Poland

Allow me first of all to congratulate Mr. Harri Holkeri on his election as President of the Millennium session of the General Assembly. The Polish delegation expresses its satisfaction that the presidency of this session has been entrusted to an eminent statesman from Finland, a country with which we have ties of friendship and cooperation based on common values and aspirations. He may count on my delegation's full cooperation in the performance of his important tasks. 29 My congratulations also to the Assembly's outgoing President, Minister Theo-Ben Guribab, for the outstanding commitment and skill he displayed during his presidency. On behalf of Poland, allow me also to welcome to the United Nations the new Member, Tuvalu. I should also like to express my appreciation to the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, for the outstanding manner in which he has demonstrated his qualities of leadership and good judgement, and in particular for his inspirational report, “We the peoples: the role of the United Nations in the twenty-first century”. Although the start of the new millennium is still a few months away, a new era actually began a little earlier. It was marked by the demise of the world's ideological polarization into East and West and division into three worlds, and by the emergence of the world economy. Humankind enters this new era, the age of globalization, with the immense opportunity to expand the spheres of freedom and prosperity brought by the triumph of democracy and advances in technology, especially the achievements of the information revolution. Behind us we have left the twentieth century, an age of extremes and profound contradictions. It was an age of man's triumphs and downfalls, alternating setbacks and advances in the evolution of the international community. On the one hand, we have witnessed of amazing scientific, technological and material progress, the spread of human rights and democracy and the development of universal international institutions. On the other hand, it was also an age of the most horrendous dramas in contemporary human history, of the tragedies, atrocities and devastation of two world wars, of the utmost contempt for the human being, and of genocide and blind violence perpetrated by utopias intent on thus building “brave new worlds”. The Polish poet and Nobel laureate in literature in 1980, Czeslaw Milosz, wrote in The Witness of History that the twentieth century's original contribution to the history of the human race was “the near disappearance of the concept of values” and concluded: “The extermination camp became the central fact of the century.” Nonetheless, the end of this century seems to bring more optimism. This is not only the assessment of the Foreign Minister of reborn and democratic Poland. It is also the personal feeling of a man who, having been a prisoner of two totalitarian systems, the Nazi and the Communist — incidentally, I am, I think, the only Foreign Minister to hold this “distinction” — has known the sufferings specific to this century, and it reflects the hope ingrained in human nature. But as well as destruction and hatred, I have also been, since as long ago as the days of the Holocaust, a witness of and participant in a struggle for the dignity and the rights of the human being and the process of my country's recovery of independence and arduous construction of democracy. My history of active participation in transforming the conditions of human existence, in its individual and collective dimension, began in the yard of the concentration camp of Auschwitz. Later, enlistment in the Polish resistance and, in particular, participation in assistance for the inhabitants of the Warsaw Ghetto. Next, the unimaginable inferno of the Warsaw uprising in 1944 and the death, as it seemed at the time, of Warsaw. Finally, the end of the war. I remember the joy and hope with which we greeted the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They gave me strength when I found myself having to survive the ordeal of years in Communist jails. From them, too, I drew inspiration on the journey that eventually led me and my political friends to Gdansk, the city for which our allies were unwilling to die in 1939 and in which the next great turning-point in the history of the past century was launched in 1980. Indeed, two weeks ago we celebrated in Poland the twentieth anniversary of the foundation of the Solidarity movement, the Polish revolution that was at first suppressed at gunpoint by the totalitarian regime but that, becoming an emblem of hope, weathered repression and an unfavourable set of international circumstances. The rebirth of Solidarity in 1989 and the Polish Round Table opened the way to historic changes, including the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Communist bloc, and in consequence set in motion a sweeping transformation of the international system. Having been involved for over 60 years in these processes, as a writer, historian, university lecturer and, currently, Foreign Minister, I feel — if the Assembly will forgive the personal tone of this confession — as if I were a living, physical symbol of humanity's stormy voyage through the history of the past century. 30 But let me also say that the traumatic experiences of my nation have made the Poles exceptionally aware of the value of peace and any manifestations of good that are lastingly present in international life. Making our contribution to the positive culmination of the twentieth century and working towards the revitalization of the message of the United Nations, and thereby opening up new prospects for the Organization, we see ourselves as full and active members of the global family of nations. A further source of the sense of security and confidence that fortifies us in this role within the United Nations is that we have become a member of the North Atlantic Alliance and are forging ever-closer ties with the European Union, which we expect to join in the near future. Bolstered by our accomplishments in the past decade, having reclaimed our place on the international stage, we are eager to participate together with other nations in