Egypt

It is a great pleasure to have Mr. Jean Ping presiding over the General Assembly at its fifty-ninth session. I am confident that his wealth of experience and the friendly ties that his sisterly country enjoys with all countries of the world will be a major asset for the Assembly as it discharges its tasks. The success of the present session will build upon the accomplishments of the fifty-eighth session under the leadership of the previous President, Mr. Julian Hunte, who made an important contribution to the revitalization of the role of the General Assembly in various fields. I would also like to express our appreciation to the Secretary-General for his tireless efforts to enhance the status of the Organization and to strengthen its role in the international arena, in particular in the area of regional and national development. At the outset of the fifty-ninth session we must scrutinize the international environment in which it is being held. We have to consider world events to determine their direction, to decide where we stand on them and to understand their impact, whether positive or negative, on the achievement of our shared goal: the promotion of international peace and security. 18 Indeed, we need to pause to see where this world and this international community are heading. Is it and are we ascending towards upholding the values of democracy, justice and the rule of law, or are we descending into tyranny, the law of the jungle and the imposition of the policies of fait accompli? Can it be said that events in the world today emanate from a genuine belief in the might of right, or do they, most regrettably, represent a consolidation of the arrogance of power? The events witnessed by the world today are a cause of grave concern to all those who believe in the tenets and principles on which the international system was established. We are witnessing the collapse of noble values and the disintegration of principles once thought unassailable. National sovereignty and territorial integrity are no longer sufficient to prevent interference in the internal affairs of States. Indeed, those internal affairs have themselves become pretexts for those who wish to impose their policies on others. The international situation forces us to consider the critical question of what we seek from this world and what we have offered in return. We claim that we want a world free from conflict and wars, but what have we done to create such a world? We claim that we want an international community governed by legality and the rule of law, as the Secretary-General said on Tuesday, but are we seriously upholding the values of legality and law? We claim that we wish to see all peoples enjoying democracy, but should States not practice democracy in the conduct of their foreign relations as well? Relations among States are by nature volatile and easy to break, but they are reparable. It may be difficult at times to repair them, but the calculations pertaining to constantly changing interests will eventually make it possible to do so. Relations among peoples, however, are different. Their wounds are readily inflamed and heal slowly or hardly at all. It is therefore incumbent upon us, in our feverish attempts to achieve our own interests, to take special care to avoid flashpoints between peoples, civilizations and cultures. Their memories store all of their experiences and tribulations. Nothing stored in their collective memory fades or disappears with time. For more than a decade now, Egypt has called and continues to call for the convening of an international conference under United Nations auspices to consider the phenomenon of terrorism and to agree on means to combat it through effective collective international efforts. Proceeding from our belief in the importance and centrality of the role of the United Nations in the coordination of international efforts to combat terrorism, as exercised through the General Assembly and the Security Council, we propose that the Assembly establish an open-ended working group to consider proposals to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the United Nations and its ability to achieve international anti-terrorism goals. That could be accompanied by the convening of regional preparatory meetings to catalogue regional needs and areas conducive to international cooperation, which could in turn ultimately lead to the adoption at an international summit of a draft comprehensive framework convention to combat terrorism. I should like to take this opportunity to describe the situation in our part of the world and the threats and challenges it faces. The main threat to the Middle East flows from the continued acquisition by some of nuclear weapons. While we all agree on the dangers posed by those weapons and on the need to halt their proliferation as one step towards eliminating them and freeing humanity from the threat they represent, the international community continues to address the question of weapons of mass destruction selectively. While the international community seeks to impose a strict system to monitor the imports of all Member States within the non-proliferation regime — which, incidentally, includes all Arab States — it turns a blind eye to the ongoing stockpiling of nuclear capabilities by one party in the region. I invite all to question whether it is acceptable for the threat of nuclear proliferation to continue to loom over the Middle East. I leave it to all to decide whether the international approach to the question is fair or is one of double standards; whether it is capable of addressing those dangers and threats, or whether we are in need of urgent radical change. The ongoing application of double standards will not only exacerbate the risks of nuclear proliferation and weaken the belief in the credibility and centrality of the relevant international regime, but also aggravate the tense situation