This
General Assembly Hall is, in fact, the situation room of
the entire world. It seems to me that over the years we
here in this Hall have collectively understood and
known what to do. The main thing now is to agree how
to do it. We all need an effective tool.
There is hope that we are already close to a
common understanding of how and with what tool we
can achieve our goals. For the international community
to emerge from a series of multiple crises and to
overcome multidimensional new threats, we must
achieve a policy of partnership. Modern international
relations are increasingly being built on the basis of
horizontal networks that include all interested and
constructive stakeholders in today’s world — States,
international organizations, civil society and the
private sector. Partnerships are a mechanism of
engagement that has no reasonable alternative in the
context of a pluralistic and contradictory world.
One particular political factor that raises hope
that that approach is a realistic instrument is an
emerging meeting of minds — involving various forces
on different continents — that see in partnerships a link
by which one can extend the chain. By way of
illustration, I will cite the example of the call of
Belarus, from this rostrum two years ago, for systems
based on opposition and confrontation to become new
international ones based on engagement and
partnership (see A/62/PV.11). A year ago, when
opening the sixty-third session of the General
Assembly, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon noted,
“Nations can no longer protect their interests or
advance the well-being of their peoples without
the partnership of other nations.” (A/63/PV.5,
p. 1)
This year the United States declared its readiness to
“build partnerships and solve problems that no nation
can solve on its own”. The European Union has also
addressed the General Assembly with the same
message of cooperation and partnership. The President
of Russia spoke from this rostrum about a “collective
agenda for unification” () dictated by life
itself.
After a long break it seems that the international
community is starting to think along the same lines on
security, partnership and development and that the
world’s political leaders are beginning to speak the
same language — that of common sense.
An important proof of the principled readiness to
walk the path of partnership is the efforts of the
20 largest world economies to combine their resources
to lead the world out of the global economic crisis. We
welcome in that connection recent meetings of some
regional economic and political groups of States. On a
less positive note, it should be noted that some aspects
of the agreements reached remain to be carried out by
the parties, for example, the rejection and removal of
protectionist measures in international trade. It should
be said that the Group of Twenty format — let alone
the Group of Eight — is too narrow to be considered a
representative partnership. In this regard, engaging
economic regional groupings of States with significant
potential, for example in our region — the Eurasian
Economic Community — would make the format more
representative.
We also believe there is great potential for
dialogue and partnership between the Non-Aligned
Movement (NAM) and other major centres of power,
as was discussed recently at the recent summit of the
Non-Aligned Movement in Egypt. After all, today the
Movement represents a significant international factor.
Its members make tangible contributions to
international security and are important actors on the
international socio-economic stage.
Today I address my colleagues from the European
Union, the United States, Russia and other developed
countries and call upon them to show leadership in
dealing with the unprecedented global challenges
through close partnerships and coordination with all
members of the international community, including
Belarus. Members of the international community,
especially the world’s power centres and leading
political groups, should give practical effect to their
good intentions by developing global partnerships and
crisis strategies.
The greatest potential for responding to global
threats and challenges is clearly here in the United
Nations. As a founding member of the Organization,
09-52592 36
Belarus is convinced of the ability of the United
Nations to play a leading role in generating
partnerships to overcome the most acute global
problems.
Was it not under the aegis of the United Nations
that the foundation was laid for the establishment of an
anti-terrorism coalition and elaboration of a counter-
terrorism strategy after the tragic events of
11 September 2001? And by the way, should the United
Nations not consider proclaiming 11 September as the
day of the fight against terrorism? We would be
interested in hearing States’ reactions to this idea. Have
not the achievement of the General Assembly in
establishing the New Partnership for Africa’s
Development been acknowledged worldwide? The
Millennium Development Goals were also formulated
in the context of a global partnership for development.
United Nations capacities have been strengthened
by some of the progress made in reforming the
Organization. In this regard I note, in particular, a new
positive element, namely, the thematic debates in the
General Assembly.
Bearing in mind the experience and potential of
the United Nations, Belarus has proposed the
establishment of a global thematic partnership against
human trafficking and slavery in the twenty-first
century. An informal mechanism on the topic initially
took shape at the Global Forum to Fight Human
Trafficking in Vienna in February 2008. It must be
institutionalized to work effectively — I stress
institutionalized, not bureaucratized — through the
elaboration and adoption by the General Assembly of a
global plan of action to combat human trafficking.
The idea for such a plan garnered wide support in
May during the thematic debate in the General
Assembly. We have also heard expressions of support
from high ranking participants in this general debate.
We welcome the recent decision by the President of the
General Assembly at its sixty-third session to appoint
the Permanent Representatives of Cape Verde and
Portugal as facilitators of the consultations on the
global plan. We call on all our partners and friends to
engage actively in this work.
