UK

I am proud that this year Britain welcomed the world to the Olympic and Paralympic games and put on a great display, showing that while we may have only the twenty- second-largest population in the world, we can roll out one of its warmest welcomes. I am honoured, too, that in the coming year I have been asked to co-chair the high-level panel designed to help us build on one of the greatest achievements of the United Nations, the Millennium Development Goals. Britain takes that work very seriously. I am convinced that we need to focus more than ever on the building blocks that take countries and people from poverty to prosperity. By those building blocks I mean the absence of conflict and corruption and the presence of property rights and the rule of law. We should never forget that for many in the world the closest relative of poverty is injustice. Development has never been just about aid or money, but I am proud that Britain is a country that keeps its promises to the poorest in our world. A year ago I stood here and argued that the Arab Spring represented an unprecedented opportunity for advancing peace, prosperity and security. One year on, some believe that the Arab Spring is in danger of becoming an Arab winter. They point to the riots on the streets, to Syria’s descent into a bloody civil war, to frustration at the lack of economic progress and to the emergence of newly elected Islamist-led Governments across the region. But I believe those people are in danger of drawing the wrong conclusion. Today is not the time to turn back, but to keep the faith and to redouble our support for open societies and for people’s demands for a job and a voice. Yes, the path is challenging. But democracy is not, and never has been, simply about holding an election. It is not one person, one vote, once. Democracy is about establishing the building blocks of true democracy: the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law, with the majority prepared to defend the rights of the minority; the freedom of the media; a proper place for the army in society; and the development of effective State institutions, political parties and a wider civil society. I am not so naive as to believe that democracy alone has some magical healing power. I am a liberal Conservative, not a neo-conservative. I respect each country’s different histories and traditions. I welcome the steps taken in countries where reform is happening with the consent of the people. I know that every country takes its own path, and that progress will sometimes be slow. Some countries have achieved stability and success based on tradition and consent. Others have endured decades in which the institutions of civil society were deliberately destroyed, political parties banned, free media abolished and the rule of law twisted for the benefit of the few. We cannot expect the damage of decades to be put right in a matter of months. But the drive for opportunity, justice and the rule of law and the hunger for a job and a voice are not responsible for the problems in the region. In fact, quite the opposite: the building blocks of democracy, fair economies and open societies are part of the solution, not part of the problem. We in the United Nations must step up our efforts to support the people of those countries as they build their own democratic future. Let me take the key arguments in turn. First, there are those who say there has been too little progress, that the Arab Spring has produced few tangible improvements in people’s lives. That is not right. Look at Libya since the fall of Al-Qadhafi. We have seen elections to create a new Congress, and now plans to integrate armed groups into the national police and army. None of that is to ignore the huge and sobering challenges that remain. The murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens was a despicable act of terrorism. But the right response is to finish the work that Chris Stevens gave his life to. That is what the vast majority of Libyans want, too, as we saw so inspiringly in Benghazi last weekend, when they took to the streets in the thousands, refusing to allow extremists to hijack their chance for democracy. The Arab Spring has also brought progress in Egypt, where the democratically elected President has asserted civilian control over the military; in Yemen and Tunisia, where elections have brought new Governments to power; and in Morocco, where there is a new Constitution and a Prime Minister appointed on the basis of a popular vote for the first time. Even further afield, Somalia has also taken the first vital step forward by electing a new President. So there has been progress. None of it would have come about without people standing up last year and demanding change, or without the United Nations having the courage to respond to those crises. Secondly, there is the argument that the removal of dictators has somehow started to unleash a new wave of violence, extremism and instability. Some argue that in a volatile region, only an authoritarian strong man can maintain stability and security. Or even, some argue, that recent events prove that democracy in the Middle East brings terrorism, not security, and sectarian conflict, not peace. Again, I believe we should reject that argument. I have no illusions about the danger that political transition can be exploited by violent extremists. I understand the importance of protecting people and defending national security. Britain is determined to work with our allies to do that. But democracy and open societies are not the problem. The fact is that, for decades, too many were prepared to tolerate dictators like Al-Qadhafi and Al-Assad on the basis that they would keep their people safe at home and promote stability in the region and the wider world. In fact, neither was true. Not only were theose dictators repressing their people, ruling by control not by consent, plundering the national wealth, and denying people their basic rights and freedoms, they were funding terrorism overseas as well. Brutal dictatorships made the region more dangerous not less; more dangerous because those regimes dealt with frustration at home by whipping up anger against their neighbours, against the West, against Israel; and more dangerous, too, because people denied a job and a voice were given no alternative but a dead-end choice between dictatorship and extremism. What was heartening about the events of Tahrir Square was that the Egyptian people found their voice and rejected that false choice. They withheld their consent from a Government that had lost all legitimacy, and they chose instead the road to a more open and fair society. The road is not easy, but it is the right one. I believe it will make countries safer in the end. Next, there are those who say that, whatever may have been achieved elsewhere, in Syria the Arab Spring has unleashed a vortex of sectarian violence and hatred with the potential to destroy the whole region. Syria does present some profound challenges. But those who look at Syria today and blame the Arab Spring have got it the wrong way round. We cannot blame the people for the behaviour of a brutal