General Assembly Session 52 meeting 55

The President

I call on the representative of Armenia, who wishes to make a proposal.

Mr. Abelian (Armenia)

My delegation would like to make a motion of no action under rule 74 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly on the amendment [A/52/L.39] proposed by the delegation of Azerbaijan to draft resolution A/52/L.38, entitled "Cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe". We make this proposal for the following reasons: the common interpretations and definitions used by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are based on decisions taken by consensus among the delegations of OSCE member States during meetings at various levels, namely OSCE summits, and meetings of the OSCE Council of Ministers, the OSCE Senior Council, the Committee of Senior Officials, and so forth. They express the common position of all Member States of OSCE and are based on the awareness of the necessity to guarantee balance and objectivity in the OSCE Minsk Group mediation efforts.

The amendment proposed by Azerbaijan is one-sided and biased, and it imposes a compulsory framework to which Armenia cannot agree. Being an obvious attempt to predetermine the outcome of the Copenhagen meeting of the OSCE Ministerial Council, this amendment in fact rejects the language proposed by the Chairman-in-Office.

We view this as an inappropriate move, since OSCE is the sole mandated and authoritative body dealing with the Nagorny Karabakh conflict. For this obvious reason, the sponsors did not find it appropriate to include the amendment proposed by Azerbaijan in the draft resolution.

The delegation of Armenia fully supports the draft resolution presented by the Chairman-in-Office this morning. Therefore, my delegation regrets to state that Azerbaijan has failed to take into account the arguments I have just mentioned.

The delegation of Armenia dissociates itself from any interpretation of language which contradicts the decisions agreed upon by consensus in OSCE among its members.

Having said that, I would like to make a motion of no action, and I call upon Member States to vote in favour of this motion.

The President

The representative of Armenia has moved within the terms of rule 74 of the rules of procedure that no action be taken on the amendment contained in document A/52/L.39. I would like to remind the Assembly that rule 74 reads as follows:

"During the discussion of any matter, a representative may move the adjournment of the debate on the item under discussion. In addition to the proposer of the motion, two representatives may speak in favour of, and two against, the motion, after which the motion shall be immediately put to the vote."

I call on the representative of Azerbaijan.

Mr. Kouliev (Azerbaijan)

As was the case last year, the delegation of Armenia has once again put forward a procedural measure -- a motion of no action -- thus attempting to deprive us of the possibility of defending our highest national interests. The delegation of Azerbaijan is categorically opposed to this. Azerbaijan has not made and does not make any claims to anyone else's territory, but neither will it permit any kind of encroachment on its own territory.

The Nagorny Karabakh region is an integral part of the Azerbaijani Republic. As a United Nations Member State, Azerbaijan must not be deprived of its legitimate right to express its view on a question which is so important for its own destiny. In protecting its sovereignty and territorial integrity, Azerbaijan must not be deprived of the opportunity to propose an amendment for consideration by the General Assembly. At its fifty-first session, the General Assembly rejected this procedural measure.

We call upon Member States, as we did last year, to vote against the motion of no action proposed by Armenia.

The President

If no other delegation wishes to speak on this issue, I shall now put to the vote the motion submitted by the representative of Armenia that no action be taken on the amendment contained in document A/52/L.39, which is an amendment submitted by Azerbaijan to the draft resolution contained in document A/52/L.38.

The President

Since the motion of no action has not been adopted, we shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/52/L.38 and the amendment contained in document A/52/L.39.

Since there are no speakers in explanation of vote before the voting, we shall now proceed to take a decision on draft resolution A/52/L.38 and on the amendment thereto, contained in document A/52/L.39.

In accordance with rule 90 of the rules of procedure, the amendment is voted on first. The Assembly shall therefore take a decision first on the amendment circulated in document A/52/L.39.

The President

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/52/L.38 as a whole, as amended.

The President

Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of vote after the vote, may I remind representatives that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

Mr. Sychou (Belarus)

The delegation of the Republic of Belarus, acting in a spirit of compromise and mutual understanding, broadly supported draft resolution A/52/L.38 and at this stage will not insist on the adoption of our amendments to many of its provisions. We should also like to thank those delegations that expressed a readiness to sponsor those amendments.

At the same time, we must focus the attention of the General Assembly on the clear imbalance between several points stressed by draft resolution L.38 regarding basic areas for the pan-European process, and the clear slant in favour of including in the draft resolution only the decisions of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). In this regard the delegation of Belarus does not consider that it is advisable for the United Nations General Assembly to be involved in issues of micro-management with regard to the purely internal competence of regional organizations.

In this context, we affirm our readiness to implement the decision of the Permanent Council of the OSCE to establish an Advisory and Monitoring Group of the OSCE in Belarus based on mutually acceptable conditions. We believe that it is premature for the General Assembly to take note of this decision, given that the negotiating process is continuing and consultations are taking place between the Government of Belarus and the OSCE on the memorandum on understanding to implement that decision of the Permanent Council of the OSCE.

