Belgium

I would first like to congratulate our colleague, the Uruguayan Minister Didier Opertti, on his election to the presidency of our General Assembly. I would also like to associate myself with the statement made by our colleague, Mr. Wolfgang Schüssel, who spoke on behalf of the European Union. My country shares and supports entirely the concerns and objectives he outlined. Unprecedented crises over the last few months have shaken our economies and the economies of the entire region. To varying degrees, the economies of the world have all sustained the social and political consequences of interdependence and the information systems that link them. It therefore seems to me that the time has come to rethink seriously the way in which international institutions and national Governments deal with the tensions and constraints which result from globalization. This means specifically that we must reflect upon the quality of life humankind will have in the next century. Despite worrisome forecasts, we seem unable to come up with a list of priorities which reflects the global public interest. We must establish a common frame of reference that ensures the peaceful coexistence of States and their citizens while at the same time respecting their diversity. This task is the indispensable corollary of globalization, which has numerous ramifications for current problems. The international communityâs responses have therefore been flawed and partial and subject to corporate logic and a narrow view of the issues. The limitations of these responses are well known to us. Countless children died last year from diseases which could have been eradicated. Tropical forests covering an area equivalent to three times the size of Belgium 21 disappeared. The developing worldâs debt remains untenably large, while expenditures for weapons continues to grow. Incalculable numbers of people have been detained, tortured, killed or forced to flee their countries. Hundreds of innocent victims have lost their lives in terrorist attacks. Global information networks and new technologies reduce distances. Thanks to television, more than one billion people can today discover both manâs incredible inventions and the worst abuses he is capable of. This is a scenario which touches our conscience. Todayâs crises affect the entire global system and call for solutions on the same level. The only way to respond effectively is to give a greater role to international solidarity and social justice. Those are the two pillars of the new international ethic that I would like to call for today. This is not a simple task. No Government likes to limit its room to manoeuvre, even for just causes, if it is the only one paying the price for its commitments. I am nevertheless convinced that the United Nations is the best forum to have a debate on this matter of international public interest. It is here, and nowhere else, that we can draw up universally accepted norms that have the approval of the largest possible number of States. The Organization can help us strengthen international consensus and the acceptance of codes of conduct designed to set the boundaries of human dignity and peaceful coexistence. Economic and financial power dominates the world, but the last few months have shown that it is not capable of running it. The globalization of political life and civil society leads us to attempt to reach beyond national limitations to confront our problems. Liberalization has generated significant growth in trade and investments. It has also led to increased transparency between our different social systems. This transparency obliges us more than in the past to reflect upon our concepts of the rights of the individual and the need to defend them. However, access to the global economic village has not led to a concomitant strengthening of solidarity. The capacity of men and women to adapt has been severely put to the test. The grip of the logic of the marketplace on the individual seems to relegate him to a secondary role in the international system. Our societies should henceforth reconcile the often very divergent effects that globalization has on the individual and on the State — namely, unemployment, competition and financial speculation. The balance between the freedom of some and the rights of others is all too often disturbed. Marginalization and abject poverty are reappearing, thereby threatening the exercise of the most fundamental of rights. After the 1980s — a lost decade, from the point of view of development — the decade of structural adjustments has been unable to put economies back on the road to sustainable development. Differences in income, both at the level of society and at the global level, have been accentuated. What can we do? What must we do? The Internet and the financial markets by themselves cannot hold the international community together. We know that Governments alone are incapable of dealing with the problems with which they are confronted. This is why new forms of solidarity and new ways of dealing with these issues are indispensable. Only a strong political international organization can counterbalance the forces of the financial markets. The loss of power of nation-States over financial and economic decisions is glaring; the social consequences are even more so. This does not call into question the existing consensus on the validity of controlled liberalization of trade, but it does put all Governments up against the wall. Has the time not come for some sort of regulation that benefits everyone? Indeed, liberalization cannot be an end in itself. It has no purpose if it does not contribute to social progress for the largest possible number of people. We should therefore strive together to find concerted responses to the uncontrolled and painful effects of this evolution by strengthening public control throughout the world. In this regard some have proposed an economic security council. This is obviously an ambitious idea, but it does serve to show how serious the threat of financial instability and economic uncertainty is to our societies. In any case, an intensified dialogue between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions must be instituted as a first step. Of course, regional strategies have been developed to strengthen economic convergence in certain regions and to integrate them into zones. Nevertheless, these regional strategies should respect the rules of multilateralism. Efficient partnerships based on mutual trade have to be developed with other regions without marginalizing third States. Developing countries must be integrated in commerce and enjoy the fruits of market liberalization. In this respect, my country supports the efforts placed on record by the European Union in the spirit referred to as “fair trade”. 22 I would now like to say a few words about the United Nations, which is at the centre of all these interactions. I say to you, the representatives of the 185 nations committed to the pursuit of the objectives of the United Nations, that we have all too often forgotten our obligations under the Charter. Now that we are free of the shackles of the cold war and its ideological deadlocks, the obligation to strengthen cohesion between States and to promote social justice is more than ever the real order of business. In this respect, I support the proposal to devote the Millennium Assembly to the issue of the fight against poverty. The gaze of much of the world will be turned towards the United Nations at that time. It would be a terrible failure if on that occasion we were only able to refer poverty to various committees, soothing our conscience with meetings of fleeting significance. As the Secretary-General stresses in his report, the fight against poverty starts with good governance. Political democratization and mechanisms for revenue sharing are indispensable elements. The question of Central Africa is currently of particular importance for Africa. After hopes were raised for what some wanted to call an African renaissance, the continent has again become prey to violence that is becoming dangerously ethnic in character. Once again, the principal victims are among the most vulnerable people in the world. The crisis in the Great Lakes region is a moral challenge for the United Nations. It