Zimbabwe

On behalf of my delegation and myself, may I extend to Mr. Jeremić our warmest congratulations on his election as President of the General Assembly at its sixty-seventh session. His extensive experience in both regional and international affairs will undoubtedly enrich the debate and the proceedings during this session. I wish to assure him of the full cooperation of Zimbabwe as he discharges the onerous duties of that high office. If I may be allowed, I would like to preface my speech with a reference to the most glowing and moving speech that we heard from the President of the United States yesterday (see A/67/PV.6), the significance of which was to get us to condemn the tragic death of the United States Ambassador to Libya. I am sure that we were all moved and that we all agree that it was, indeed, an appalling event that we all condemn. A year ago, we saw the barbaric and brutal death of the Head of State of Libya, which is a member of the African Union. His death occurred in a context in which NATO was operating supposedly in order to protect civilians. As we join the United States in spirit in condemning the Ambassador’s death, will the United States also join us in condemning the barbaric death of the Head of State of Libya, Al-Qadhafi? That great and tragic loss to Africa occurred in circumstances in which NATO had sought the authority of the Security Council under Chapter VII to operate in Libya in the protection of civilians, who were said to be at the mercy of the Government of Libya, led by Colonel Al-Qadhafi. The mission was strictly to protect civilians, but it became a brutal hunt for Al-Qadhafi and his family. NATO caught up with them. Al-Qadhafi and some of his children suffered the brutal deaths about which we know. As the United States President spoke, I am sure that that he was aware that his country, as a NATO Power, had, alongside the other NATO Powers, the authority under Chapter VII to operate in Libya in order to protect civilians. But is that what the operation turned out to be? In a very dishonest manner, we saw the authority entrusted under Chapter VII being used as a weapon in order to rout a whole family and to commit the murders that occurred in that country. Bombs were hurled in a callous manner. Quite a number of civilians died. Was that the protection they had sought under Chapter VII of the Charter? So the death of Al-Qadhafi must be seen in the same tragic vein as the death of Chris Stevens. We condemn both. Let me begin by reaffirming the rightful and important role of the United Nations in the management of issues affecting international peace and security. In the quest for a more just and equitable international order, Zimbabwe remains strongly opposed to unilateralism and committed to multilateralism. We would therefore like to see a United Nations that continues to be a guarantor of world peace and security and a bulwark in the fight for justice and equality among nations. It behoves us all, therefore, to take the necessary steps to ensure that the United Nations is not marginalized on international issues. Equally important, the United Nations must, in future, never allow itself to be abused, as it was in the case I referred to earlier, when NATO sought under Chapter VII authority to protect civilians, but it did not turn out to be that. In the future, the Security Council must never allow itself to be abused by any Member State or group of States that seeks to achieve parochial, partisan goals. The Charter of the United Nations clearly stipulates that it is an international body that should work for the good of all the peoples of the world, big and small. We recognize that there are existing and emerging threats and challenges that continue to frustrate our individual and collective efforts to attain greater economic development and social progress, as well as peace and security. But the increasing trend among the NATO member States, inspired by the arrogant belief that they are the most powerful among us — demonstrated in their recent resort to unilateralism and military hegemony in Libya — is the very antithesis of the basic principles of the United Nations. In the case of Libya, the African Union and its peacemaking role was defied, ignored and humiliated. The African Union sought dialogue between the Libyan authorities and the so-called revolutionaries. May we urge the international community to collectively nip this dangerous and unwelcome aggressive development in the bud before it festers. In that regard, the theme that the President has chosen for this session — “Bringing about adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations by peaceful means” — is very appropriate. This is what we in the African Union stress — the settlement of disputes in a peaceful way, through dialogue. The warmongers of our world have done us enough harm. Wherever they have imposed themselves, chaos in place of peace has been the result. One example was the situation created by the Bush-Blair illegal campaign in Iraq — an illegal campaign undertaken because it was alleged that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, when it was well known to those two and their Governments that he did not have such weapons — and, indeed, after invading Iraq, creating much havoc and getting rid of Saddam Hussein, they admitted that he had no weapons of mass destruction. So why had they attacked Iraq in the first place? Why did they seek to get rid of Saddam Hussein? Was it merely because he was a dictator, as they alleged? No, he was the head of a country that sat on tons and tons of oil. It was oil they required, and we saw companies — indeed, one such company was headed by a brother of Bush — rushing to suck oil from Iraq. That is also what happened with Libya. The situation they created in Iraq has now brought about greater instability than there ever was. We have Sunnis rising against Shias, and vice versa, let alone the disastrous economic consequences of that unlawful invasion. The economy is unstable, society unstable, and people are fighting one another. Libya has been made equally unstable after NATO’s deceitful intervention under the sham cover of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations and the phony principle of the responsibility to protect. I listened to the speech made by the Secretary- General. He made reference to that principle. It is one that can be abused, and it has been abused. And, anyway, it is still being debated. Zimbabwe fi rmly believes in the peaceful settlement of disputes between and among States in a manner