I wish to congratulate
you, Madam, on your election as President of the
General Assembly at its sixty-first session. It signals
the increasing role of women, especially women from
the Muslim world, in international affairs; and this is a
very welcome and positive development. May I also
thank and commend His Excellency Mr. Jan Eliasson
for his able stewardship at the sixtieth session.
Let me now join colleagues in paying tribute to
the outstanding service of His Excellency Mr. Kofi
Annan, whose 10-year term of office as Secretary-
General is about to conclude. Among the valuable
services he has rendered is to give the world
community a way of firmly grasping the fundamental
challenges of our time: the challenge of security, the
challenge of underdevelopment and the challenge of
human rights and the rule of law.
We have contemplated these challenges well
enough to know the answers. We know that long-term
security can be achieved only through a durable and
just peace, not one that is imposed on the weak by the
strong. We can overcome the challenge of poverty only
through a global partnership for development that will
equitably distribute the benefits of globalization. The
challenge of human rights and the rule of law can only
be met by Governments that rule by the consent of the
governed, Governments that are elected by and
accountable to the people. In a word, democracy.
Peace, development and democracy are
inseparable. Development is paralysed and democracy
is meaningless in situations of violence and bloody
conflict. Nowhere is this more poignantly true than in
the Middle East. Over the years, Lebanon has rebuilt
its civil-war-ravaged economy, only to be bombed to
the ground recently by Israel. Hundreds of innocent
civilians were killed in those military strikes, many of
them women and children. The carnage stopped with
the adoption of Security Council resolution 1701
(2006), but this came only after a very lengthy process
during which time the Lebanese people underwent so
much unnecessary suffering and loss. The frustration
and inability to take immediate action is radicalizing
many people in the Muslim world.
17 06-53329
This serves to prove the importance of reforming
the Security Council, in its composition, as well as the
way it works, so that it can take effective action when
action is a matter of life and death for thousands of
people, as was recently the case in Lebanon.
Deeply committed to being a part of the solution
to this crisis, Indonesia is sending an 850-strong
mechanized infantry battalion to form part of the
United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), as
mandated by Security Council resolution 1701 (2006).
It has become an Indonesian tradition to contribute
troops to United Nations peacekeeping forces. The first
contingent was deployed as part of the United Nations
Emergency Force I in Suez in 1957.
As for the Arab-Israeli conflict, it is essential to
recognize that the problem of Palestine lies at its core.
There are no military solutions to this problem, as
military might can never guarantee security. There can
only be a two-State solution, with the parties to the
conflict assuming their responsibilities and taking
concrete measures to lay down the foundations of
peace. In this regard, we encourage the formation of a
Palestinian government of national unity, as that will
open a window of opportunity for the resumption of
dialogue and for the revival of the Quartet’s Road Map
for peace.
We appeal to the Security Council to act on this
issue with dispatch, for Muslims everywhere have a
strong emotional reaction to what they perceive to be
the oppression and humiliation of their Palestinian,
Iraqi and Afghan co-religionists. Terrorists operating as
far away from the Middle East as South-East Asia
justify their heinous crimes as retaliation for what they
consider to be aggression against Islam.
Thus today we are witness to the error of some
Western circles attributing to Islam a propensity for
violence, matched by the error of terrorist groups
claiming that violent means are sanctified by Islam.
The only way to liberate the human mind from these
errors is through intensive and extensive dialogue.
That is why Indonesia has been actively
promoting interfaith and intercultural dialogue in the
Asia-Pacific region and within the Asia-Europe
Meeting (ASEM). It is our way of debasing the
ideology of the terrorists and at the same time
empowering the moderates and strengthening the voice
of moderation.
Earlier this month, we collaborated with Norway
in holding the first global intermedia dialogue, which
was attended by leading mass-media practitioners from
five continents. For while the media can be a force for
good, it can also do a great deal of harm, as shown by
the recent cartoon controversy. Through this dialogue,
we aimed to promote mass media sensitivity to other
cultures and faiths, while upholding freedom of
expression. As with the interfaith dialogue, the
intermedia dialogue has been institutionalized and will
be carried out annually.
There is also a great need for dialogue to address
the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Asia. While the
threat of nuclear weapons has subsided in other
regions, a new nuclear theatre may be developing from
West to East Asia.
It is therefore important that we find a diplomatic
solution to the nuclear issue regarding Iran and North
Korea. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons (NPT), as the cornerstone of disarmament,
must be strengthened. In fact, all weapons of mass
destruction should be abolished.
Indeed, we must work for peace in a relentless
day-to-day struggle. Even when the guns are silent,
that is not enough for the long-term survival of
humankind. There must also be development. There
must be an end to poverty as a basic problem of the
human condition; otherwise social grievances will be a
constant threat to peace.
