Canada

May I first take this opportunity to congratulate my very good friend, the Foreign Minister of Ukraine, on his election as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-second session and to convey to him the best wishes of Canada for a successful and productive association in this session. I know from our long personal contacts that the course of this important debate is in the best possible hands. Let me also take the opportunity to thank and congratulate Ambassador Razali for his tireless and effective leadership of the General Assembly at the fifty- first session. I come to the Assembly today with a sense of urgency and an abiding faith and belief that we are now emerging, not only from the shadows of the cold war, but also from the uncertainties of its aftermath. Around the world, we see countless examples of the basic principles and overall vision of the United Nations Charter being put into practice. The people of the world are laying the foundations of a new international system for the new millennium. Of course, I recognize that no part of the world is without its burdens of conflict, grief and personal suffering. Nor are there any great signs of relief from the growing burden of global economic inequities. What has changed, however, is the new international willingness to face the issues, to mobilize political will and to launch reforms. There is a sense, not of helplessness, but of hope. The old realities of power have not disappeared, but alongside them have appeared new forces, new coalitions and new ways of doing business — and these forces are impatient. As we have seen, in fact, in recent days, one person's vision and generosity can make a difference and stand as an inspiration to us all. This new spirit needs to be manifest and inspire the work of the United Nations. The Secretary-General has proposed a serious and far-sighted set of reforms. Canada strongly supports these proposals and accepts them as a package. They promise not simply greater efficiency, but, we hope, greater effectiveness. Based on our experiences in Canada, I can say with some authority that budget-cutting by itself is not the answer. There must be serious structural change to modernize existing institutions, both national and international, that were formed over 50 years ago. To undertake these reforms, solutions must be based on agreement and cooperation. Solutions cannot be imposed by one country or one group, but rather must be inspired by a sense of openness and innovation. In other words, we must establish a new compact amongst United Nations Members to set this Organization on a sound financial footing. As Mr. Udovenko has said, we are at a watershed, a defining moment for the Organization that can either provide new momentum or stall our advance. The direction we take is ours collectively to decide and the outcome in all our hands. We must not waste this opportunity. (spoke in French) Another defining moment, I believe, took place just over a week ago in Oslo. Ninety nations, spurred on by the efforts of the non-governmental organizations, agreed on the text of a treaty banning anti-personnel landmines. The treaty will be signed this coming December, just 14 months after it was first conceived. (spoke in English) While visiting the treaty discussions in Oslo, I was forcibly struck by how what has become known as the Ottawa process demonstrates the changed character of world affairs. Above all, it shows how the breakdown of the old bipolar world affords new opportunities for civil society, private individuals, to influence multilateral diplomacy. The focus of the Ottawa process 19 is a weapon that slaughters countless civilians, a weapon that has lost much of its military utility, whatever some may say. This illustrates the growing feeling, coming from the grass roots of the world community, that the engines of war designed for the twentieth century have no place in the twenty-first. I should say that this is not the only example of the new grass-roots activism which points to the emergence of a global commons as a powerful positive force of globalization. For example, Canadian women, appalled at the treatment of their sisters in Afghanistan, have started a letter-writing campaign. I will be delivering some 5,000 letters today to the Secretary-General, which call on him to take the lead in exposing the gross human rights violations of women in Afghanistan as unacceptable in the eyes of the world's citizens. The effectiveness of these new forces can be clearly measured. Nations from every region of the world have pledged to sign on to a complete ban on the stockpiling, production, export and use of anti-personnel landmines. We hope to see more join our ranks between now and December. For those who are still on the sidelines, we ask them to think hard and deep on this issue. Their engagement is crucial. By joining us, already a majority of United Nations Member States, they can help rid the world of this most inhumane weapon. (spoke in French) Canada recently announced its intention to destroy its remaining stocks of anti-personnel mines before signature of the treaty. We will also shortly ratify the amended Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. (spoke in English) This treaty constitutes a promise to future generations. But it does not resolve the equally grave problems posed by mines already in the ground, nor does it address the plight of those who have experienced directly their dreadful impact. Following the signing of the treaty, the international community will have an obligation to develop policies for an enhanced and coordinated approach to humanitarian demining, and to victim assistance and rehabilitation. This is, as much as anything else, a development issue. Heavily mined areas of the world cannot pursue economic development