that is consistent with the principles and purposes of the United Nations. In the maintenance of international peace and security, much more must be done to prevent conflicts from erupting in the first place, and to prevent relapses once a situation has been stabilized. Beyond deploying adequate resources for managing conflicts, it is important to address their underlying causes, and to pursue, more proactively, a comprehensive approach focusing on conflict prevention, peacebuilding, peace-maintenance and development. In pursuing thst cause, my delegation strongly believes that adherence to the Charter of the United Nations should be a solemn obligation of all Member States. We have noticed, with deep regret, that the provisions of the United Nations Charter dealing with the peaceful settlement of disputes have, on occasion, been ignored by the Security Council. In contrast, there appears to be an insatiable appetite for war, embargoes, sanctions and other punitive actions, even on matters that are better resolved through multilateral cooperation and dialogue. Instead of resorting to the peaceful resolution of disputes, we are daily witnessing a situation where might is now right. We have said, “Well, yes, those who are powerful might hang on the principle that might is right”, but certainly right is also might. We need to take stock of the inspiring Preamble to the United Nations Charter, where the plenipotentiaries who met in San Francisco in 1945 undertook to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”. That is especially pertinent at present, when global events represent a radical departure from that solemn and noble San Francisco declaration. What do the NATO alliance members have to say about that, one may ask. It is therefore important that the Security Council should respect and support the decisions, processes and priorities of regional organizations. In contrast, recent events — as has already been stated — particularly with reference to Africa, have demonstrated the scant regard that the United Nations and certain powerful members of the international community give to the pivotal role of regional organizations. Effective cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations will become viable and sustainable only when developed on the basis of mutual respect and support, as well as on shared responsibility and commitment. It is regrettable to note that certain unacceptable concepts are currently being foisted on the United Nations membership in the absence of intergovernmental mandates. For instance, there is no agreement yet on the concept of the responsibility to protect, especially with respect to the circumstances under which it might be invoked. We are concerned by the clear and growing evidence that the concept of responsibility to protect has begun to be applied and seriously abused, thus inevitably compromising and undermining the cardinal principle of the sovereignty of States and the United Nations Charter principles of territorial integrity and non-interference in the domestic affairs of countries. For the international community to successfully deal with global economic, social, security and environmental challenges, the existence of international institutions to handle them and a culture of genuine multilateralism are critical. The United Nations, its specialized agencies and international financial institutions are the only instruments available for responding effectively to the global challenges we face in the global village. It is therefore critical that those structures be reformed and realigned in response to both global challenges and our contemporary realities, in order to enable them to better serve our collective interests. This Assembly is the most representative organ within the United Nations family. We must therefore dedicate ourselves to finding consensus on measures to revitalize it so that it fulfils its mandate in accordance with the provisions of the Charter. We wish to reiterate our deep concern that the mandate, powers and jurisdiction of the General Assembly are shrinking as a consequence of the Security Council’s gradual encroachment on the Assembly’s areas of competence. That, in our view, upsets the delicate balance envisaged under the Charter and undermines the overall effectiveness of the United Nations system. The General Assembly must remain the main deliberative, policy-making organ of the United Nations. We have been seized with the debate on the reform of the Security Council for far too long. My delegation fully supports the current intergovernmental negotiations on the reform and expansion of the Council. However, we wish to caution against an open-ended approach that short-changes those of us from regions that are not represented at all among the permanent membership of the Council. Zimbabwe stands by Africa’s demand for two permanent seats, complete with a veto if the veto is to be retained, plus two additional non-permanent seats, as clearly articulated in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. For how long will the international community continue to ignore the aspirations of a whole continent of 54 countries? We shall not be bought off with empty promises, nor shall we accept some cosmetic tinkering with the Security Council disguised as reform. It is indeed a travesty of justice that the African continent, which accounts for almost a third of the membership represented in this Assembly, has no permanent representation in the Council. Is that good governance? Is that democracy? And is that justice? My delegation condemns unreservedly the economic sanctions imposed against my country and people in an unjustified effort to deny them the chance to fully benefit from their natural resource endowment. We wish to remind those who have maintained sanctions against us that there is international consensus — fully supported by the Southern African Development Community, the African Union, the Non-Aligned Movement and the rest of the progressive world — that these sanctions must go. We hope they will go. Allow me to conclude by reaffirming Zimbabwe’s commitment to the principles that have brought us together in the United Nations for the last 67 years. My country is confident that in this inextricably interdependent world, our commitment to the common good, which the Organization embodies, will be resolute and enduring. Zimbabwe will continue to stand firm and to condemn unilateralism, the imposition of unwarranted and illegal sanctions on nations and the unwarranted extraterritorial application of national laws.