Russia

There is no doubt that the twentieth century, which is now coming to a close, will leave a deep imprint on the history of the world. This has been an epoch of global transformation and social change, scientific discoveries and achievements. The realization of the idea of a universal world Organization, which has become the foundation uniting the entire international community, has indeed been one of the positive things about this century. However, the twentieth century has witnessed the most severe upheavals. Millions of people have perished in the flames of world wars, revolutions and civil and ethnic conflicts. On a few occasions, humanity teetered on the brink of self-destruction, and the burden of outstanding problems it has left for the new era is a heavy one. We cannot resolve all these problems before the advent of the third millennium, but we are indeed duty bound to lay down the foundations for resolving them in the long-term and to start moving in that direction. The most important thing we should do is to define the parameters of the world in which we are going to live. This lies at the core of the initiative put forward by the President of the Russian Federation, President Yeltsin, to develop a world concept for the twenty-first century. As a world Power and permanent member of the Security Council, Russia is fully conscious of its special role in and responsibility for world developments and stands for the establishment of a multipolar world built on a solid foundation of international law. Our country is pursuing in practice a multifaceted foreign policy with a view to establishing equitable and mutually beneficial bilateral and multilateral relations with all the countries of the world and to strengthening international security and stability. The world concept for the twenty-first century involves establishing a new culture which would aim to form a common system of values and models of behaviour. A world without wars and conflict, a world of democracy and prosperity must be the highest priority for all peoples and States. Every nation is entitled to its rightful place among other nations and to security on an equal footing in all its aspects, including in the political, military, economic and social areas. How and through what mechanisms can this be achieved? Is there a body which can reflect the interests of all States in a balanced manner? The answer is obvious: it is the United Nations. From the outset, the United Nations Charter put the Organization at the service of all humankind. There is simply no other universal mechanism to regulate international relations. We are fully aware of the danger posed by the threats and challenges facing our world today: the various manifestations of militant nationalism, separatism, terrorism and extremism, which know no borders. This is a common challenge which is claiming countless victims and wreaking destruction in various parts of the globe. Aggressive separatism, which has become a growth medium for various extremist forces, has become one of the main sources of domestic conflict and regional instability. No one is immune to it. The international community and, above all, the United Nations, must decisively clamp down on any manifestations of separatism and strictly and consistently defend the principles of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States and the inviolability of their borders. Outside encouragement and support for separatist forces must be totally eradicated. Recently, separatism has been increasingly merging with the monster of terrorism. We could even now, during this session, take a number of specific steps to stimulate practical international cooperation in combating terrorism. We must finalize the draft international convention on the suppression of acts of nuclear terrorism. I therefore suggest that we should develop and adopt a declaration of principles for cooperation between States on combating terrorism more vigorously. It is the States’ bounden duty to protect their citizens against terrorist attacks and to prevent activities from taking place in their territory that are aimed at organizing such acts against the citizens of other countries. Russia therefore supports the initiative to convene, under United Nations auspices, a conference or a special session of the General Assembly next year on 13 combating terrorism. Such an event would give a powerful political impetus to the struggle against terrorism at a global level. The capabilities of the United Nations should also be used more efficiently in the fight against drug-related threats and organized crime. Only through joint efforts that are also in strict compliance with the rules of international law can we defeat this evil. The founding fathers of the United Nations made provision for a law-based response to violations of peace and security. The international community can take also coercive measures, but this should be done in accordance with the Charter and following a decision by the Security Council. Unlawful means can only undermine rightful ends. It is from this very perspective that we assess such doctrines as that of humanitarian intervention. In general, we should take an extremely careful approach to coercive measures; what is more, we must not allow them to turn into a repressive mechanism for influencing States and peoples that are not to the liking of some. Of course, evolution of the international situation means that it is appropriate for existing rules of international law to be developed and adapted to prevailing conditions, but this should be done through collective discussion and the adoption of appropriate decisions, not as a fait accompli and not working from scratch: it should be based on valid rules of international law. This is precisely what Russia had in mind with its initiative to consider at the Millennium Summit legal aspects of the use of force in international relations in the era of globalization. We invite all countries to a broad and open dialogue on this issue. Much has been said in recent years about the reform of the United