imposes on us the duty of solidarity. We must help Africa to find solutions and to implement them without interfering or trying to impose solutions. The United Nations, together with the relevant regional and subregional organizations, should involve itself in an initiative to restore dialogue to the region and to put confidence-building measures in place. I believe that a conference on regional security and cooperation in the Great Lakes region — if it is viewed as a process rather than as a single event — could serve as the vehicle for stabilizing the region. My country is willing to support such an initiative. Political instability, uninterrupted violence and challenges to the nation State have led to large-scale population movements. In Central Africa, Kosovo and elsewhere, hundreds of thousands of families have been forced to flee their homes and their land. It is our shared duty to continue to assist humanitarian organizations in their efforts to come to the aid of these refugees and to enable them to return home. However, sometimes, when the roads or the family land are littered with landmines and children cannot go to school without being exposed to physical danger, returning can be a problem. We must rid ourselves of these landmines; their production must stop. These devices of death must be for ever banished from the Earth. I welcome the entry into force of the Convention on the total prohibition of anti-personnel landmines and appeal to donor and victim countries to support the integrated activities undertaken by the United Nations in this field, including through voluntary financial contributions. But that is not enough. Conflict prevention should be a priority, and within our Organization we must also pay attention to the less spectacular aspects of conflict prevention, such as early warning and the establishment of an appropriate United Nations presence on the ground. Conflict prevention will make no sense if we do not at the same time put an end to the acquisition of arms by those who attempt to resolve their problems through violence. Belgium has responded positively to the European Union initiative to formulate a code of conduct for arms transactions. My country is also a strong advocate of giving the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms effective universal application. It is also behind several initiatives designed to block the illegal transfer of small arms. The Brussels conference, which will take place in October, and our participation on the Panel of Governmental Experts on Small Arms, provide further examples of our commitment, which extends to all sectors of disarmament. How could it be otherwise, when some countries consider it useful to put on an alarming show of their nuclear expertise? A significant contribution to ethical renewal in international relations was the adoption, after much work, of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. It is indeed shocking that those responsible for the most reprehensible crimes, in particular genocide, can go unpunished. Belgium has recently signed the Statute of the International Criminal Court and intends to work for its effective establishment. My country will also continue to support the two existing United Nations ad hoc criminal tribunals. Some countries still harbour doubts about that important undertaking. However, a balance has been found between international security and justice. The only remaining question is whether we, so-called civilized nations, are prepared to adopt binding rules so as to ensure respect for the most elementary and universally 23 accepted principles of respect for the human being and international coexistence. Adopting voluntary restrictions to strengthen an international ethical code can only benefit States and their citizens. That is truly the role of the State: to ensure that its citizens are protected — if necessary, through international law. I do not consider it realistic to develop a global ethical code without working for the protection and education of our children. Working together with other countries, the United Nations Childrenâs Fund (UNICEF) and other United Nations organizations, Belgium has played an important role in a number of initiatives. I propose that the General Assembly at its fifty-third session build upon its achievements with respect to the definition of standards for the protection of children. Child labour is a waste of human beings — for the girls and boys who are subjected to it and for future generations. Market forces must yield in this area. Like the enlistment of child soldiers, child labour is a moral scandal that must be remedied through the development of alternatives adapted to the sociocultural context at the local level. One of my Governmentâs priorities is the fight against the most repugnant forms of exploitation. We are alarmed by the use of the Internet by those who traffic in children and by networks of prostitutes and all the new forms of crime that make a mockery of traditional methods of defending the rule of law. Here, too, international cooperation is the only solution. I am also ready to take the initiative, on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Convention of the Rights of the Child in 1999, to organize, together with UNICEF and all interested countries, a meeting in Belgium at which we can all share our experiences with regard to our respective legislation. The ideas that I have outlined will be not bear fruit if Member States do not cooperate fully with the Organization. Denying the Secretary-General the resources needed to turn the United Nations into an efficient instrument will only make matters worse. The Secretary- General deserves our full support in his reform efforts. The Security Council is crucial for the maintenance of international peace and security. Its reform is of concern to us all. I hope that in the not-too-distant future, a balanced enlargement of the Council can be agreed upon. The work undertaken during the past year has sometimes been disappointing because of the stubborn resistance of several countries. Belgium belongs to the majority of Member States arguing for a strengthening of the authority of the Council. My country clearly laid out its position: we would like an equal increase in the number of permanent and non-permanent members, better representation of the various regions and self-imposed limits on the use of the right of veto under certain conditions provided for in advance. The privilege of veto is excessive when it is used to the detriment of the interests of the international community as whole. The consensus proposal put forward by the group of 10 has numerous advantages and offers material for further reflection. It is quite disturbing to see that a minority of Member States are ignoring the evolution of international relations over the last 50 years while at the same time claiming for themselves a preponderant role in the maintenance of international peace and security. Postponing reform of the Security Council is tantamount to an assault on its credibility. The financial health of the Organization has not improved much over the course of the last year. Belgium believes that countries that accumulate arrears harm the entire international community. The damage goes beyond the resulting debt, because the Organization is denied the means fully to discharge its mandate. Furthermore, the reform process is jeopardized. Nothing can make up for the damage this does to international cooperation and social progress. The political and moral responsibility of those Governments is at stake. None who speak from this rostrum can claim their attachment to United Nations ideals without accepting the financial obligations involved in being a Member, that is, payment in full, on time and without conditions of their financial contributions. In face of the excesses of the international system, the international community must be on guard. Here as well our Organization can be the worldâs conscience. Its weighty role is to help Member States formulate adequate responses to the globalization with which we are confronted. It is therefore in a serious yet hopeful frame of mind that I look at the agenda of this session of the General Assembly and pledge my countryâs full support for the work ahead of us.