dictator. The responsibility lies with the brutal dictator himself. Al-Assad is today inf laming Syria’s sectarian tensions, just as his father did as far back as the slaughter in Hama 30 years ago. And not only in Syria; Al-Assad has colluded with those in Iran who are set on dragging the region into wider conflict. The only way out of Syria’s nightmare is to move forward towards political transition and not to give up the cause of freedom. The future for Syria is a future without Al-Assad. It has to be based on mutual consent, as was clearly agreed in the International Conference on Syria held in Geneva in June. If anyone was in any doubt about the horrors that Al-Assad has inf licted on his people, just look at the evidence published this week by Save the Children: schools used as torture centres, children used for target practice. A 16-year-old Syrian called Wael who was detained in a police station in Daraa said: “I have seen children slaughtered. No, I do not think I will ever be OK again...lf there was even 1 per cent of humanity in the world, this would not happen”. The blood of those young children is a terrible stain on the reputation of the United Nations. In particular, it is a stain on those who have failed to stand up to these atrocities and those who in some cases aided and abetted Al-Assad’s regime of terror. lf the United Nations Charter is to have any value in the twenty- first century, we must now join together to support a rapid political transition. At the same time, no one of conscience can turn a deaf ear to the voices of suffering. Security Council members have a particular responsibility to support the United Nations appeal for Syria. Britain, already the third biggest donor, is today announcing a further $12 million in humanitarian support, including new support for UNICEF’s work to help Syrian children. We look to our international partners to do more as well. Of course, the Arab Spring has not removed overnight the profound economic challenges that these countries face. Too many countries face falling investment, rising food prices and bigger trade deficits. But it is completely wrong to suggest that the Arab Spring has somehow created those economic problems. It is a challenging time for the world economy as a whole. There was never going to be an economic transformation overnight, not least because far from being successful open-market-based economies, many of these countries were beset by vested interests and corruption, with unaccountable institutions. That has, one might say, created a double problem. Not just fragile economies, but worse, people were told they had experienced free enterprise and open markets when they had experienced nothing of the sort. So we must help these countries unwind the legacy of endemic corruption, military expenditure they cannot afford, natural resources unfairly exploited; in short, the mass kleptocracy that they suffered under for too long. While I am on the subject of stolen assets, we also have a responsibility to help these countries get back the stolen assets that are rightfully theirs, just as we have returned billions of dollars of assets to Libya. It is simply not good enough that the Egyptian people continue to be denied those assets long after Mubarak has gone. Today, I am announcing a new British task force to work with the Egyptian Government to gather evidence, trace assets, work to change European Union law and pursue the legal cases that will return the stolen money to its rightful owners, the Egyptian people. Finally, perhaps most challenging of all for Western countries like mine, is the argument that elections have simply opened the door to Islamist parties whose values are incompatible with truly open societies. My response to this is clear. We should respect the outcome of elections. But we should not compromise on our definition of what makes an open society. We should judge Islamists by what they do. The test is this. Will they entrust the rights of citizenship to fellow countrymen and countrywomen who do not share their specific political or religious views? Do they accept that, unlike the dictators they replaced, they should never pervert the democratic process to hold onto power if they lose the consent of the people they serve? Will they live up to their commitments to protect the rule of law for all citizens, to defend the rights of Christians and minorities and to allow women a full role in society, in the economy and in politics? The truth is this: we cannot build strong economies, we cannot build open societies and we cannot have inclusive political systems if we lock out women. The eyes of the world today may be on the brothers, but the future is as much in the hands of their mothers, their sisters and their daughters. Holding Islamists to account must also mean that if they attempt to undermine the stability of other countries, encourage terrorism instead of peace or promote conflict instead of partnership, we will oppose them. That is why Iran will continue to face the full force of sanctions and scrutiny from the United Nations until it gives up its ambitions to spread a nuclear shadow over the world. It is also why we should not waver from our insistence that Hamas give up violence. Hamas must not be allowed to dictate the way forward. Palestinians should have the chance to fulfil the same aspirations for a job and a voice as others in the region, and we support their right to have a State and a home. And Israelis should be able to fulfil their own aspirations to live in peace and security with their neighbours. Of course there are challenges in working with Governments that have different views and cultural traditions. But there is a fundamental difference between Islam and extremism. Islam is a great religion observed peacefully and devoutly by more than 1 billion people. Islamist extremism is a warped political ideology supported by a minority that seeks to hijack that great religion, to gain respectability for its violent objectives. It is vital that we make that distinction. In Turkey, we see a Government with roots in Islamic values but with democratic politics, an open economy and a responsible attitude to supporting change in Libya, Syria and elsewhere in the region. I profoundly believe the same path is open to Egypt, Tunisia and their neighbours. We must help them take it. Democracy and Islam can flourish alongside one another. Let us judge Governments not by their religion, but by how they act and what they do. Let us engage with the new democratic Governments in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya so their success can strengthen democracy, not undermine it. There is no doubt that we are in the midst of profound change and that many uncertainties lie ahead. But the building blocks of democracy, fair economies and open societies are part of the solution, not the problem. Indeed, nothing in the last year has changed my fundamental conviction. The Arab Spring represents a precious opportunity for people to realize their aspirations for a job, a voice and a stake in their future. We in the United Nations must do everything we can to support them.