Traditionally, the General Assembly session
provides an opportunity to conduct a review of the
current situation in the world, identify major
international issues and determine the role that the
United Nations could play in resolving them.
I believe that we have every reason to conclude
that there is a prevailing trend of growing awareness of
the need to strengthen the collective foundations of
international politics, as well as of the fact that there is
no alternative to tackling problems through multilateral
diplomacy. That trend is based on objective facts, for it
reflects the realities of an emerging multipolar
architecture of international relations. It is logical,
because answers to global challenges and threats can
only be found collectively. Finally, it is a manifestation
of historical continuity, because we are revisiting the
same objective as the founding fathers of the United
Nations were determined to pursue by enshrining in the
Charter the principles for a system of collective
security.
It is precisely such an approach, firmly grounded
in international law, that can ensure the world’s
sustainable development in this era of globalization.
That requires a strengthened central role for the
universal Organization in every area of international
life.
We must of course continue to adapt the
mechanisms and methods of the United Nations to the
new environment. Much has been done as follow-up to
the decisions of the 2005 World Summit: The
Peacebuilding Commission and the Human Rights
Council have been established, and the reform process
has been extended to management.
It is important that all our further work be based
upon the fundamental principle of the universality of
the United Nations. Patterns contrary to the Charter of
the United Nations that exclude individual States or
groups of States from participating meaningfully in the
activities of the Organization or that introduce a single
system of values into the work of the Secretariat are
unsustainable. Let us not forget that the United Nations
belongs to us all. Moreover, administrative reform
should not lead to the bureaucracy taking over the
management of the Organization, thereby jeopardizing
the intergovernmental nature of the United Nations.
A trend towards collective action has also spread
beyond the structures of the United Nations. During
Russia’s presidency of the Group of Eight (G-8), there
was greater interaction between the G-8 and other
leading countries and international organizations. Over
06-53005 28
the past 12 months our dialogue partners have actively
contributed to Saint Petersburg summit documents on
every main agenda item, including global energy
security, education and controlling infectious diseases.
A new and genuinely collaborative type of
interaction between the G-8 and Africa is now
emerging in this era of globalization, as the needs of
the continent are reflected in the mainstream of world
development rather than being viewed as issues
divorced from overall trends.
The G-8 does not have a monopoly over the
decisions taken at Saint Petersburg. All States are
invited to participate in their implementation.
Regional organizations and cooperation and
coordination between those organizations and the
United Nations have also strengthened in maintaining
international peace and security. Issues pertaining to
that were discussed yesterday at the special ministerial
meeting of the Security Council (see S/PV.5529). Once
again, we are dealing here with an important dimension
of collective action by the international community.
The Commonwealth of Independent States has
made a significant contribution to such interaction. To
address common problems, specific actions have been
taken within the Commonwealth area, primarily within
the Eurasian Economic Community and the Collective
Security Treaty Organization. Further substantive and
resolute efforts are being made in the context of the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which developed
and launched and initiative to establish a partnership
network for multilateral organizations in the Asia-
Pacific region. Development patterns in that region
will largely determine the future contours of our planet.
Multilateral institutions in Latin America have
also become stronger, and the development of the
African Union is gaining momentum.
At their recent Summit in Havana, heads of State
of the countries of the Non-Aligned Movement
expressed their support for a collective search —
within the context of the central role of the United
Nations — for agreed solutions to problems
confronting the world community.
Europe, of course, is not outside the common
trend towards collective examination and resolution of
common problems. In that connection, we also see
growing awareness of the fact that security and
prosperity are indivisible. We expect NATO to
transform itself from a defence alliance into something
more contemporary that would be in line with
principles of transparency and collective response and
based upon a universal legal foundation.
We have been watching with keen interest the
emerging foreign policy and security mechanisms of
the European Union. Russia is prepared to cooperate
with multilateral structures in the Euro-Atlantic space
and other regions of the world. In fact, we already have
effective common mechanisms with many of them.
Collective efforts are also needed to further
develop international law, primarily within the context
of countering new threats. The United Nations Global
Counter-terrorism Strategy (resolution 60/288), which
was recently adopted by consensus, is an important
contribution in terms of strengthening the legal basis
for the anti-terrorist coalition and ensuring a
comprehensive approach to counter-terrorism. It is not
only about countering all terrorist manifestations and
ideologies, it is also about eliminating the problems
that give rise to terrorism. The next step will be to
agree upon a comprehensive anti-terrorism convention.