until they have been demined; and demining is a hopeless task if there is no treaty to prevent the laying of new mines. At Ottawa in December, we will invite nations to engage in a second phase of the campaign: a broad mobilization of groups and countries to tackle the aftermath of the landmines crisis. It is a monumental task, to be met only through the combined action of all States. We invite all present to join us. The generosity of private citizens such as Ted Turner, or of the Auto Workers' Union of Canada, and the commitment of those like Princess Diana must be matched, indeed surpassed, by the Governments of this world. It is important to ask what is behind this willingness to tackle these old problems in a new way? What has brought us to the intersection of high hopes and new strategies, and the real ability to effect change in the world, as exemplified by the landmines campaign? To my mind, these developments and, above all the recognition of the need to adopt new approaches, are in part a response to the changing face of war. In the second half of the twentieth century, we have seen one type of conflict become prevalent. These are wars fought within, not between, States; wars that tend to be long and bitter; and wars, above all, in which civilians suffer the most and children and women are often deliberately targeted. These are wars in which, in the words of Saint-Exupéry “the firing line passes through the hearts of people”. As this type of war increasingly accounts for the great majority of all conflicts, the distinctions that once informed the work of international diplomacy — between military security concerns and humanitarian or civil concerns — break down. This blurring of the lines, along with heightened media presence, has strongly affected international opinion. Fewer and fewer people are willing to view war as an acceptable instrument of state policy. In the light of these changes, the concept of human security, which I highlighted when I addressed the Assembly last year, takes on growing relevance. It is based on the premise that it is not enough to spare people from the “scourge of war” narrowly defined. Ensuring true, sustainable human security means tackling other severe threats: the unmet needs of more than a billion people living in poverty; attacks on human rights of individuals and groups within society; 20 transnational threats, such as crime and terrorism; and threats to health and livelihood through depletion or pollution of our resources. The problems of these new global issues will not wait for long-term solutions. It is urgent that we take action to prevent or reduce the incidence of conflict, to restore societies in the aftermath of conflict and to increase human security around the world. The priorities for action can, in my view, be grouped under three main headings: addressing issues which cut across traditional boundaries between areas of concern, such as we have in the landmines campaign; identifying and addressing the root causes of conflict; and improving our ability to respond to crises when we cannot prevent them. Let me talk about that first priority. Landmines are not the only complex, cross-cutting problem to be addressed if we are to reduce the impact of conflict. All too often it is small arms, rather than the major weapons systems targeted by our disarmament efforts, that cause the greatest bloodshed. In the hands of terrorists, criminals, the irregular militia and armed bands typical of internal conflict, these are the true weapons of mass terror. As with landmines, their victims are all too often civilians. We welcome the recent report of the United Nations Panel of Governmental Experts on Small Arms and discussions within the United Nations Disarmament Commission on disarming combatants as a step towards more lasting peace. These should serve as the launching pad from which to develop practical measures, in consultation with regional bodies. (spoke in French) To tackle this problem, the first steps must be to combat illicit trafficking in firearms and to bring greater transparency to the legal exportation of small arms. The Organization of American States (OAS) is currently working towards an Inter-American convention on illicit trafficking in firearms. Canada hopes that the OAS negotiations will result in an effective convention and will also inspire other regional bodies to take action. (spoke in English) Ridding the world of anti-personnel landmines and banning or limiting other forms of weapons directly reduce the human suffering caused by conflict. The other side of the same coin is building and enhancing human security. By building peace, reducing unsustainable military expenditures, promoting equitable and sustainable development and encouraging stable, democratic societies which respect human rights, we not only limit human suffering, but we also address the root causes of conflict itself. To do this requires solutions that are built from the inside, not imposed from the outside. Sustainable peace can be built only through the active cooperation and participation of Governments, peoples, and groups caught in the conflict itself. At the same time, a parallel effort is required to reform the United Nations development funds and programmes. Canada strongly supports the Secretary- General's reform proposals in this area. We place priority on improving coordination within the United Nations system at the country level, including among the specialized agencies and the Bretton Woods institutions, in order to maximize development impact. Canada, through diplomacy and development assistance, has supported peace-building activities in certain regions for many years. To give further impetus to this approach, last October I announced the Canadian peace-building initiative. Its aim is to coordinate Canadian