France

I come to this rostrum on behalf of France to express my sincere and fervent faith in the United Nations. France’s ambition is to be a major actor in building a system of global governance that is more just, more cohesive, more social, and a global order that is organized and regulated around a stronger, more representative and more effective United Nations — a United Nations capable of meeting the great challenges of our century. I look out upon the Assembly. I know many of those present here today. For 25 years now — even more — I have been going up and down the corridors of the United Nations because I like the United Nations, because I believe in the United Nations, and because I know it to be indispensable. I would like to speak to the Assembly candidly. I am going to talk about men and women, suffering and hope. I am going to talk about responsibility, because we have responsibilities as citizens, diplomats and political leaders to meet these sufferings, hopes and expectations. Of course, all of us would have an infinite number of reasons to present a litany of generous intentions, only to go home, our conscience clear, for what we had said a little while before to the Assembly and then go back to our day-to-day problems at home. Of course, after the terrible economic crisis from which we have barely emerged, we have to live with reduced budgets and tense socio-economic situations. The times are difficult and our fellow citizens are worried. The temptation to retreat exists. Of course, to correct the large imbalances and injustices that undermine our society and to fight for the planet’s security and development, we can always count on others. But which others? There are no “others”. We are all here, the nations of the world, represented in the General Assembly, and we only have to decide together to act. Not acting today would be to resign ourselves to disorder, injustice and chaos. That choice will never be France’s because it is not in keeping with our history, or our values, or our interests. Faced with disorder in the world, the greatest risk today would be to lapse into routine. Please do not tell me that we cannot move forward, that the situation is at an impasse. No, in the past, we have been able together, collectively, to be revolutionary on fundamental subjects, even at the expense of the national sovereignties which we all represent here. Recall our boldness here in 1988, General Assembly resolution 43/131, and then two years later, resolution 45/100, on humanitarian assistance to victims of natural disasters and similar emergency situations. These resolutions allowed us for the first time to guarantee free access of humanitarian workers to the affected regions. Then there was Security Council 688 (1991) (5 April 1991) on the situation in Kurdistan, where, for the first time, the door was opened to a military operation to protect civilian populations against an oppressor State. These were two historic moments which laid the first markers of the right to intervene. This became the responsibility to protect, which this Assembly adopted by consensus at the 2005 World Summit (see resolution 60/1). Who could have imagined that such an upending of international law would be possible? The fight was long and difficult; it is not over — far from it. To speak candidly to the Assembly, the results are not completely what I had expected. But we must note that, together, we were able to overcome some obstacles which were supposed to be insurmountable. Let nothing stop us from taking up subjects which we decide on together. Our first shared responsibility is development — to make sure that all men and women, including the most impoverished, have decent living conditions. The widening gap of inequalities is not only morally unacceptable, it is politically dangerous. Of course, it is costly to act, but the cost of inaction is even greater. The conclusions of the High-level Meeting on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that we just held place our responsibilities squarely before us. This 37 10-55122 is an urgent matter. We can no longer ask suffering populations to continue to wait. The President of the French Republic, Nicolas Sarkozy, reminded the Assembly of this fact, that France is the second largest global donor of official development assistance — €9 billion per annum — targeted to education, health, food security, sanitation and infrastructure. France’s commitment to development will not slacken, but figures do not make a policy. Our assistance must be judged according to its results. We need to go further and move faster for children dying of malaria — one every 30 seconds — for entire families stricken by AIDS, and for all those who are hungry or cannot go to school. I ask the Assembly: what planet do we wish to leave as a legacy to our children? Will we be able to make an ambitious decision to combat climate change and preserve our environment? This is a subject that concerns us all and requires a global partnership, one where we aspire to find an agreement on both reducing emissions and measures to be taken in order to adapt. And we must, first and foremost, ensure that the commitments undertaken will be implemented and that follow-up mechanisms and effective institutions will be put in place. For all of this, we must find a great deal of money — several tens of billions of dollars per year — for us and our planet. Let us provide the means to realize our ambitions. The solutions are here, within reach; they have proved to be effective and await only our political will and our courage. They are called innovative financing. The tax on airline tickets was a step forward, a long time in coming. Today we should go farther by adopting an international tax on financial transactions which would permanently change matters for development. It is an idea that I have been defending for more than 20 years. It is a priority for France now. The President alluded to it here a few days ago. Bear in mind that a minute tax of 0.005 per cent, that is five cents on a transaction of €1,000, could