At the outset, let me
convey the sincere condolences of the people and the
Government of Liechtenstein to all those affected by
the abhorrent terrorist attack in Kenya. Our thoughts
are with the victims and their families.
For the second year in a row, the Assembly is
meeting under the shadow of the crisis in Syria. It is the
challenge of our time. No other situation in the recent
past has so dramatically tested the United Nations
ability to respond. And none has so starkly illustrated
the limitations and the weaknesses of our multilateral
system. Thousands of people have been killed in a
brutal war, many of them women and children, and
many of them victims of war crimes and crimes against
humanity. Regional stability has been eroded. Millions
of people are depending on humanitarian assistance,
which is often impossible to deliver. Humanitarian
access to those most in need, including the sick and
the wounded, is being systematically denied owing
to cynical political calculations. The humanitarian
agencies have become a pawn in that perverted game.
Sadly, it took a particularly outrageous act to
generate action in the Security Council: the use of
chemical weapons, with hundreds of victims, including
countless children. We are encouraged to see that the
Council has decided to ensure the destruction of all
chemical weapons in Syria. That should also provide
new momentum to ensure that all remaining States join
the Chemical Weapons Convention. Indeed, it should
be a step towards the elimination of all weapons of
mass destruction worldwide.
The use of chemical weapons in Syria has marked a
watershed in the conflict. Nevertheless, that issue must
not divert our attention away from the core problem:
the fighting in Syria continues unabated, with blatant
disregard for the civilian population and international
humanitarian law. Weapons and ammunition cross the
borders more easily than humanitarian assistance.
The recent breakthrough on the issue of chemical
weapons shows that political progress is possible.
Hopefully, that will create the momentum for the
Council to finally live up to its responsibility: to end
the supply of weapons, pressure the parties to the
conflict to accept a ceasefire, work towards a political
solution and prepare the ground for accountability for
past crimes. There may be different views on who used
chemical weapons in Syria, but everyone agrees that
that use constitutes a crime against humanity and a war
crime that must not go unpunished. It must therefore be
put before a court of law, together with the countless
other crimes committed, for an independent and
impartial investigation.
Syria is our biggest collective failure with regard
to accountability in recent history. The International
Criminal Court (ICC) has been operational for more
than a decade now. During that time, we have not
witnessed any other situation in which crimes have
been committed so systematically, on such a scale and
for such a long time without any adequate response
from the international community.
It is well documented that crimes have been and
continue to be committed by all sides. That is precisely
the type of crisis for which we established the ICC, and
it is precisely the type of situation that led us to give
the Security Council the competence to refer situations
to the Court. In its recent resolution 2118 (2013), the
Council made a limited statement on accountability.
More determined and more concrete action must follow.
A referral to the ICC will ultimately also contribute
to a viable political future for the country, create
accountability for those crimes, provide redress for the
victims and establish the truth.
The establishment of the International Criminal
Court has been the most significant development
in international law for decades. Only the adoption
of the Arms Trade Treaty earlier this year has come
even close in terms of significance. With 122 States
parties, the Court has attracted a strong following. But
the emergence of an effective international judicial
mechanism also poses challenges. We have mandated
the Court to investigate and prosecute the most serious
crimes under international law. And we have asked it
to focus on those perpetrators who bear the greatest
responsibility. Therefore, it cannot be surprising to
anyone that the Court is dealing with individuals in
leadership positions. We are satisfied that the Court
follows the evidence, and that it does not shy away
from investigating and prosecuting those in powerful
positions. It is therefore implementing its mandate and
not politicizing the work it does.
Recent events in Syria have reminded us of the
importance of the amendments to the Rome Statute
adopted in Kampala in 2010. We added provisions
that criminalize the use of poisonous and other gases,
whether they are used in international or in internal
armed conflict. It is troubling that those provisions
have become relevant so quickly. But the biggest steps
forward are amendments to crimes of aggression. They
complement the prohibition of the illegal use of force
enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. The
most serious forms of the illegal use of force by one
State against another will become a punishable offence
before the ICC. The Court will thereby help enforce
the core principle of the rule of law at the international
level. With ratifications by Andorra, Cyprus, Slovenia
and Uruguay earlier this week, we have come a
significant step closer to our common goal, namely,
the activation of the Court’s policy over crimes of
aggression in 2017. Liechtenstein was the first country
to ratify the amendments, and we will continue to assist
in the ratification process.
Liechtenstein firmly believes in the responsibility
to protect populations from crimes of atrocity. Clearly,
we have much work left to do in order to put that
norm into practice. Our inability to respond to the
crisis in Syria demonstrates a crucial weakness in the
system: the use of the veto, or its threat, in a manner
incompatible with the purposes of the United Nations.
That can make the Security Council irrelevant when it
is most urgently needed. During this general debate,
the President of France suggested a common code of
conduct for Permanent Members of the Security Council
(see A/68/PV.5). We strongly agree with that proposal.
All five permanent members should be able to give the
world one public commitment, that is, that they will
not use their veto to block action aimed at ending or
preventing crimes of atrocity. That would be crucial to
enhancing the Council’s effectiveness and credibility.
Unfortunately, we have not yet reached the point where
we are able to bring the composition of the Security
Council in line with the geopolitical realities of the
twenty-first century. But the Council is also struggling
to adjust its working methods to new challenges in order
to better include the perspective of non-members in its
decisions, which is a crucial ingredient for effective
leadership. We will therefore continue our efforts to
promote accountability and transparency in the work
of the Council.
The rule of law and accountability have made
steady progress in the work of the United Nations.
Nevertheless, that progress remains abstract for
countless individuals who are vulnerable to atrocities.
Sexual violence in conflict has become a rampant
phenomenon, with women and girls at particular risk of
becoming victims. The ICC has made the fight against
that scourge a priority. Most important, though, we
must do our part as States. Liechtenstein fully supports
the United Kingdom’s initiative to take greater action
to end sexual violence during conflict. The fight
against sexual violence must also play a central role
in the larger context of the women, peace and security
agenda. All of that requires stronger emphasis on the
need to empower women. Many of our stated goals,
from sustainable development to lasting peace, require
the full participation of women. Otherwise, they are
simply not attainable. In that regard, I am grateful for
the leadership of the Secretary-General. We should all
rally behind his call to make the twenty-first century
the century for women.
The upcoming negotiations on the post-2015 agenda
will be a crucial test of our ability to tackle challenges
that will define the lives of future generations. We look
forward to the leadership of the President of the General
Assembly in that process. It is of course too early to
offer a final assessment of the Millennium Development
Goals. But we know that important unfinished business
will be carried over into the sustainable development
goals. Those new goals must be much more than just an
extension of past efforts. They must aim at eradicating
poverty and hunger once and for all, and finally ensure
full equality between men and women. They must
therefore be firmly rooted in human rights, respect for
the rule of law and principles of good governance. The
sustainable development goals will ensure sustainability
only if they approach development in a holistic way.
Most important, once we have agreed on our new goals,
we need to become more serious in our commitment to
achieving them. Let us therefore develop and apply an
effective monitoring mechanism to show the world that
we are indeed serious.
The post-2015 process will also be decisive in
moving the General Assembly back to the centre of
multilateral policy-making. Only the “G-193” provides
the legitimacy and universality required for decisions
of global impact and for setting standards that apply to
all. This is our General Assembly. Let us use it.