Global economic development is always driven
by certain engines, which are replaced by new and
more effective ones. For example, coal and steel were
engines for the European industrial revolution; the
engine for the global economy after the Second World
War was oil, which was replaced by information
technologies in the 1990s. The economic engine of the
past decade was finance. It is absolutely obvious that
the global crisis has demonstrated the need to replace
the outdated financial engine. What can and should
replace it? We believe there will be not just one engine
for the future, but a number of elements that include a
leading role for clean, green technologies. Given the
increasing interdependence of energy and environment
and the determining role of energy in global survival, it
cannot be otherwise.
This year we face an especially momentous task:
elaboration of new post-Kyoto agreements to deal with
global warming that include universal introduction of
new and renewable energy sources. This issue was
discussed in depth at the thematic dialogue of the
General Assembly held in June 2009. That was a good
beginning, yet we must move decisively forward. The
increasing topicality of the energy and environment
agenda requires creation of a specific partnership — a
global mechanism to improve the access of developing
countries and countries with economies in transition to
new and renewable energy sources.
This issue must not be shelved. We need to lay
the foundations for a qualitative breakthrough at this
session of the General Assembly. Belarus will initiate a
comprehensive study of this issue with the involvement
of leading international experts and include in its
results conclusions and recommendations for the future
report of the Secretary-General. We believe that, given
current conditions, the strengthening of the economic
potential and political role of middle-income countries
could be yet another motor of economic and social
progress.
Experience has clearly shown that resources and
capacities of a narrow circle of traditional world
leaders are insufficient for overcoming the crisis. The
greatest potential for growth rests with middle-income
countries. To a certain extent, one could draw a parallel
here with the key role played by the middle class in the
stable economic and political development of States. It
is no coincidence that the majority of United States and
European companies are turning their eyes to the Asian
and other developing world markets.
Mindful of such importance, let alone the mere
numerical strength of this group of countries, which
includes more than 100 States, the United Nations
system must take an active role. With this idea in mind
37 09-52592
last year, Belarus, together with its partners, sponsored
the adoption by the General Assembly of a resolution
on cooperation for development with middle-income
countries.
This year, for the first time within these walls, a
substantive discussion was held on how to make the
best use of the capacity of the United Nations system
to assist such countries in addressing their specific
social and economic problems, which are particularly
important for sustainable global development.
We hope that the work of the General Assembly
on that topic will not be seen simply in terms of
competition for the scarce resources of the donor
community and the United Nations. That is not the
point. The larger the number of economically
prosperous States in the world, the stronger and more
predictable the world economy will be. There will be
increased predictability and fewer crises and
catastrophes. There will be more opportunities for
economic growth in the poorer countries and an
increase in international assistance will be generated.
In the long run, everyone will be a winner.
I cannot but turn to the subject of Kyoto and post-
Kyoto, which sets the tone for the current session of
the General Assembly. The possible outcome of the
Copenhagen meeting is, unfortunately, not quite clear.
All of us, big, medium-size and small States, have to
do our utmost to ensure its success. But the perfect
does not have to be the enemy of the good.
Belarus is the only State in the world that, for
several years, has been trying to achieve what may
seem, at first glance, to be a paradoxical goal. That is,
to take on significant commitments to reduce harmful
emissions. The commitments we have taken happen to
be more significant than many of our neighbours, and
even than those of some European Union countries.
Since we are all partners here, I will put it in a
blunt and straightforward way. We do not understand
why many States, including powerful groups of States,
which are, by the way, leading the way in post-Kyoto
advocacy, do not allow us to assume legally binding
and significant Kyoto commitments. I address this call
to partners and colleagues. If we want to strengthen the
Kyoto paradigm, let us not undermine it. I sincerely
hope that the call of Belarus for speedy ratification of
our accession to Kyoto will be heeded.
In a year’s time, here in New York, there will be
the 2010 United Nations Summit. That is the only
forum that has united the heads of State and
Government of the G-8, the G-20, the European Union,
the Non-Aligned Movement, the Commonwealth of
Independent States and others. Belarus proposes
considering the 2010 Summit as a summit of
partnerships, the venue for putting forward and acting
upon the ideas of global partnerships.
We support the intention of the President of the
current session of the General Assembly to start
preparations for the Summit well in advance. At the
Summit itself, we propose the adoption, at the level of
heads of State and Government, of a mechanism, an
algorithm or a plan of close cooperation on the part of
Member States for the years to come on how to
overcome global challenges. And in the next few
months, delegations could make suggestions as to the
substance of such a document. Negotiations on the
document could start in January 2010.
Sixty-five years after the signing of the United
Nations Charter, we can and should make an
honourable attempt to return to the roots of the United
Nations by restoring the original meaning of the word
“united”, which forms part of our name. It all depends
on us.