It is necessary to secure the achievements that
have been made by taking practical steps. In the course
of Russia’s presidency of the G-8, the Second
Ministerial Conference on Drug Trafficking Routes
From Afghanistan was held, where additional measures
were approved aimed at mobilizing the international
community to counter the terrorism-related drug threat
originating from Afghanistan. Another international
meeting will be held in Moscow next November to
focus on developing modalities for government-
business partnerships in countering terrorism.
What is needed today are more proactive
measures to prevent lethal weapons from falling into
the hands of non-State actors, as well as the consistent
implementation of Security Council resolution 1540
(2004) and other counter-terrorism resolutions of the
Council. The Russia-United States global initiative to
combat nuclear terrorism, which was launched at Saint
Petersburg by Presidents Vladimir V. Putin and George
W. Bush last July, should be an important tool in
preventing a linkage between weapons of mass
destruction and terrorism. That initiative invites
interested States to act collectively.
The ever-growing demand for the unique
peacekeeping capabilities of the United Nations also
calls for a collective effort. Not all of those capabilities
29 06-53005
have been utilized to the fullest. Utilizing the
capabilities of the Military Staff Committee, as well as
those of regional organizations, on the basis of the
relevant provisions of the United Nations Charter
would be helpful.
It is encouraging to see a more active role being
played by Africans themselves in peacemaking
operations in Africa — an undertaking spearheaded by
the African Union and supported by the United
Nations.
In a number of crisis situations conditions are
gradually emerging for a transition to post-conflict
reconstruction. It is our hope that the Declaration on
Cooperation and Future Action in Stabilization and
Reconstruction adopted at the Saint Petersburg G-8
Summit will help us complement the efforts of the
United Nations and regional organizations at this
critically important period of transition to
peacebuilding.
A comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli
conflict remains a central task for the world
community. Many of today’s threats have come
together in that region, and the key to resolving them is
most often to be found there. In that connection, I
should first like to mention the truly global challenge
posed by the need to prevent a schism between
civilizations.
We welcome the emerging prospects for a
national agreement in the Palestinian territories, as
well as for the resumption of the Palestinian-Israeli
talks. It is important to continue to encourage the
parties to meet their respective obligations, with the
clear understanding that any progress towards the
objectives set out by the international community will
inevitably be gradual and that any attempt to act in an
all-or-nothing spirit will be counterproductive and
could once again plunge the region into confrontation.
The recent war in Lebanon demonstrated the
great fragility of the situation in the Middle East and
the acute need for a comprehensive approach along all
tracks. That presupposes the involvement of all
countries and parties. Without their participation it will
be impossible to reach any viable negotiated solution.
It is also clear that the road to comprehensive peace
will not be an easy one, but now is the time. The
initiative of the League of Arab States to convene an
international conference should contribute to finding
the proper framework for that undertaking. The Quartet
of international mediators should also make a key
contribution to the process.
A breakthrough on a Middle East settlement
could provide the positive momentum so wanting in
the region. It could also facilitate the solution of other
burning problems in the region and in neighbouring
countries. That is particularly true as regards efforts
aimed at stabilizing the situation in Iraq, where
attempts to contain wanton violence and chaos have
thus far proved unsuccessful. Dozens of people, mainly
civilians, continue to die in Iraq every day. Five
officials of the Russian embassy in Baghdad have also
fallen victim to that barbarous massacre. A resolution
in Iraq will be possible only through concerted efforts.
That requires the involvement in the political process
of all major Iraqi interests and the implementation of
the plans of that country’s Government to reach
genuine national accord, with the concerted support of
the international community, including all of Iraq’s
neighbours.
We are, unfortunately, now witnessing growing
significance of the use of force in world affairs; that
undermines non-proliferation regimes. The feeling of a
lack of predictability and stability in the area of
security is becoming ever more pronounced. Against
that background, the growing interest of many States in
nuclear energy may give rise to concerns, given the
trend towards the global proliferation of sensitive
technologies.