this generally perceptible shift towards values. A yearning for a world imbued with moral values is visible in all civilizations and religions. This is especially evident in the waning of the unlawful use of force in international life. The recent outbreaks seen here and there are an echo of divisions and conflicts that are fading along with the twentieth century. This positive tendency can be observed in Europe, in the Middle East, in North-East Asia and in other parts of the world. Contributing to it is a growing respect for human rights and appreciation of the economic and social factors involved in their full achievement. Against this background, the Polish people hold in great esteem the peace mission of John Paul II, the Pope from Poland — a Pope whose pontificate, like the whole course of his life, personifies, beacon-like, an unwavering adherence to values and, through the symbol of open arms, understanding and reconciliation. The Pope's position not only fills us with pride but is also a model for our international behaviour. The bearings guiding our actions, including here in the United Nations, are tolerance, openness and respect for the dignity and rights of the individual, minorities and whole nations. We are determined to oppose every kind of discrimination and prejudice, whether on ethnic, national, religious or social grounds. In this cause, Poland is and will continue to be a staunch ally of the United Nations. We are entering the twenty-first century with the immense potential generated by the newest phase of the revolution in science, technology, mass communications, the opening up of frontiers, the development of inter-societal ties and the universalization of democracy and human rights. Most of these phenomena are encompassed by the common term “globalization”. For a number of years, assessment of their consequences has, especially in the wake of regional financial crises, been growing increasingly contentious. Sometimes they are treated as a force of nature sweeping all before them, as morally neutral processes that can do good or harm and that eventually will bring prosperity to all peoples or be a source of crises, inequality and instability within nations and on an international scale. Globalization has unquestionably beneficial effects in the sphere of trade, production, the spread of modern technologies and capital flows. The liberalization of international trade, the growth of world output and the prosperity of societies should bring a more equitable sharing of the benefits of globalization. At the same time, there are looming dangers, harmful side-effects and new problems whose scale and nature we are not yet capable of identifying correctly. The challenge facing us is to work together to steer these processes in such a way that it is their blessings that are mainly felt by humanity, and that they are prevented from creating new divides in the world. We must do everything in our power, including here at the United Nations, to ensure that these processes mean the globalization of good. Faced with the opportunities, but also the threats, presented by the evolution of human civilization at the threshold of the third millennium, the international community needs to organize around a question of basic importance to the direction of its future development. That was the purpose of the Government of Poland when it decided, together with the Governments of Chile, India, the Republic of Korea, Mali, the United States and the Czech Republic, to initiate broader international collaboration in the cause of consolidation and promotion of democracy in the world. In this gathering there is no need to argue the virtues of democracy. No one disputes the positive interrelationship between democracy and human rights, internal and international peace, economic growth and prosperity and better realization of the principles of justice and solidarity. At the same time, we cannot ignore the threats to democracy, which are primarily of 31 an internal nature. They affect countries in the process of democratic transition as well as so-called mature democracies. They cover a wide spectrum, ranging from poverty and economic underdevelopment, ethnic conflicts and organized crime to corruption and the exclusion of whole sectors of public life, notably finance and the media, from democratic control, which saps the foundations of democracy and demeans it in the eyes of society. Democracy, its condition and prospects, can and should be no less a legitimate subject of international debate and cooperation than the other great issues of our times: human rights, disarmament, the environment and the like. Imbued with this belief, we embarked, in conjunction with a number of other States, on organizing in June of this year an international conference, “Towards a Community of Democracies”. A total of 107 States accepted our invitation. Speaking at the Warsaw conference, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said, “One of the greatest challenges to humankind in the new century will be the struggle to make the practice of democracy equally universal. In that struggle, nations in which democracy is already well established will need to be vigilant in preserving that achievement”. The participants in the conference adopted the Warsaw Declaration, in which they reaffirmed their commitment to its catalogue of democratic values and standards. They also undertook to pursue informal cooperation to strengthen and promote democracy in various international organizations. For obvious reasons, the key question will be what can be done to advance this cause in the framework of and through the United Nations. Let me take this opportunity to recall another Polish initiative that also falls within the current of responses to the harmful side effects of globalization processes. In 1996, at the General Assembly, Poland submitted a proposal to frame a universal legal instrument, the first of its kind, that could help us combat one of the greatest dangers of our times: international organized crime. At this session the text of that Convention will be presented to the General Assembly for its approval. The central issue of