programmes and policies in support of conflict prevention and resolution, peace-building and post-conflict reconstruction. A peace-building mechanism or fund has provided a rapid response mechanism in areas of conflict. Over the last six months, we have used this peace- building fund for the following purposes: to provide critical start-up funding for the historical clarification Commission in Guatemala; to assist the preparatory commission for the establishment of an international criminal court by underwriting the participation of delegates from developing countries; and to provide financial assistance for the work of the joint United Nations/Organization of African Unity (OAU) Special Representative for the Great Lakes region of Africa, Mr. Mohamed Sahnoun. In addition, Canada is prepared to contribute up to $500,000 from this fund for the establishment in Bosnia and Herzegovina of a non-governmental organization foundation to develop civil society on the basis of 21 multi-ethnic cooperation. I urge other members to join us in supporting this foundation. Finally, I am pleased to announce a Canadian contribution of $500,000 from the peace-building fund to the new United Nations Trust Fund for Preventive Action, created by the Secretary-General in response to a proposal from the Norwegian Government. A second promising area of work on the root causes of conflict lies in exploring the links between security and development, and particularly in reducing levels of military expenditures relative to economic and social spending. Last year Canada sponsored, together with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) a symposium on military expenditures in developing countries which brought together a wide range of experts who identified areas for further action: small- arms proliferation, about which I have just spoken, regional security, good governance and the rule of law. The United Nations has established important tools to build the confidence necessary for reductions in military spending, in the form of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms and the United Nations standardized reports on national military expenditures. Much more work is needed, particularly at the regional level, to identify ways to reduce military spending and to redirect scarce national resources to the economic and social development goals. A third area of attention is work on conflict that comes from threats to environmental sustainability. Environmental problems have the capacity to imperil living standards and to endanger the well-being of future generations. For these reasons, Canada strongly supports new agreements on hazardous chemicals, including persistent organic pollutants, and will work to ensure the success of the new intergovernmental forum on forests. Combating desertification also remains a priority for us, and we have offered to host the Desertification Convention secretariat. The fourth and final promising area in addressing the root causes of conflict is human rights and good governance. Next year we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is an opportunity for all of us to reaffirm strongly the fundamental importance of this document and our commitment to the common standards it sets out. In recognition of the importance of this anniversary, Canada will be sponsoring a broad programme of activities, including a major world conference on human rights and the Internet, to draw together work being done in many international forums, with a focus on strategies for using the new international telecommunications technology to increase respect for human rights. We are working on the development and publication of an annual report on the state of human rights worldwide, based on the findings of the United Nations independent human rights mechanisms. And we will hold a conference reviewing the impact of the 1993 Vienna Declaration, to be held by Canadian non-governmental organizations. Abuse of human rights is sometimes excused as necessary in the interests of stability and national security, but the facts show otherwise. Countries with democratic governments which respect the fundamental rights of their citizens are less likely to wage war on one another. They are also more likely over time to achieve high levels of economic development. Recognizing this, Canada has recently undertaken a series of new bilateral human rights initiatives. Our aim is to work with our counterparts in other countries to establish discussions between governments to foster exchanges between institutions devoted to the protection of human rights and civil-society initiatives and projects for the development of free media. We also fully support the Secretary-General’s proposals for reform measures to enhance United Nations work in human rights. And we welcome the appointment of Mary Robinson as High Commissioner for Human Rights, and offer her our support. As we move towards the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the challenges facing the international community, if anything, have increased. The trend towards targeting civilians in warfare has resulted in severe infringements of the basic rights of women and children. Too often we have seen children recruited as soldiers or women subjected to sexual assault as a deliberate weapon of terror. Canada continues to make the rights of the child and of women, both in conflict and in peace, a top 22 human rights priority, which we pursue actively in the United Nations and elsewhere. We welcome the appointment of Mr. Olara Otunnu as Special Representative to study the impact of armed conflict on children. We will shortly host a preparatory meeting for the main donor countries invited to the Oslo child labour conference. And domestically we have launched a Child Labour Challenge Fund to support the efforts of