Belgium

It is with great pleasure that I join the previous speakers in congratulating you, Sir, on your election to the presidency of this Assembly. The great African country that you represent, Côte d’Ivoire, has always played an active and constructive role in our Organization. We are delighted to have you presiding over our proceedings. 8 My German ministerial colleague, Mr. Klaus Kinkel, spoke this morning on behalf of the European Union. The views of my delegation are faithfully reflected in his statement and, consequently, there is no need for me to address the positions he has outlined. Five years ago the talk was of a new international order. The events that shook Eastern Europe at that time led us to believe that the old bipolar world had expired and that another order was bound to take its place. For some, the reaction to the aggression against Kuwait marked the beginning of this new phase. Reality did not live up to our hopes. Today we have come to understand that the equilibrium based on a bipolar world did not have a "natural successor" and that it is up to us to build a new one, little by little, through trial and error. Of course, a new equilibrium is emerging in several parts of the world. First, there is the highly symbolic case of the Middle East. Even if implementation of the Washington and Cairo agreements is proving as arduous as was expected, every new stage constitutes an important step towards lasting peace. The historic rapprochement between Israel and Jordan strengthens this prospect. The new South Africa, too, is facing immense challenges, but at the same time it has become a beacon of hope for the entire African continent. The strengthening of democracy and the progress made in regional integration in Latin America seem to us yet another meaningful evolution. A number of countries in this region have now found the way towards sustainable economic development. The same holds true for Asia, where, moreover, a readiness for dialogue now exists. The regional Forum launched by the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), contacts on the Korean peninsula and, at another level, the dialogue between the two sides of the Formosa Strait all contribute towards a new climate of confidence. While preparing to welcome four new members, the European Union has signed cooperation agreements with the majority of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that might ultimately lead to full membership. Simultaneously, new geostrategic ties are being forged with Russia. The same will for dialogue is reflected in the discussion of major issues that concern the future of our Organization, such as reform of the Security Council. Even if divergences of opinion remain on various points, the sense of common interest prevails. Belgium’s major concern remains the achievement of a more representative Council without diminishing its decision-making capacity. We prefer therefore to avoid ambitious projects that would give privileged status to several "regional Powers" according to imprecise criteria but would not reinforce the Council’s ability to shoulder its responsibilities. Why not, as a first step, adapt the Council’s membership on the basis of unanimously agreed criteria? The international community could, as a measure with immediate advantageous effect, grant an additional non-permanent seat to the regions that consider themselves to be underrepresented and confer permanent member status on those two economic Powers whose positive contribution to world affairs has long been recognized. These steps, however encouraging, do not by themselves constitute a new international agreement. Progress and the readiness for rapprochement are by no means universal: Central Africa and Bosnia and Herzegovina are cases in point. The situation in Rwanda is uppermost in our minds. The threat it represents of destabilization in Burundi and the neighbouring countries has become a constant cause for worry in recent months. However deep the hatred born of the recent or the distant past, reconciliation is the only alternative. We appeal to the leaders and prominent citizens of these countries to unite their efforts to broaden the base of political power and to stand firm against extremists. Only when these conditions are met can emergency aid make way for durable reconstruction. Naturally, my country will contribute to each stage of this renewal. The civil war in the former Yugoslavia has cast first Europe and then the entire world into profound disarray. Yet for more than three years now, we have been working relentlessly to put an end to this tragedy. The United Nations Protection Force has become one of the largest peace-keeping missions ever set up by our Organization. The United Nations and the European Union have worked together tirelessly to find a negotiated solution. The main Powers have now added their weight 9 to these efforts. Let us hope that the latest attempt by the European Union, the United States and the Russian Federation will finally succeed in halting the bloodshed. From this rostrum I call upon the parties to seize this opportunity: put an end to madness and let peace return. I have just touched upon two cases of civil war where racial hatred has led to particularly inhumane behaviour. More than ever, we must remain unyielding when human rights are systematically violated. We must aim to banish every regime that is based on practices of "ethnic cleansing". So that this lesson may never be forgotten, Belgium favours the establishment of an international penal jurisdiction and expresses the wish that the international community do whatever is necessary to render it operational as soon as possible. In the