successive international agendas is security. Though preserving international peace and security is the main purpose of the United Nations, States have also looked to other ways to ensure their security: through creation of balance-of- power systems, arms races and even the use of force. Today we are trying to achieve such goals by different means. Anachronistic doctrines of geopolitics and spheres of influence are now fading into history. The Roman maxim, “If you want peace, prepare for war” — Si vis pacem para bellum — is becoming irrelevant. Nevertheless, the problem of security remains a pressing one, as the numerous conflicts and humanitarian dramas in various parts of the world make all too clear. In addition to crises and wars inherited from the old international order, we are plagued by conflicts which spring from poverty, ethnic and religious strife or the atrophying of States' ability to perform their basic functions: providing the people living within their borders with internal security and decent conditions of existence. This new situation, in which security depends not so much on purely military factors as on social stability, on observance of human rights and the rights of national minorities or on access to drinking water, enhances the role of the United Nations, which can draw on unique experience and a wide range of non- military instruments for ensuring security. Fuller involvement by the United Nations in the security sphere as provided in the mandate deriving from its Charter requires determined continuation of reform of the Organization in this field, starting with a practical redefinition of the role of the Security Council that would extend its purview to non-traditional threats to international security. The Security Council must do what, in accordance with the Charter, is expected of it by Members and respond more decisively to signs of budding conflicts or humanitarian disasters. The Kosovo drama, like many others, could have been avoided if Security Council members had displayed sufficient imagination and resolve at the right time. That would also have enabled us to avoid last year's arguments and controversies over the issue of humanitarian intervention. The inability of the Security Council to respond robustly in such situations will open the way to further precedents for sidestepping the Charter and United Nations mechanisms in the security sphere and could thereby lead to disintegration of this system. 32 The success and effectiveness of the proposals and recommendations contained in the Secretary- General's Millennium report will depend on the determination of the Security Council as the system's lynch-pin. Poland endorses the report's perspective on international problems and approach to tackling them. We are in favour of stronger legal instruments for stabilizing the international order; this refers to situations involving threats to security and use of force, to respect for human rights and to arms control and limitation. In all these areas we must preserve the primacy of the United Nations system over regional or unilateral measures, which are acceptable only in the exceptional circumstances in which the Security Council and United Nations mechanisms are found wanting. In this context I should also like to pay tribute to the Brahimi report on United Nations peace operations. As a long-standing and very active participant in United Nations peacekeeping missions, Poland is in favour of streamlining the machinery for conducting them — from decision-making to presence in the field — and ensuring their greater effectiveness by widening and making more adequate the array of instruments with which such operations are equipped. This means both the possibility of the use of force by the units deployed in an operation and a wide spectrum of peace-building and post-conflict rehabilitation capabilities. I refer also to action aimed at advancing human rights and laying the groundwork for democracy in the institutional and civil society sphere. In our view, in further work on the recommendations of the report, greater emphasis should be put on the question of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, an area in which lie many hitherto untapped opportunities, as well on as a more creative approach to conflict prevention. We no longer seek foundations for a future international order in military capacities, but to an ever greater degree we are trying to build it on fair and respected laws. The maxim Si vis pacem para iustitiam which adorns the facade of the Palace of Justice in The Hague no longer has quite the idealistic ring that it had several decades ago. But we are also aware that though administering justice through law is an indispensable condition of peace, it is not yet a sufficient condition. Our times, in which conflicts and instability are often a result of poverty and underdevelopment, require the application of a new maxim, a contemporary paraphrase of the old ones: Si vis pacem para solidaritatem. Here, we are entering the domain of the international economic order, in particular its financial and trade dimensions. This is a sphere in which the United Nations system must be much more active than hitherto or run the risk of being sidelined by the new and powerful non-State actors in international life. The recently fashionable, if ill-defined, formula of global governance should at the practical level be developed in the United Nations framework or in concert with, not parallel or counter to, the United Nations. First and foremost, it is essential to intensify international efforts to promote stability and predictability in international economic relations, which includes strengthening the new international financial architecture of a system and institutions based on transparent rules. What is also needed — and this is a point that clearly emerges from the reports of the main international organizations, the Secretary-General's report included — is a new approach to development. One has to agree with those who maintain that there is no greater challenge today than global sustainable development and that United Nations success or failure will be crucial to the