All
of us seated in this Hall witnessed the collapse almost
two decades ago of a seemingly invincible
international system based on the antagonism of two
poles of power. It collapsed instantly. The system that
ensued, based on the antagonism of one powerful pole
to the rest of the world, is already splitting apart before
our very eyes and creating strains that will inevitably
lead to its collapse. Simple logic, which does not aspire
to explain the laws of the universe, tells us that systems
based on confrontation are short-lived. They are
doomed. But this is not the end of history: this is a
process of history. As the twenty-first century begins,
systems based on antagonism and confrontation are
becoming a thing of the past. The sands of time are
inexorably flowing out of them. New international
systems based on partnership must replace them.
Those thoughts are not a digression into the
abstract. Though still split by the old paradigm of
North-South confrontation and the imposed myth of
confrontation between developed and developing
States, and the myth of a clash of civilizations, the
international community should through its actions
today build a practical partnership that will lay the
foundations of new systems for the world order. When
we succeed in working together, we will be able to
tackle the most serious problems.
Let us take the subject of terrorism. Force alone,
even the most powerful and the most sophisticated,
cannot overcome terrorism. Its use instead causes a
further spiral of terror. We have all painfully come to
realize this. Instead, we have understood the true
impact of poverty, inequality, social vulnerability and
illiteracy on the rise of extremism and terrorism and
have taken up the fight against terrorism through joint
and comprehensive efforts, and have thus started to
undermine the very foundations of terrorism. The
decisive role in this, in our opinion, belongs to the
United Nations.
The United Nations must also reassert its leading
role in the fight against such growing evils as
trafficking in human beings and bring about
cooperation between the countries of origin and
countries of destination of modern-day slaves. Having,
in 2006, taken the first steps towards coordinating the
efforts of the international community in this sphere
(see resolution 61/180), the General Assembly should
offer to its intergovernmental and non-governmental
partners a practical vision of a global partnership in
this fight. As an optimal form of such a partnership,
Belarus would opt for a United Nations plan of action
or strategy to counter human trafficking and other
modern forms of slavery. Let us determine the optimal
format for our cooperation through a thematic General
Assembly debate and begin this without delay during
the current session.
We are certain that it is time for our common
Organization, the United Nations, to begin looking for
ways, obviously based on cooperation, to deal with
what is de facto the most topical problem facing
humankind: the energy problem. Antagonism between
suppliers and consumers of energy resources and a
price race will not resolve the energy problem. Such
antagonism is itself a superficial phenomenon. At the
end of the day, we are all energy consumers, and this,
in principle, is where we have common interests. How
are we to solve this problem, given the rapid pace of
growth of the world economy and the consequent rush
for energy sources? It is clear that the future belongs to
alternative and renewable sources of energy. This
means that today the United Nations must work out
practical arrangements for the transfer and distribution
of alternative and renewable energy technologies on a
global scale. That is a fundamental prerequisite for the
achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.
Such practical measures should include the
methods of dealing with the obvious problem that these
technologies are concentrated in the hands of a small
group of States. Otherwise, the pricing for these
technologies tomorrow will emulate today’s exorbitant
prices for traditional energy resources. If a few decades
ago the international community drew on the
enlightened minds of researchers and managed to
decide that a future controlled fusion technology, as a
perpetual source of energy, should belong to all
humanity, why can the United Nations today not take a
similar decision with respect to alternative and
renewable sources of energy? It would probably be
right to hold, during the next session of the General
Assembly, informal thematic debates on technologies
for alternative and renewable energy resources as the
common property of humankind.
The problem of global climate change a key
topic for this year’s general debate is becoming
increasingly acute. At present, the Kyoto Protocol is
the most important international instrument for
addressing this issue. In 2006, with an eye to full-
fledged participation in the Kyoto Protocol, Belarus
became the first and so far the only country to initiate
an amendment to annex-B of the Protocol. In view of
the worsening problem of climate change and
incorporating the wishes of our partners, we have
undertaken the most stringent commitments on the
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) region.
Through joint efforts by the parties to the Kyoto
Protocol, let us ensure prompt ratification of the
amendment and its entry into force, thereby setting a
major practical precedent by enlarging the circle of
participants in the Kyoto Protocol.
The fact that Belarus takes climate change and
environmental protection issues so seriously is not
accidental. Like our neighbours, the Russian
Federation and Ukraine, for the past two decades now
Belarus has had to deal with the consequences of the
deadliest man-made disaster of the twentieth century,
the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.
Thanks to great effort and at tremendous cost the most
urgent problems of providing emergency assistance to
the population today have been dealt with. In the years
to come we will face an equally challenging task,
namely, to restore the economic potential of the
affected areas and to create a viable environment for
people and pollution-free production. As before, we
will bear the main burden ourselves. However, we hope
that the proposed proclamation by the United Nations
of a decade of rehabilitation and sustainable
development of Chernobyl-affected areas, which was
endorsed by the 2006 Minsk Chernobyl International
Conference, will have the support of the Assembly and
that a new resolution of the General Assembly will
officially announce the beginning of the decade of
Chernobyl, thus ensuring the cooperation and solidarity
of the international community.
From this rostrum much has been said about the
problems of the Doha round of negotiations on
international trade. There is one more aspect of this
subject, the unacceptable practice of certain countries
that use the process of accession to membership of the
World Trade Organization (WTO) as a convenient
instrument of pressure on candidate countries. This has
involved not only economic pressure, in order to
receive coerced and unilateral additional benefits from
WTO expansion, but also political pressure. The
United Nations must take a firm stand in favour of
establishing, with the participation of all interested
States, fair conditions for WTO accession that take into
account the trade and financial needs of the acceding
countries and their genuine development needs.
Belarus rejects the use of unilateral coercive
measures in international relations as an instrument of
political and economic pressure on sovereign States.
Such measures not only contradict the principles of the
United Nations Charter and international law but breed
alienation, mistrust and hostility among nations. We
end up dealing with simply absurd situations when
economic sanctions are imposed under the pretext of
promoting workers’ rights but lead ultimately to job
losses. By applying increasingly unilateral coercive
measures of economic pressure, including
extraterritorially, the well-known world centre of
power has assumed de facto the rights of the United
Nations Security Council. We have all witnessed this
during the current general debate in the General
Assembly.
We wish to draw the attention of the General
Assembly to a particular aspect, the abuse by the
United States of the right to be the world reserve
currency manager and its deliberate creation of
obstacles to the lawful economic activity of legitimate
companies and banks from countries that are not
deemed acceptable by the United States. This is a
wake-up call for the entire international community. By
designating States at will as acceptable or
unacceptable, as good or bad, the United States is
creating an atmosphere that suppresses dissent and
diversity in international relations. That not only brings
ideology and politicking into international relations but
is an act of confrontation with each and every one who
dares to have an independent opinion or who has the
courage to pursue an independent foreign policy. The
majority in this hall are member States of the
Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). They are non-aligned
to confrontation. Five decades ago the creation of the
Movement was a protest against confrontation and a
global response to the global challenge of
confrontation. Today it is within our power to stop
confrontation and to reject the solutions that it seeks to
impose. Tomorrow belongs to positive ideas and
actions and to interaction and cooperation for peace in
the common interest of the entire international
community.