meantime, we believe that the Tribunal created to judge the war crimes perpetrated in the former Yugoslavia will stand as a valuable precedent, which we would like to see extended to the crimes committed in Rwanda as soon as possible. Along the same lines, my Government welcomes the appointment of a High Commissioner for Human Rights. The operational initiatives launched by Mr. Ayala Lasso - sending human rights monitors to Rwanda, for instance - have received early and concrete support from Belgium, among others. I am convinced that Mr. Ayala Lasso’s actions will strengthen the respect for human rights and promote a successful dialogue among political leaders and human rights activists in every part of the world. This dialogue will take into account the differing approaches inspired by various cultures and religions, but in my opinion, it would lose its meaning if it were to compromise on the one essential point: the respect owed to the physical and moral integrity of every human being. For Belgium, the crisis in Rwanda has marked the international agenda. In the wake of the genocide, death lashed out blindly at a population in exile, pushing back the limits of horror already reached in Bosnia and Somalia. My fellow citizens were deeply troubled by the ruin of so many efforts of development, the failure of so many attempts at reconciliation. The savage killing of 10 Belgian "blue helmets", who were among the 100 United Nations peace-keepers slain since the beginning of this year, highlights the unmistakable fragility of peace-keeping operations. I believe the best way to honour all those who lost their lives is by reflecting in particular upon the limits and possibilities of international action. In this regard, the common experience in which Belgium took part - in the former Yugoslavia, in Somalia and in Rwanda - has enabled us, sometimes in tragic circumstances, to make a number of observations for future use. I intend to group them around four principles that seem to me essential. First: peace-keeping operations cannot be improvised. Second: once decided, they should be given the means to achieve their aims. Third: for these means to function fully, we should ensure their operational and political coherence. And, finally, as long as the security of the personnel involved cannot be guaranteed, it will become increasingly difficult to find troop contributors for peace-keeping missions, which will thereby reduce them to a purely theoretical instrument. First, the principle of "non-improvisation" implies two things. The first is that the Organization must at all times be able to mobilize the necessary means for a peace-keeping operation and to this end rely on the solidarity of all its members. This means that it is essential to reinforce the military peace-keeping capacity of the Organization. In the absence of a United Nations multilateral force that can be deployed quickly, generalized offers of stand-by troops and equipment and standardization of equipment and procedures are objectives we must pursue diligently. To this end I have sent the Secretary-General a list of possible Belgian contributions which could be made available for peace-keeping operations. The second implication is that, even though solidarity remains the basis for conceiving and implementing peace-keeping, this solidarity cannot be blind and automatic. Each specific operation must be the result of careful consideration. The launching of a new peace-keeping operation should only be envisaged and seriously considered when all other means of solving the crisis have been exhausted, including at the regional level. Chapter VI, as well as "An Agenda for Peace", offer a wide choice of instruments for solving a crisis through negotiation, arbitration, and so on. Those who forget that peace-keeping operations are not a panacea do the Organization a disservice and often unwittingly contribute to making situations worse rather than solving them. Once it has been decided by the Security Council, a peace-keeping operation becomes everybody’s business. All Member States must contribute according to their 10 possibilities and as circumstances dictate. Of course, Member States must retain the sovereign right to decide whether or not to participate in a given peace-keeping operation, but in so doing, they should look beyond the criterion of national interest. All States should cooperate actively with a view to the success of the operation by facilitating its movements, supplies, reinforcements and the prepositioning of reserve troops. All States should use their diplomatic influence to help the Secretary-General achieve the political objectives of an operation. And, finally, all States must adhere to their financial obligations with respect to an operation. Secondly, a peace-keeping operation must be based on the consent of the parties, appropriate flexibility and adequate information. Every operation must be based on consensus among the States legitimately involved. The conflicting parties themselves must agree to the deployment and aims of the operation, except in the case of an obvious humanitarian catastrophe. In this all-too-frequent case, the Security Council’s decision to act outside the framework of the traditional mandate and disregard the three usual conditions - in other words, agreement by the parties, the political process and a cease-fire - must be taken with great care. The Council must express this decision clearly in the mandate and accept all its consequences. An operation must at all times have the strength necessary to execute its mission safely. This rule is of utmost importance. It implies, to begin with, sufficient manpower and flexible rules of engagement