Nations, which is only natural. Life is an evolving process and, as times change, any system will need to be updated. What objectives future reform should pursue is another matter. In our view, reform means, first and foremost, the adoption of a package of measures to enhance the role of the United Nations in the world arena. The Organization should be ready to respond in a timely and appropriate way to the challenges that globalization presents to mankind. We must give serious thought to how to enhance the efficiency of the Security Council and how to make that principal organ of the United Nations more representative through the inclusion of influential new members, including — and this is absolutely indispensable — developing countries. This would help maintain the overall balance in the system of international relations, especially when the use of force, bypassing the Security Council, continues. It is also beyond doubt that preservation of the right of veto of permanent members is indispensable for meaningful and efficient work in the Council. Generally speaking, the entire system of international organizations needs sensible and responsible reform. At the same time, the United Nations must remain a focal point of the international community’s efforts to settle the most burning problems of the day. The issue of strengthening the authority of the United Nations after it has been seriously and painfully tested by the Balkan and Iraq crises is at the very top of the agenda at the current session of the General Assembly. First of all, we must continue strenuous efforts to restore the role of the Security Council in world affairs. We have managed through joint efforts to bring the settlement of the Kosovo problem back within the legal and political framework of the United Nations. Now we need jointly to strive for strict and consistent implementation of Security Council resolution 1244 (1999). We cannot afford to let the re-emerging political process be undermined again, since that could become a tragedy for all of Europe and could once again bring the world to the brink of catastrophe. Equally urgent is the issue of post-conflict rehabilitation in the Balkans. The United Nations has an important role to play in meeting these challenges as well. We all should draw serious lessons from recent crises. Non-legitimate methods of exerting power only exacerbate problems and result in even greater deadlock. Developments in the Middle East, where the peace process has of late acquired a new positive impetus, clearly exemplify the optimal alternative, that of negotiated settlement. Also on the agenda is the issue of improving sanctions regimes, to which the international community has frequently resorted over the past decade. Sanctions are an extreme measure. They must be applied only when other means of political influence have been exhausted and when the Security Council has established the existence of a threat to peace. The Council, for its part, should be guided by clear criteria for the imposition and the lifting of sanctions, and should not permit any free interpretation of the decisions it has adopted, much less permit the use of its decisions by anyone for selfish political or economic ends. It is necessary to take very serious account of the humanitarian implications of sanctions both for the population of the States subject to 14 such sanctions and for third countries. The punishment of entire nations, especially for an indefinite time and indiscriminately, is inadmissible. Peacemaking is one of the key areas of United Nations activities. During the past 50 years the Organization has acquired vast practical experience in this field. Having successfully survived intense disputes and ideological battles, peacemaking has proved its vital power and importance for securing world and regional stability. The evolution of the theory and practice of present-day peacemaking confirms that there is no alternative to maintaining the central role of the United Nations in this sphere. The encouragement of peacemaking and the strengthening of its legal basis in strict conformity with the fundamental principles of the Charter should become an important component of the concept of the world in the twenty-first century. Building up and modernizing the anti- crisis capability of the United Nations is a key prerequisite for tackling these tasks successfully. The top priority here is to begin truly using the system of stand-by agreements with the United Nations. Taking into account the limited resources of the world Organization, and given the high demand for peacekeeping operations, cooperation and division of labour between the United Nations and regional structures has become a priority. It is of fundamental importance that such cooperation should be in strict accordance with Chapter VIII of the Charter and should be fully consistent with the prerogatives of the Security Council. For Russia, the question of peacemaking cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations is far from theoretical. For many years, Russian peacemakers within the peacekeeping forces of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) have contributed to stabilizing the situations in Abkhazia, Georgia, in Tajikistan, and in Trans- Dniestria, Moldova. This testifies to the fact that the settlement of conflicts within the framework of the CIS is a priority for Russia. As before, we do not see any reasonable alternative to political settlement of these crisis situations, for which political will, patience and commitment to one’s obligations are needed. We consider it important for the United Nations to continue to play a prominent role in finding solutions in Tajikistan and in Abkhazia, Georgia. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which is called upon to play a central role in ensuring European security and stability, can and should be the main United Nations peacemaking partner in Europe. When this arrangement fails to work, not only do specific European countries suffer, but providing for global and continental security becomes complicated. In a broad sense, OSCE peacemaking parameters, ranging from conflict prevention to peacekeeping operations and post- conflict rehabilitation, should be defined in a charter on European security. Russia proposes too that the charter should also reflect such principles important for the future of Europeans as ensuring the security and the foundations of the relations between European and Euro-Atlantic organizations in this area. Then the charter will indeed become a kind of political constitution for the Europe of the twenty-first century. As the Istanbul summit of the OSCE, which is expected to adopt the charter, is approaching fast, we should press ahead with the formulation of a substantive document. The Conference on Interaction and Confidence- building Measures in Asia may become an important factor for stability on the Asian continent after the new positive impetus it received at the recent Almaty Foreign Affairs Ministers’ Meeting of the founding States. The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum, a venue for active dialogue on a broad spectrum of urgent international issues, is yet another example of the focus of the Asian countries on the formation of solid structures for security and cooperation on the continent. It is necessary to enhance the potential of African regional and subregional organizations, which are acting in close cooperation with the United Nations to curb and cope with conflicts and humanitarian catastrophes emerging in Africa. It is the duty of the international community to render every possible support to the African peoples. While strengthening the legal and practical basis of peacemaking activities, special attention should be paid to what is commonly called the human rights dimension. This relates not only to measures to minimize human sufferings caused by armed conflicts, but also to efforts aimed at preventing humanitarian crises. In this connection, I cannot fail to mention the unacceptable situation of countless thousands of people in the centre of Europe who, due to arbitrary actions by authorities, have found themselves deprived of their citizenship and of the right to use their native language and enjoy full rights in their State of residence. Civilized integration, rather than latent assimilation — this is the way out of the prevailing humanitarian situation in these 15 countries. We welcome the efforts of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Council of Europe and the Council of Baltic Sea States (CBSS) aimed at eliminating violations of human rights and freedoms of the non-indigenous population of Latvia and Estonia. We hope that the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights will make her contribution to these efforts. The risk of losing positive dynamics in the sphere of disarmament as a result of attempts to rely on unilateral power methods cannot but cause concern. If the political and legal fabric regulating international relations continues to disintegrate further, then trends to ensure national security through an arms race will become even stronger. Russia has consistently advocated the reduction and limitation of nuclear arsenals and strict compliance with the non-proliferation regime. For without this, ensuring strategic stability would prove impossible. We realize the importance of early ratification of the START II Treaty and of the initiation of START III negotiations, under which Russia would be prepared, on a reciprocal basis, to agree to considerable further reduction of strategic offensive armaments. Naturally, this process will be feasible only if the existing agreements in this field, first of all the ABM Treaty, are strictly observed. We believe that the General Assembly should come out clearly in support of the preservation and observance of the ABM Treaty, which is a cornerstone of strategic stability, because unilateral actions aimed at undermining the time-tested regime established by this Treaty are fraught with extremely dangerous consequences. A collective search for political and diplomatic solutions is the alternative to military responses to the problems of proliferation. This is precisely the target of Russia’s initiative concerning the global system of control over proliferation of missiles and missile technologies. Substantive discussions on threats to international information security must also be continued within the framework and under the auspices of the United Nations. The time has come to reach, through joint efforts, a common understanding of such threats and of measures to reduce them. The twentieth century has brought about economic globalization. All economies have become open and closely linked as a result of advances in science and technology. All these factors have provided a powerful impetus to social and economic development while creating their own specific problems. The gap between the industrial and the formerly colonial worlds has not only persisted but has begun to widen. Development assistance should remain a principal focus of future United Nations activities. Crises, primarily financial ones, have assumed an international character. We must draw the appropriate lessons and modernize the architecture of the world financial system. The United Nations and its specialized agencies should play a role here. The expansion of human economic activities has brought about a globalization of both natural and man-made disasters, and this has become a major destabilizing global factor. The challenges related to the prevention of such disasters and the elimination of their consequences require that the most advanced technologies be used for the benefit of the world community as a whole. Why not consider, therefore, the establishment, under the auspices of the United Nations, of a specialized international emergency agency which would assume relevant functions? A widely known saying reads: "It is much easier to win a war than a peace." The United Nations founders won the war and laid the foundations for peace. It is our duty to win this peace and to make it comprehensive and irreversible.