Philippines

I convey my delegation’s felicitations on your election, Mr. President, on leading this historic session. I also wish to express our deep appreciation to Ambassador Jean Ping, whose leadership and wisdom proved to be the key to the successful negotiation and adoption of our outcome document. Sixty years ago, enduring peace was foremost in the minds of the founders of our Organization. Scarred from war and stunned by mankind’s capacity for death and destruction, they did not consider failure an option. Our common humanity demanded that we build a better and peaceful world. To do that, representatives from 50 nations gathered in San Francisco, in a building dedicated to those who defended and fought for freedom, to draft a charter that would unite the nations of the world for peace. General Carlos P. Romulo, the head of the Philippine delegation, articulating the hopes of mankind, said then at the United Nations: “Let us make this floor the last battlefield.” Mr. Zarif (Islamic Republic of Iran), Vice- President, took the Chair. The leading lights attending the founding of the United Nations are still familiar to us — Joseph Paul Boncour of France, Wellington Koo of China, Andrei Gromyko of Russia, Lord Halifax of the United Kingdom, Edward Stettinius of the United States, His Royal Highness Faisal ibn Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia, Sir Ramaswami Mudaliar of India, Jan Smuts of the Union of South Africa, Jan Masaryk of Czechoslovakia, Herbert Evatt of Australia, Exequiel Padilla of Mexico, and many others. Those visionaries led the historic and daunting task of writing the United Nations Charter. A third of mankind was still under colonial domination. Only three Asian nations were in attendance. Most of Africa were not yet independent nations. In a forum dominated by colonial Powers, the Philippines fought to ensure the notion that the goal of the Trusteeship Council should not only be self- government but independence. When the United Nations emblem was being drawn, General Romulo asked that the Philippines, although still a commonwealth, be included. He was told that the Philippines would only be a small dot on that now familiar map. He demanded nevertheless that the dot be placed on the map. The Philippines insistence on its place on the world map, albeit just a dot, symbolized for many soon-to-be independent and developing nations the challenge facing the United Nations. The clear challenge facing the United Nations at its inception, and particularly developing nations, was to ensure that freedom from want, freedom from fear and freedom to pursue human dignity would be at the heart of the political independence of the States. Sixty years after San Francisco, we continue to face the challenge of freeing all our peoples from want and from fear and allowing them the true dignity that they deserve as independent nations. The fight for the political and legal independence of States is over, but the fight to win for all peoples their freedom from fear and want and to pursue human dignity continues. For the Philippines, as a developing country, freedom from want is of utmost concern. Poverty, the energy crisis and insufficient financial resources, compounded by debt, are the pressing challenges 5 facing my country and its people. We also face serious security threats, particularly from terrorism — with many of our citizens victimized by terrorist attacks. We recognize the economic and social underpinnings of such acts. In the not too distant past, my country also had to confront the threat of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Our national experience prompts us to agree with the Secretary-General that these global threats are all interrelated, and our different perceptions of the imminence of the threats facing us should not deter us from cooperating to address them. This brings me to my central theme — that we should let the bond of our broad vision of our common humanity inspire us all to work towards a stronger United Nations for a better world. We agree with the Secretary-General that no nation can defend itself against threats entirely on its own. We agree that development, freedom from fear and human rights concerns are interrelated and should be equally considered in designing the solutions to the threats we face. We believe that because of this interrelation, these concerns should be addressed in a comprehensive and integrated manner. The world is facing the problem of unbridled spiralling of oil prices. International cooperation on energy is increasingly becoming an imperative as the capacity and capability of countries, particularly non- oil producing developing countries, to meet their development objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), are affected. This unavoidably impacts on security. The Philippines welcomes the 100 per cent debt cancellation for the 38 heavily indebted poor countries. However, the debt situation is expected to worsen, as middle-income countries go deeper in debt with the threat of rising world oil prices. Once more, the need for other innovative and creative means of international cooperation for debt relief also becomes imperative. The Philippines has proposed the consideration of the adoption of a debt conversion scheme including “debt-for-equity” or “debt-for-Millennium Development Goal projects”. The scheme calls for the conversion of 50 per cent of the debt service into equity for MDG projects of at least equal value with an income earning potential. Debt for development projects can focus on areas that would achieve MDG benchmarks such as hospitals and health care, schools, classrooms, information technology, clean water, electricity, reforestation, eco- tourism and many others that should help us achieve our MDGs by 2015. The nexus between development and international migration cannot be overlooked. Migration brings challenges and opportunities to countries of origin, destination and transit. This is another multifaceted issue that requires international cooperation to be addressed in a coordinated and coherent manner. A comprehensive and effective international mechanism for cooperation should be drawn up to address its politico-security, social, cultural and economic development dimensions. As one of the major sending States, the Philippines stands ready to cooperate with all countries in contributing towards the formulation of effective mechanisms that would help ensure a smooth management of the migration phenomenon. The Philippines knows only too well the fear that terrorism instils in the civilian population and the anguish it brings to victims and close relatives. We take cognizance of terrorism’s political, social and economic underpinnings. Our national