raise €30 billion to €40 billion per year, almost one quarter of official development assistance. Who could deny that this is a stable and predictable way of raising a massive amount for development? Even with half of that amount, it would be possible to send every child to school in the low-income countries. Everyone agrees today that it is technically and economically feasible to establish such a mechanism. And, make no mistake; we are not talking about diminishing official development assistance or dodging our responsibilities. No, on the contrary, this amount would come as an addition. And so we must not waste time, we are together, this is what we established this institution for, this institution, unparalleled in history, called the United Nations. It is now a universally recognized principle that development cannot occur without peace and security, which are the basic raison d’être of the United Nations. Here, the challenges remain considerable. Afghanistan, Somalia, the Sudan, the Middle East — so many conflicts continue to feed chaos throughout the world. How many missed opportunities, how many dashed hopes, how many misunderstandings have for more than 60 years — I repeat, 60 years — marked this process, peaceful in name only, in the Middle East? The Arab-Israeli conflict concerns us all. I say Arab- Israeli because, besides the Palestinian track, France considers it just as important to work on the Lebanese and Syrian tracks. Today we have before us a historic opportunity. We cannot let it slip. The process almost stopped yesterday evening. I am not sure that it will continue in an orderly way and with unanimous support. I hope it will. We have limited time remaining. Palestine, the new State Member of the United Nations which many of us have been calling for, will be, I hope, the best guarantee of security for Israel. All States in the region have a critical role to play. All of that is important, but what is necessary is that the Israelis and Palestinians make a strategic decision to put an end to this conflict in their own interests. I would therefore call on the sense of responsibility of President Abbas and Prime Minister Netanyahu; together they must make the painful compromises on the road to peace. I have said that I have faith in the United Nations. I served the United Nations, as perhaps you know, in Kosovo and in a number of other places. I know, respect and deeply love the men and women who give life to the United Nations. From this rostrum, I wish to pay tribute with emotion, affection and respect, to all those who, in serving the United Nations, take risks every day for our shared ideal of peace and 10-55122 38 development. I think of all the friends we have lost — and the friends we may still lose — year after year, and, of course, of those who take their place. The fight is noble. Respect for the values and universal principles of human rights constitutes the indispensable foundation on which United Nations action must be built. The ambition to build a world order founded on universal respect for human dignity has been and will always be at the heart of French diplomacy. Have we collectively progressed in our service of these values? Not enough. How long will we continue to accept — now that we live in a so-called information society, a world where people can know what is happening in other places — that, in terms of human rights, there are so many blind spots, so many forgotten tragedies and so much suffering that remain hidden? As I asked at the beginning, what has become of the responsibility to protect? Today the success of the United Nations must first of all be assessed in terms of its contribution to the protection of civilians. That is the first area in which our requirements should be upheld. Every day massacres and rapes are committed throughout the world, in Somalia, in Darfur and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, including in regions where peacekeeping operations are deployed. We can no longer simply count the victims when mass crimes are committed. Our courage must not be less than that of those who die from risks that we no longer know how to take. France believes that the International Criminal Court is one of the most important advances made in the history of a humankind conscious of the dangers to which it is exposed by its own demons. France understands the criticism of those that believe that the Court is too slow or that it goes too far. Let us be clear, France will always support the idea of international criminal justice that is impartial and universal, for it is the only way of fulfilling the imperative dictated by our history, namely, combating impunity. To all who are shocked by the boldness of some of the Court’s prosecutions, I say that, on the contrary, it would be appalling if the victims were deprived of their right to justice. Human rights, the protection of civilians, international justice — these are not hollow concepts or empty principles for us. For France, they are first and foremost principles of action, and the only valid criterion for judgement is the impact of our actions on the actual situation. In Guinea, after the killings in the Conakry stadium, on 28 September 2009, we came together to denounce the human rights violations and to assist the victims of the atrocities committed. The Secretary- General dispatched an International Commission of Inquiry to the field one month after the fact, and I would like to once again thank him sincerely for that. The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court instituted proceedings. That pressure enabled Guinean civil society in the field to make the difference. Today the junta has been replaced by a transitional executive. Nothing has been won. There will be a second round of elections in two weeks. But I wanted to recall this success of the United Nations since at the beginning I said that the responsibility to protect was threatened. I think we can all agree that there is a movement forming in civil society throughout the world and that we can still take action.