to respond to the unexpected. It also implies adequate equipment to fulfil the mandate and to react to emergencies. The deployment of a military reserve in the vicinity has already proven its usefulness, for example, in Somalia. It is a precautionary measure we should envisage more often in the future. As a rule, a force subject to local provocation must always have the choice between evacuating or remaining in place, between retreat or riposte. But the use of force is not the first option to be considered in order to discourage resistance to a peace-keeping operation. Education and persuasion will do miracles among populations that are often ill-informed or even misguided about the objectives of a peace-keeping operation. Experience has shown that it is absolutely necessary to develop a coherent information strategy. Each peace-keeping operation should be provided with an information unit and a radio transmitter to broadcast its message. Moreover, the ability to neutralize hostile propaganda sources should be put to use each time this propaganda threatens the safety of part of a population or United Nations personnel. The third consideration is that the cohesion of the command and control structures and consultations on a regular basis with troop-contributing countries are conditions essential to the success of an operation. The military and political control of an operation must rest with the United Nations or with a duly mandated body. This principle has two consequences. Any attempt by the Commander of the Force or of a small contingent to report directly only to national authorities will reduce the cohesion of the multilateral operation. The flexibility required by a commander in the field to deal with the unexpected, however, is a different matter. When an action is undertaken by a regional or multilateral force it must be authorized by the Security Council. However, this authorization should not reduce the operational autonomy of the commanders of such an operation. Those who take the risk must be in control. Moreover, for each operation a consultation committee should be created in which troop contributors, the members of the Security Council and the Secretariat can meet at regular intervals. This committee will enable the contributors better to assist the Secretariat in managing the operation. It will also generate a real dialogue between contributors and the members of the Council, each time the latter prepare to take a decision which modifies the basic conditions of the operation. Contributors often have a better knowledge of the situation in the field and are best placed to judge whether a new task is feasible or acceptable. Without troop contributors the resolutions of the Council would remain ineffectual. As a fourth and last consideration, the security of the blue helmets is as much a concern of the contributing countries as of the Secretariat. The prosecution of those who attack the peace-keeping forces must be efficiently organized. The responsibility of a Government for its contingent does not stop with its dispatch to the field of operations. The contributing country has the right to watch over the 11 safety of its compatriots at all times. Ultimately, security must be the decisive factor for a contributing country to continue or suspend its participation in a peace-keeping operation. It seems normal, therefore, that a troop contributor should be entitled to equip its contingent from the start with sufficient defensive armament. Later, when unexpected circumstances place the contingent in a situation of real danger, the Security Council and the Secretary-General must immediately adapt the mandate and, if necessary, the rules of engagement to that situation. It is a fundamental duty of the United Nations to organize the international prosecution of those who attack United Nations personnel. The impunity granted so far to the perpetrators of such crimes gives rise to an uneasy feeling and undermines the credibility of the United Nations in the eyes of world opinion. The authority of our Organization over those whom it is trying to reconcile is negatively affected by this, and the Governments that contribute troops are increasingly worried. In our opinion, it is essential to speed up the adoption of a convention on the security of United Nations personnel, as well as of the investigations and the effective prosecution of those who attack our personnel. I hope that these thoughts that I have shared with the Assembly will contribute to improving the procedures and reinforcing the means put into effect by our Organization to face up to the new situations that it needs to tackle. In fact, these changes deserve to be formalized when any revision of the Charter takes place. The functioning of the peace-keeping operations would be greatly improved by this. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: "Amongst the laws that govern human societies, there is one that seems clearer and more precise than all others. If men are to remain civilized, or become so, the art of association must grow and improve at the same rate as the equality of their conditions". Though this "art of association" affects civil societies in the first place, it is also, and more than ever, a concern of our society of Governments. Launching peace-keeping operations is without doubt a most generous expression of this art of acting together. In the meantime, the fact that we have been able to multiply peace-keeping operations in difficult political, financial and material circumstances is nothing short of miraculous and prompts us to pay tribute to all the people who have been working tirelessly within the Secretariat as well as in the field.