In future, we intend to continue to base our position on the fact that decisions adopted regarding areas of interaction between the United Nations and the OSCE, as in the case of interaction between the United Nations and all other regional organizations, can yield tangible results only when they cover the entire range of the most important spheres of competence of each of them and are supported by all Member States.

Miss Lucas (Luxembourg)

The European Union regrets that once again it has not been possible to adopt this resolution by consensus. The resolution is part of a series of resolutions dealing with cooperation between the United Nations and various international or regional organizations. The European Union would also have preferred the focus of our discussion to have been on strengthening cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and on the coordination of their activities. With regard to the substance of the question addressed in the amendment introduced by the Republic of Azerbaijan, the European Union can only repeat its earlier comment, made in the general debate: the principles that should lead to a settlement respecting the dignity and interests of the parties to the conflict in Nagorny Karabakh are well-known; they are clearly defined in the framework of the OSCE. We appeal to the parties to pursue their negotiations in the framework of the Minsk Process. The States members of the European Union, as co-sponsors of the draft resolution introduced by the Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE, would have preferred reaching a consensus on maintaining paragraph 16 as it was. The amendment proposed by Azerbaijan, however, reverts to the language adopted last year by the General Assembly. The European Union therefore joined with the Co-Chairmen of the Minsk Conference by voting in favour of A/52/L.39.

Mr. Abelian (Armenia)

My delegation voted against the amendment proposed by the delegation of Azerbaijan and abstained on the resolution as a whole for the following reasons. The initial proposal put forward by the Chairman-in-Office was very balanced and was dictated by the need to create a more favourable environment for the peace process on the eve of the Copenhagen ministerial meeting. The United Nations should not have second-guessed the language proposed by the Chairman-in-Office, since the OSCE is the sole mandated and authoritative body dealing with the Nagorny Karabakh conflict.

We are surprised that the States members of the OSCE, including the members of the European Union, voted in favour of the Azerbaijani amendment, given that they earlier sponsored the proposed draft. In this respect we are particularly disappointed by the decision of the Co-Chairmen of the Minsk Group to support this amendment. The position of the Minsk Group Co-Chairmen countries to vote in favour of the Azerbaijani amendment undermines and dismisses the initial proposal of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office.

We are convinced that any attempt to predetermine the final status of Nagorny Karabakh will continue to have a negative effect on the peace process, as did the Lisbon Declaration, not only making the commencement of negotiations on Nagorny Karabakh difficult, but also making the signing of an interim agreement between the parties to the conflict highly unlikely. However, Armenia remains committed to the peace process and will continue to be constructively engaged in negotiations to reach a peaceful resolution to the conflict based on goodwill and mutual compromise.

Mr. Dlamini (Swaziland)

My delegation wholeheartedly supported this resolution. This support emanated from the belief that the regional organization should truly be given support by the United Nations. This is in the spirit of the Charter itself, which advocates, for both regional and subregional organizations, the resolution of existing conflicts and also the economic problems which normally beset our subregions.

Furthermore, my delegation humbly implores the group affected by the resolution to endeavour to sit around a regional conference table to resolve any problems. I say to those concerned: "Quarrelling with your brother, misunderstanding the language of your brother, has no place nowadays". Therefore, I humbly request that in future before they come to the Assembly they try to overcome any difficulty and not interrupt as we take action on such draft resolutions.

Let us turn the weapons of the cold war into a machinery for development, a mechanism for creating sacred vows on peace and security, so that any future draft resolution can be adopted by consensus, like the one on relations between the Organization of African Unity and the United Nations. I urge my friends, my brothers and sisters, to bury their hatchets and learn to love one another, so that they do not waste time and energy which they need for sustainable economic development.

The President

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote. I call on the representative of Estonia, who wishes to speak in exercise of the right of reply.

Mr. Velliste (Estonia)

I should like to clarify the Estonian Government's position on a matter raised this morning by the representative of the Russian Federation.

Estonia has consistently supported cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), in a wide range of matters.

In this regard, I would specifically like to clarify that the OSCE agenda does not contain an issue of human rights in Estonia. However, the Estonian Government has developed close relations with the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities in addressing problems caused by the collapse of the Soviet empire and directly resulting from Soviet occupation. These concern activities of integrating an alien population into Estonian society. It is widely believed that Estonia has succeeded in making good progress towards this end.

Finally, I wish to recall that, by a consensual decision, the General Assembly at its fifty-first session welcomed the fruitful cooperation of the Government of Estonia with the OSCE.

The President

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 40?

The President

I give the floor to the representative of France to introduce draft resolution A/52/L.35.