We in the international community have the
resources and the skills to conquer poverty. For that
goal to be attainable, however, the developed and the
developing world must be able to faithfully carry out a
contract of partnership that stipulates for each side a
set of obligations.
We do not need to negotiate that contract; it
already exists. For the past decade and a half, the
international community, within the framework of the
United Nations, has produced a substantial body of
documents to which we have formally committed
ourselves. These constitute a contract for the conquest
of poverty and its attendant maladies. It is not just a
contract between and among States; it is also a contract
with our peoples and with future generations.
Hence, it is appropriate that the theme of our
sixty-first session should be “Implementing a global
partnership for development.” As President Susilo
06-53329 18
Bambang Yudhoyono pointed out recently, all we need
to do is bind ourselves to this contract and carry it out
according to its letter and spirit. This means political
will, which is often lacking, and a streak of sincerity,
which is very rare in our time.
The developed nations have four basic
obligations under this contract. The first is to tear down
the walls of protectionism and open up their markets to
the products of the developing world. They must
salvage the Doha Development Round.
Their second obligation is to relieve their
developing counterparts of some of the burdens of the
debt crisis. Developing countries are often unable to
fund their development programmes because they have
to make huge debt payments.
The third obligation of the developed countries is
to ensure sufficient volumes of financial flows to
developing countries, especially in the form of foreign
direct investment. Many developing countries are
simply too poor to muster the capital they need to get
them out of poverty.
Another essential requirement of development is
technology. Hence, the fourth obligation of the
developed countries is to share their technology with
the developing world, striking a balance between social
responsibility and respect for intellectual property
rights.
The obligations of developed countries must be
matched by those of the developing countries,
otherwise the partnership will not be equitable. The
first obligation of developing countries is to practise
good governance. We must therefore wage a relentless
battle against all forms of corruption. The only form of
capital that is abundant in the developing world is
human capital. It is therefore the second obligation of
the developing countries to protect and enhance that
capital through education, human resources
development and health care.
The third obligation of the developing countries
is to provide a climate that is friendly to foreign
capital, particularly foreign direct investment. This
normally means a package of incentives. It also means
a level playing field and a reputation for good
governance.
It is our fourth and particular obligation to make
use of our natural resources with wisdom so that we
meet the needs of today without robbing our future
generations of their legacy. These obligations are not
easy to fulfil, but they must be carried out if the global
partnership for development is to work.
In the case of Indonesia, we carried out the first
obligation as a matter of survival: it was the only way
we could climb our way out of the limbo to which the
Asian financial crisis relegated us almost a decade ago.
We had to make our transition to a more fully
democratic system of governance, becoming, in the
process, a full-fledged democracy.
We instituted reforms in every aspect of national
life. Our economic recovery is a product of reform, and
our new drive for economic growth is driven by
reform. In the spirit of reform and dialogue, we were
able to forge a peace agreement with the separatist Free
Aceh Movement. The peace has been holding for more
than a year and promises to be durable.
As for our human resources, our Constitution
mandates that 20 per cent of our budget be allocated to
education. As part of our effort to achieve universal
education, we are providing free schooling to some 60
million primary through high school students. To
alleviate poverty, we are continuing to extend direct
cash subsidies to some 19.1 million households.
Last year, one fourth of our total population of
220 million benefited from the medical services of
community health centres. We recently reduced the
price of generic medicines by 30 to 50 per cent.
With regard to foreign investment, Indonesia is
sending out some very positive signals. We are
legislating a new package of investment incentives,
including a law on tax reform, a law that rationalizes
the labour market and regulations to streamline
customs procedures. We are establishing special
economic zones. The response of foreign direct
investors was to pour some $6 billion into Indonesia
last year.
To ensure the sustainability of our environment,
we have launched a national programme entitled
“Towards a green Indonesia” aimed at building the
capacity of local government to conserve natural
resources and control environmental degradation. In
sum, Indonesia is ready for partnership — ready to be
an active participant in that global partnership for
development that will enable the developing world to
reach its Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). I
believe that many other developing countries are just
19 06-53329
as ready for that partnership; and, if they feel they are
not ready at the moment, it takes nothing more — but
nothing less as well — than political will to get
themselves to a proper state of preparedness. That also
applies to the countries of the developed North — they
must also have the political will to fulfil their end of
the partnership. Otherwise, that partnership will not be
worth the paper on which so many Summit documents
were printed. Given that development, peace and
human dignity are inseparable, the destiny of this
partnership parallels the destiny of the entire human
race; a partnership for development is also a
partnership for peace and for the dignity of the human
being.