outcome of efforts by the international community. One of the key challenges facing the international community as it enters the twenty-first century is poverty reduction, especially in the least developed countries. Success in this field requires wide application of the principle of solidarity in international economic relations. If globalization is to be harnessed to development and poverty reduction, more is needed than just better coordination among the organizations active in the socio-economic sphere. It is also necessary to stop perceiving development and poverty reduction solely as technical problems. To attack them effectively, there has to be a coherent policy that comprises not only financial and technical assistance but also substantive measures in the sphere of education, culture, good governance, rule of law, democratic institutions, etc. International solidarity will not deliver results in the shape of building up the production capacities of the poorest countries and enabling them to reap benefits from globalization processes without serious efforts on the part of these countries themselves, in 33 particular rational economic policies and the ability to make effective use of development aid. Poland is joining in international endeavours to further effective management of international interdependence, with an appropriate role played by the United Nations system and a key role by international financial institutions in the organization of international economic and financial cooperation. In the framework of a poverty reduction strategy, we are participating in the implementation of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative. Poland also supports the European Union proposal that World Trade Organization (WTO) members, including in the first place the industrialized countries, should within a year of the conclusion of a new trade round abolish import tariffs and quotas on basically all exports from the least developed countries. It is precisely in order to stress what we believe to be the crucial significance of solidarity in maintaining peace, security and solidarity throughout the world that the Polish Government, mindful of the experiences of our recent history, will — together with a few other countries — propose that the United Nations proclaim 31 August as “International Solidarity Day”; it is the date of the establishment of the free and independent Solidarity trade union in Poland in 1980. The qualitatively new feature of the situation at the turn of the century is not only the extent but the greater complexity of the tasks facing our Organization. Greater still are the expectations associated with it of individuals, diverse groups, nations and the whole international community. It is essential that we not only understand the nature of the new problems but also deal more effectively with the matters that have to be tackled by the United Nations, whether or not they form an explicit part of the mandate deriving from the Charter. In roles ranging from preserving peace to human rights, and from development to protection of the natural environment, the United Nations is irreplaceable. It is precisely because of the nature of threats such as environmental degradation in the contemporary world that a speedy and comprehensive response by the United Nations is needed. The sense of “one earth, one human race” requires solidarity-driven and responsible action by all the system's participants. The tasks and expectations associated with the United Nations require that its role in international relations be strengthened. The system must continue to be the legal and institutional infrastructure of the international order. No other formula provides sufficient legitimization for the performance of this role. The United Nations Charter and Organization are indispensable, in the first place, to small and medium- sized countries. Marginalization of the United Nations would lead to anarchy, in which the only law would be the will of the great Powers and increasingly powerful non-State actors. The extremely positive trends towards involvement of non-governmental organizations in United Nations activities — a trend steadfastly championed by Poland — must remain consonant with the intergovernmental character of the Organization, whose universal mandate stems from the legitimacy of the States which are its Members. Within this system we must, however, be mindful not only of the rights of States but also of their obligations. Accountability does not apply only to individuals, though here we are in favour of prompt entry into force of the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court. We cannot allow the United Nations to tolerate a situation of non-accountability of States for violations of international law. The successes of any organization, its usefulness and effectiveness, are not only a matter of the determination and unanimity of its members. Much also depends on the resources at its disposal, the efficiency of its procedures and the competence of the people operating them. In the past, United Nations officers have provided innumerable examples of their dedication in pursuing the Organization's activities, of their commitment to serving the ideals actuating the United Nations. Better use needs to be made of their potential through constant adaptation of the Organization's structures and mechanisms to changing tasks. That will also make for much better disposition of the Organization's budget. In our drive to rationalize the United Nations budget, our focus should not be on ways of reducing it. The real problem is that there is not enough money to do all the things that everyone expects the Organization to be doing. The United Nations budget should be tailored to the tasks that we ask it to perform, but also more effectively. We are also aware that the 34 Organization's regular budget and its peacekeeping budget should be based on the principle of the ability to pay and on realistic economic indicators. Poland is prepared to accept any reasonable and fair changes that may be agreed on the future scale of contributions. We will play a constructive part in negotiations on this problem.