Apart from current resolute steps to find
negotiated solutions to individual problems — such as
the Iranian nuclear programme and the problem of the
Korean peninsula — there is a need for an urgent effort
by the entire international community to systematically
strengthen non-proliferation regimes on a generally
acceptable basis, while ensuring that the benefits of
peaceful atomic energy are legitimately accessible to
all States.
President Vladimir V. Putin’s initiative to
establish multilateral centres for nuclear fuel-cycle
services, along with similar ideas proposed by the
leadership of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) and proposals put forth by United States
President George W. Bush, have found support among
G-8 leaders. We are confident that the development and
practical implementation of such approaches — in
cooperation with all countries with an interest in
modern and safe nuclear energy — will make it
06-53005 30
possible to resolve non-proliferation issues in a non-
confrontational manner.
As in other areas, the obsession with sanctions —
applied without calculating their consequences —
might produce unpredictable results. It is absolutely
necessary to eliminate the loopholes in the non-
proliferation regimes, but that should be done through
clear and non-discriminatory approaches, without
creating grounds for suspicion regarding the existence
of some hidden agenda.
Stagnation in the international disarmament
process does not help to resolve non-proliferation
problems. Here again, we need concerted action, for
this is a matter of collective security.
In the area of strategic arms, the United States-
Russian agreements play an enormously important role.
Their significance goes far beyond the framework of
bilateral relations, considering that virtually all
members of the international community benefit from
strategic stability. We support the consistent
development of the United States-Russian bilateral
disarmament process, as was stated by our Presidents
in Saint Petersburg in July.
Closely related to that are issues related to anti-
ballistic missiles, in particular within the context of the
existing plans of the United States. In that context,
there is a need for complete transparency and for an
analysis of the consequences for strategic stability.
The situation surrounding the Treaty on
Conventional Armed Forces in Europe continues to
cause grave concern. The old Treaty, based on the
realities of confrontation between military blocs, has
lost its relevance, while NATO is blocking the entry
into force of the Agreement on its adaptation.
At the same time, reconfiguration of the military
architecture on the European continent is under way. At
its heart is an expanding military alliance. Such virtual
arms control becomes meaningless as it turns into a
one-way street.
It is also necessary to revitalize multilateral
disarmament approaches. That agenda should include
the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-
Test-Ban Treaty, non-deployment of weapons in outer
space, conclusion of a fissile material cut-off treaty and
ensuring information security. Nuclear-weapon-free
zones play an important role, and we welcome the
creation of such a zone in Central Asia.
The overall task is to reinvigorate the efforts of
the international community in the area of disarmament
and arms control, within the framework of the
Conference on Disarmament and other relevant United
Nations bodies.
The 2005 World Summit unanimously reaffirmed
that peace, security and development are inseparable.
With that in mind, we are prepared to engage in
collective discussions and support further joint
pragmatic steps with a view to improving the
efficiency of the social and economic activities of the
entire United Nations system.
The Russian Federation realizes its responsibility
as one of the fastest growing economies of the world,
and is devoting increasing attention to development
assistance. Thus far, Russia has written off or has
undertaken to write off $11.3 billion of the debt of
African countries, including more than $2.2 billion
within the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt
Initiative. New steps are planned in that area. Russia
now ranks third in absolute figures of debt relief and
first in terms of the ratio of debt relief to gross
domestic product. We have also increased our
contributions to other international development
assistance mechanisms, including through United
Nations institutions and funds and the Bretton Woods
institutions.
Today, I cannot fail to express my sincere
appreciation and praise to the Secretary-General Kofi
Annan. For many years, during the most difficult times
for world politics, he has carried out his duties with
dignity. Thanks largely to the efforts of Kofi Annan
and to his ability to take the lead while remaining a
realist in the face of severe challenges, we have
managed to make progress in strengthening the United
Nations.
Today the United Nations is relevant as never
before. We do not have to create it anew. In the course
of reforming the United Nations in accordance with the
dictates of the time, it is incumbent upon us all to
reaffirm by action our commitment to the world
Organization, which draws its strength from our trust
in it and in its unique legitimacy. Without the United
Nations and its Charter to rely upon, it would prove
impossible to ensure a more reliable and democratic
system of collective security that would respond to the
dictates of our time.