in the Middle East. In order to ease that tension and to avert those dangers, in 1990 President Mubarak launched the Egyptian initiative to create a 19 zone free from weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. In the year that has elapsed between the opening of the fifty-eighth and the fifty-ninth sessions, the suffering of the Palestinian people has continued. The Palestinian people has been subject to acts of aggression and its legitimate rights have continued to be violated. The tragedies visited upon Palestinians have become a permanent item of newscasts and newspaper headlines. A new report emerges every day of the demolition of homes, the destruction of infrastructure, the targeting of unarmed civilians, assassinations, collective punishments, and the imposition of curfews and closures. There is no end in sight to such policies. All this suffering has been met by an inexplicable international silence, with the exception of some timid expression of dissatisfaction or, at best, displeasure at events unfolding there. Such responses entrench, rather than change, the situation of fait accompli. Israel also continues to build the separation wall on Palestinian lands. The wall separates students from their schools, workers from their factories and farmers from their fields. Had Israel’s objective in the construction of the wall truly been to ensure its own security, it would have built it on its own land. The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice declared the wall’s construction illegal and called for a halt to construction activities and for the removal of the sections already constructed. The opinion sent a strong message to the international community in general, and to Israel in particular, to the effect that the torch of justice still burns bright. It may have seemed to flicker, but it has not been extinguished. The scales of justice still prevail. They may seem to have been upset, but they have neither fallen nor been tipped. Our region needs the construction of bridges that connect, not walls that separate. Our region needs a channel for the hopes for a promising future, not barriers that hold the region captive to the past and its tribulations. Our region needs the serious action and sincere cooperation of all in order to dislodge the political peace process from its current impasse and put it back on track. The way out of this bloody dilemma is well known. It was laid down by the international Quartet in the road map that enjoys the support of the entire international community. The ultimate destination of that path is also well known. It was enunciated by United States President George Bush in his vision of the establishment of two independent States, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security. That is the road before us; those are its landmarks and its goals. There is neither time for waiting nor room for foot-dragging. Prompt and effective action is needed to break the cycle of violence, to restore calm and to resume the process of political negotiations. Such negotiations are the one and only way to end the Arab-Israeli conflict. In that regard, Israel’s intended withdrawal from the Gaza Strip could be a significant step. If the withdrawal takes place in a rational, disciplined and orderly manner, it could enable us to begin to overcome the crisis and to put the peace process back on track. However, if it is carried out in an attitude of stubbornness and short-sightedness, it will lead only to tension and further violence. In order to achieve the goal of an Israeli withdrawal, a number of elements must be ensured. In particular, the withdrawal must take place as an integral and clear part of the road map, and it must be full and complete. The withdrawal must include all crossing points, the seaport and the airport; otherwise, it will be just another way to impose a blockade on and confinement of the Palestinian people. A complete Israeli withdrawal means not only the departure of occupation forces from the Gaza Strip, but also an end to the policy of incursions, raids and assassinations, which must be followed by a withdrawal from all the occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank. Despite all the efforts and appeals for peace, the bloodshed continues unabated in the Middle East. We had pinned our hopes on the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqi people at the end of June and on the formation of an Iraqi Government and National Council. It was hoped that those would be the first steps towards the restoration by the Iraqis of their full sovereignty on their own national soil and towards ending the foreign presence in that long-suffering country. However, the events of recent months and days have shown — and current events continue to show every day — that the Iraqi people continue to live in conditions that are far from stable. We wonder whose interests are served by the events in Iraq. Who is to benefit from the destruction of that country, with its age-old civilization? Will the 20 events taking place in Iraq remain confined to that country, or will they spread beyond its borders like fire, causing destruction and desolation in the region as they have done in Iraq? We call upon all parties to respect Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The people and the State of Iraq desperately need a breathing space for calm reflection on the best way to bring the country out of the devastating spiral of violence. We call upon the United Nations to continue its pivotal role in helping the people of Iraq to rebuild their constitutional and legislative institutions as a first step towards the rebuilding of Iraq by the Iraqis themselves. Moreover, there is an urgent humanitarian problem in Darfur — indeed, a real humanitarian tragedy that requires urgent international action to contain it. But is it inevitable that such an effort take the form of