our private sector to address the problem of exploitative child labour. Nowhere is the link between human rights and human security clearer than in the issue of children’s rights. By protecting the basic rights of the world’s children, we are nurturing a future generation of citizens with both the means and the desire to live in peace. The final overall priority for action is crisis response. And despite our best efforts, there will be times when conflict looms, or when it cannot be prevented. These situations call for rapid, decisive action, whether to forestall conflict or contain it when it breaks out. These actions include not only peacekeeping and other military measures, but also humanitarian and judicial responses. To date, the international community appears to have identified the lessons that the missions to Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda and Zaire have taught us, but not to have learned from them. In crisis situations, speed is the key to effective response. This is why Canada has been so active in efforts to develop a United Nations rapid- response and deployment capability, in particular a rapidly deployable mission headquarters here in New York. This would not only permit the timely insertion of military forces, but also integrate civilian and humanitarian organizations into mission planning and deployment. Canada hopes to see measurable progress on the rapidly deployable headquarters and on the Danish-led Standby Forces High-Readiness Brigade initiative. These improvements to the United Nations rapid-response capability are complementary, feasible and should be implemented without delay. Let us learn our lesson, and not ignore it once again. In addition to rapid military and humanitarian reaction, a key element of the United Nations response to conflict is the application of justice and the international rule of law. Canada strongly supports the timely establishment of an independent, effective international criminal court. In order to be effective, the court must have inherent jurisdiction over the core crimes of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. In order to be independent, the court must not be precluded from dealing with matters on the Security Council agenda. In conclusion, let me say that, as we all recognize, the United Nations was originally established as an instrument of international peace. Since that time, war has put on a new face. More and more, it has targeted primarily civilian populations. If the United Nations is to be effective — and I believe that the need for effective multilateralism has never been greater — the United Nations must adapt to this changing face of war. At the same time, the United Nations must also recognize that it, too, has changed at its very foundation. Both its membership and its mandate have expanded, and the growing importance of United Nations development and humanitarian activities have made their mark. Clearly, it is time for concerted reflection on the purpose and functioning of this body that we have built together — including on the difficult issues of financing and reform of the Security Council. The reform and expansion of the Security Council is a major undertaking of direct concern to all Member States. The long-term implications must be fully debated and carefully weighed, and the process must be fair and open. It must attract a broad consensus and cannot be rushed to accommodate other goals — including a short-term solution to the United Nations financial crisis. Canada wants to see a Security Council that is effective, transparent, broadly representative and, above all, less elitist and more democratic. The primary criteria for membership should be commitment to the ideals and undertakings of the United Nations and a willingness to remain always accountable to the full membership of this Assembly. Broader United Nations reform must necessarily fail so long as Member States continue to demand more of a system to which they contribute less. Effective leadership and moral authority are rooted in respect for undertakings and obligations freely entered into by Member States. It is the responsibility of each and every Member to pay its dues. These obligations apply in full, on time and without conditions. Looking ahead, there may be a time when we will choose to reconsider aspects of the current financial underpinnings of the United Nations. Indeed, we may 23 collectively decide that in order to broaden responsibilities and share power in ways that better reflect current international realities, some adjustments to the scale of assessments are warranted. Such decisions, however, can be neither prejudged nor presumed, and would no doubt be influenced by the commitment of those advocating such changes to the broader purposes of this Organization. The international context in which the United Nations functions has changed profoundly. Around the world, people are reshaping the way they live — be it by seeking more food, better air or greater democracy. Crucial to this massive transformation is the search for security, through both the reduction of conflict and the building of a better life in times of peace. The United Nations has long symbolized these dual hopes, for escape from “the scourge of war” and for “better standards of life in larger freedom”. I close my remarks today on a note of hope, quoting President Václav Havel of the Czech Republic, who said, “Hope is definitely not the same thing as optimism. It is not a conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out.” Our hope lies in the certainty that the United Nations, as the standard-bearer of international values, of a sense of multilateralism and of a sense of cooperation and partnership, makes sense for all of us. This must spur us on in this Assembly for the challenges that lie ahead.