experience has shown us the value of dialogue in our approach to consider all those factors. The Philippines wants to share this positive value of dialogue and therefore has taken the lead in drawing attention to the need for interfaith dialogue as an integral part for the promotion of the culture of peace. My President recently convened a successful informal summit on interfaith dialogue and cooperation here in the United Nations. The summit adopted a declaration calling for greater interreligious, intercultural and intercivilizational dialogue and cooperation to ensure a lasting and durable peace and understanding at the global, regional and national levels. We invite all who agree with its principles to consider endorsing the declaration. We all acknowledge that the world has reached an unprecedented stage when there are virtually no more barriers, whether of space or time. Communication technology has made possible the dissemination of information instantaneously to practically all parts and corners of the globe. 6 As the nineteenth century brought us the industrial revolution, the twentieth century brought us to the technology revolution ushered in by computerization. The twenty-first century now offers infinite possibilities to further advance the information age. At no other time has the saying “no man is an island” rang truer. As the Secretary-General has said, what affects one affects all in this globalized world. However, the information age is a two-edged sword, as experience has shown us. While it opened opportunities, it also brought challenges that we all have to cope with. Our concern however is that just as the limitless opportunities it offered could be used to benefit humanity, it could also be used destructively. Information technology enables companies to search for lowest cost factors of production globally, operate more efficiently and pass on the benefits to consumers. However, this same technology also enables disillusioned and desperate members of society to become agents of terror and recruit adherents to their way of thinking as well as to fund their destructive activities. It is therefore in our common interest to bring together our collective strengths to take advantage of the opportunities before us as well as to confront common threats. For 60 years, the United Nations has provided us the forum to draw up norms of conduct that take on board all our concerns. From its inception with 51 Member States in 1945, the membership has almost quadrupled to its present 191 States. While the United Nations has, time and again, adopted some reforms, at no other time has the pressure for far-reaching change been starker than it is now. The evolving global and regional security environment, ongoing conflicts in many countries that have multidimensional root causes and other flashpoints have to be addressed. It is clear that in pursuing our shared interest to preserve our common humanity, the United Nations continues to serve as our indispensable tool. It is therefore also our shared interest to strengthen it. Even before San Francisco, some key decisions had already been reached among the major Powers, primarily on the power of the veto, or what was referred to then as the “unanimity rule”. Our delegation, in concert with others, pressed for an increased role of the General Assembly. We felt that this was the balance necessary to safeguard the effectiveness of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and security. We also urged wider and more equitable representation in the Security Council — an aspiration that has yet to achieve realization, and thus an advocacy that my country carries to this day. The outcome document of the High-level Plenary Meeting provides the substance upon which to strengthen the United Nations system. It should guide us well in our discussions on institutional reform. Six decades after San Francisco, our common humanity remains at stake. We have today another opportunity to make our United Nations succeed. Whether the issue is United Nations reform or freedom from want or fear, we must act now to ensure that the principles committed to by our leaders at this year’s summit be implemented effectively and efficiently. Allow me therefore to present at this point some practical strategies that may assist us in ensuring that we achieve our goals. Firstly, the agreed commitments should be broken down into tangible steps. Concrete benchmarks and pragmatic indicators of progress must be set. Secondly, with concrete international benchmarks, national strategies can be geared to achieving them. All concerned national actors in domestic procedures and actions should be involved. This is necessary to put into effect and implement multilateral commitments. Ideally, national actors should be privy to developments in the negotiating process and have the opportunity to provide their own inputs with respect to the national position to be taken. This is expected to ensure implementation and follow- up to the commitments made by our leaders. Thirdly, we must not lose sight of the need to increase congruence among national, regional and international plans of action. Keeping these in sight contributes to a faster rate of achieving these goals. National plans of action can be elevated to the regional level, whenever feasible. Fourthly, we must rethink our existing modes of international cooperation. There will be value in assessing how we have been collaborating bilaterally, regionally and multilaterally. Let us assess the effectiveness of our current modes of cooperation. 7 In adopting practical measures and in discovering new opportunities and addressing new threats, we must be mindful of the old hopes and enduring dreams that led to the birth of our United Nations. As a child, I listened with all innocence as my family closely followed the work of the Philippine delegation in San Francisco. I felt proud that my nation, the Philippines — the Benjamin among the founders — was part of this historic event. We were rebuilding our shattered lives and mourning our dead. Yet we held on to hope. We had hope that no country would ever again crush us with their bombs, trample us with their tanks or defile our mothers, sisters and daughters. As a nation devastated by war, we placed great hope in the United Nations. I still remember the words that made us dare dream of a better, more peaceful world — words heard by a child through the crackle and static of an old radio, words spoken by General Carlos P. Romulo in addressing the delegates in San Francisco in 1945. He said: “Words are more powerful than guns in the defence of human dignity. Treaties are stronger than armamented boundaries. The only impregnable line is that of human understanding.”