action their commitment to and engagement with peace agreements and other political platforms either negotiated directly or sponsored by regional institutions and the international community.
The international community’s collective action under the auspices of the United Nations should also cover the fight against terrorism. In this fight, a significant part of our effort should be directed at combating the causes of terrorism and violent extremism, which reside, inter alia, in the social crises in and the institutional fragility of many States. The case of Libya is a blatant example of this reality.
The African continent has been at the forefront of the fight against terrorism, which has killed innocent civilians, caused extensive damage to property and destroyed the way of life of many of its countries. Angola fully supports the efforts of the African Union, with the assistance of its international partners, to confront the scourge of terrorism.
Two years ago, we adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development — an important instrument to guide the development strategies of our States. We hope that its implementation over the next 13 years will substantially reduce the major social deficiencies affecting developing nations in particular. The economic and financial difficulties affecting most countries have had a negative impact on the mobilization of financial resources for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, especially among the poorest, most vulnerable countries with limited internal resources. International efforts aimed at securing critical financial resources should be guided by the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development, adopted in 2015.
The Republic of Angola, which is now beginning a new cycle in its life as a nation, is strongly engaged in achieving the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, despite an adverse global economic environment. To that end, Angola has launched its national development plan, aimed at rehabilitating and modernizing economic and social infrastructure, promoting public and private investment, and enhancing training, qualification and the adequate management of human resources.
The world is moving towards consensus in recognizing the urgency of combating climate change. To this end, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change is extremely important in the development of enabling tools for protecting the right to development and strengthening resilience in developing countries. Angola views the Agreement as a historic commitmentand an encouragement to contain global warming and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The urgent need for the world to advance the implementation of the Paris Agreement has been dramatically highlighted by the recent climate-related disasters in various parts of the world. Angola joins in solidarity with the victims in the Caribbean, Mexico, the United States and other parts of the world.
In order to address this and other challenges facing the international community, Angola will continue to be a safe and responsible partner of the United Nations and contribute to the implementation of its agenda in an engaged manner. We are increasingly able and fit to play a decisive role in restoring peace and security, particularly in Africa, as well as in furthering its economic development. To that end, Angola has remained stable, and the pacification of the country has definitely been achieved.
The Republic of Angola recently held its third general elections in peacetime, in a climate of tranquillity, respect for differences and great civility, demonstrating the stability prevailing in the country and that the gradual consolidation of democracy is a fact. The priorities of the new Government will focus on economic development with particular attention on combating poverty, reducing inequalities, combating unemployment, and improving governance insufficiencies and development indicators as a sine qua non for building a prosperous and democratic society.
Regrettably, peace is still not prevalent in many regions. Concerning Guinea-Bissau, a country linked to Angola by historical and brotherly ties, we remain confident and expectant regarding the resolution of the political impasse. In this regard, we strongly support the efforts of all the Guinean, regional and international political and social actors, including the Economic Community of West African States, the African Union, the United Nations, the European Union and the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries.
The issue of Western Sahara continues to merit the due attention of the United Nations to ensure the effective implementation of the relevant Security Council and African Union resolutions. Angola encourages the main parties involved to continue the dialogue in order to resolve the dispute, which has lasted too long.
In the Middle East, we are concerned about the impasse in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
Angola argues that the solution lies in the acceptance and existence of two States, living side by side in peace and security.
The tension we are now witnessing in the Korean peninsula poses a very serious threat to international peace and security. Angola joins the voices advocating for a diplomatic solution and compliance with international non-proliferation instruments. The peoples of the region deserve to live in peace and not haunted by the spectre of a conflict whose effects would be devastating and unacceptable to the human conscience.
Angola promptly welcomed the steps taken to normalize relations between the Republic of Cuba and the United States of America, which will benefit the two peoples. The complete lifting of the economic, commercial and financial embargo would contribute significantly to easing tensions between the two countries and would eliminate one of the last remnants of the Cold War. This would also bring about a more stable and peaceful environment for development in the Latin American region. This unilateral measure — the embargo — limits the Cuban people’s enjoyment of development, and its extraterritorial effects violate the principles and norms of international law.
The promotion and protection of human rights have always been at the forefront of Angola’s foreign priorities, as evidenced by the fact that it is a party to the main international human rights instruments and maintains an exemplary cooperation and ongoing dialogue with United Nations human rights mechanisms. It is in this context that Angola is a candidate for a seat on the Human Rights Council in the elections that will take place in October 2017. We look forward to participating actively in and contributing to the protection of human rights in the regions and countries most affected by violations of these rights. In this regard, we would highly appreciate the support of the members of the Assembly for our candidacy.
I would like to conclude by urging Member States to renew their confidence in the United Nations and strengthen international dialogue as a key element of a culture of peace, respect for differences among peoples, conflict prevention and the foundations of progress and development, to which all the peoples of the world have the right and are entitled.