interference in the Sudan’s internal affairs and violation of its sovereignty? Can we not provide humanitarian assistance and relief to Darfur’s inhabitants without encroaching upon the Sudan’s national sovereignty? Are there enough military forces in the world to be dispatched as invaders to every area that is afflicted by a humanitarian crisis? The affairs of the Sudan, with its ethnic composition and its religious and cultural heritage, are by nature complex. It is our duty to help solve those complex and difficult problems, not to make them more so. The Sudan has signed, with the United Nations, a framework for cooperation to solve the problem in Darfur and to ensure humanitarian access to the civilians in the region. That augurs well for the early alleviation of this humanitarian tragedy, which threatens to have dire consequences for the entire region. We call upon the international community not to confine itself to criticizing one party or another and not to lay the blame on one set of policies or another. What is more important and useful is serious action to help the Sudanese people to overcome the crisis. Egypt believes that, in order to effectively face the challenges and threats to international peace and security, we must improve the working methods of the United Nations. Therefore, we have participated seriously — and will continue to do so — in the exercise of strengthening and revitalizing the United Nations and its organs. It is our hope that that exercise will be comprehensive, balanced and transparent and that it will be carried out in full respect for the mandates that established the various organs of the United Nations. In that context, we need to reaffirm the need to revitalize the role of the General Assembly and to ensure respect for and implementation of its resolutions by establishing an effective follow-up mechanism. I now turn from the wider context of United Nations reform to the most sensitive reform issue: reform and expansion of the Security Council. The sensitivity of that issue clearly stems from the Council’s increasing role in international affairs and its effect on many vital interests and on the international balances of power. Here, I should like clearly to state Egypt’s position, which is based on our membership in the Group of African States and the fact that we have the honour to coordinate the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) working group on this issue. Egypt hopes that the deliberations on this subject will result in both reform of the Council and expansion of its membership. The United Nations and the international community as a whole will not gain much if the process is limited to expanding the Council’s membership without truly improving its working methods so that it can better represent the general membership of the Organization and have greater capacity to maintain international peace and security. Egypt is fully committed to the Declaration of the 1997 Harare Summit of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), which affirmed Africa’s right to two permanent seats and three non-permanent seats on an expanded Security Council. We are also committed to the positions of the Non-Aligned Movement with regard to increasing the membership of the Council to at least 26 member States. Such an expansion could be confined to the non-permanent category should the expansion of both membership categories prove difficult. What about the composition of the Council? We call for guaranteed representation of all cultures and civilizations in an expanded Security Council on the basis of the current geographical distribution in the United Nations. We believe that the Council will not be able to effectively carry out its duties in the maintenance of international peace and security unless it is more aware of the nature and circumstances prevailing in all societies and of the cultural and 21 historical heritage on which they base and formulate their policies. Here, we must reaffirm the legitimate right of more than 1 billion Muslims and more than 300 million Arabs to be represented in the Council on an equal footing with those who represent other cultures and civilizations. In that context, I wish to recall the significant contributions made by Egypt at the regional and international levels and its central role in the African, Arab and Islamic spheres. Also noteworthy is Egypt’s role in the Middle East and among developing and emerging economies. As a founding Member of the United Nations, Egypt has made well-known contributions to the implementation of the purposes and principles of the Organization and to United Nations peacekeeping operations. Egypt also played a pivotal role in establishing the League of Arab States, the OAU, the African Union, NAM and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. In addition, I wish to recall that Egypt possesses the components of a regional Power in its comprehensive sense, be it economic, military or human. Egypt also enjoys social and political stability. Its diplomatic outreach is among the largest, and over the years it has developed strong international ties throughout the world. Egypt has in the past expressed its conviction that it is eminently qualified to assume the responsibility of a permanent seat in an expanded Security Council, on the basis of the Harare Declaration. We reiterate that the considerations to which I referred demonstrate that Egypt is clearly eligible, and has the capacity, to take on the responsibilities of membership of the Security Council, in accordance with Article 23 of the Charter. We believe that such membership could be based on a system of rotation with our African brothers, whereby we would fill the additional seats that would be allocated to our continent, in accordance with any newly established status in the Council and with the geographic distribution as would be worked out by the United Nations.