General Assembly Session 55 meeting 10

The President

The General Assembly, in accordance with the decision taken at its 9 th plenary meeting on 11 September 2000, will now take up agenda item 10, entitled "Report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization", to hear a presentation by the Secretary-General of his annual report.

I give the floor to the Secretary-General.

The Secretary-General

"The tumult and the shouting dies; the captains and the kings depart."

In other years this day, when the Assembly begins its general debate, marks the climax of the United Nations calendar. This year, coming the week after our historic Millennium Summit, it may seem something of an anticlimax.

But I prefer to see it as the moment when we roll up our sleeves and start putting into action the bold pledges that our heads of State or Government have made. It is in that spirit that I have the honour to present to the Assembly my annual report on the work of the Organization.

This year I have not tried to give my annual report any grand, overarching theme. I felt that the Assembly would neither need nor want that, since I had already set out, in my millennium report, what I see as the major challenges for humanity, and for this Organization, at the start of the new century.

Needless to say, I am delighted that many of the commitments and targets I suggested in that report were solemnly adopted by heads of State or Government in their Declaration last Friday.

Clearly, there is broad consensus on what needs to be done -- broader than many would have expected in so large and diverse an Organization. What is vital now, however, is that we also agree on the means of doing it, and that we equip ourselves with the right tools.

In particular, it is vital that this Organization, the United Nations itself, should be capable of playing the role that the world's peoples expect of it. It must be, as the heads of State or Government declared, a more effective instrument for pursuing the priorities they have outlined. These are the fight for development, which is also the fight against poverty, ignorance and disease, including the worldwide scourge of HIV/AIDS; the fight against injustice in all its forms, from gross inequalities of power and wealth, through corruption, discrimination and oppression to the extremes of mass destruction or genocide; the fight against violence, terror and crime, which take on new forms as we develop new technology, and which regrettably march in step with the development of a global economy; and the fight against the degradation and destruction of our common home, the earth -- a fight that still does not receive the priority attention that it merits, despite the constant accumulation of evidence that our present patterns of production and consumption are ecologically unsustainable.

I do not mean, of course, that this Organization should be able to win all these battles by itself. If the twentieth century has taught us anything, it is that large-scale, centralized government does not work. It does not work at the national level, and it is even less likely to work at the global level.

Governments can bring about change, not by acting alone but by working together with other actors -- with commercial enterprises, and with civil society in its broadest sense.

Governments can define norms and principles, and plans of action, after carefully listening to the views of civil society. But then they need to work with appropriate partners to put those norms into practice.

Your heads of State or Government have reaffirmed the central position of this Assembly as the chief deliberative, policy-making and representative organ of the United Nations and have resolved to enable it to play that role effectively. It is up to you to give effect to that resolution, by taking decisions which reflect the will of the great majority of Member States, and taking them when they are needed.

Consensus is highly desirable, but it need not mean waiting for absolute unanimity on every sub-clause among 189 Member States. The minority, often a very small minority, should not withhold its consent unreasonably. Whatever we think of the veto in the Security Council, it surely has no place in this Assembly. We can no longer afford to operate always at the level of the lowest, and slowest, common denominator. It is up to you, likewise, to achieve the comprehensive reform of the Security Council that your heads of State or Government have called for -- a reform that will make the Council more representative and legitimate, but also more effective.

In this connection, I draw your attention particularly to the request addressed to you by your heads of State or Government to consider expeditiously the recommendations of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations. As you know, the Panel's recommendations are intended precisely to make this Organization more effective in its primary task of keeping the peace. Some of them fall within the area of responsibility of the Security Council, which decided, during its summit-level meeting last week, that it, too, would consider them expeditiously. Some fall fully within my own purview as Secretary-General, and I and my staff have already started work on implementing them.

But the largest number call for decisions by this Assembly, not least because they have budgetary implications. I will shortly submit to you an implementation plan, in the hope that within a year we will see real change. Never again must the United Nations find itself without the means to protect those who have been encouraged to put their trust in it.

Not only in peace operations, but also across the whole range of our activities, it is up to you to ensure that this Organization is provided, on a timely and predictable basis, with the resources it needs to carry out its mandates.

It is up to you to agree on the clear rules of procedure that will enable us in the Secretariat, by adopting the best management practices and technologies available, and by concentrating on the tasks that reflect your priorities, to make the best use of those resources.

I would add that it is up to you to allocate those resources in a way that reflects your current priorities, rather than condemning us to operate with a budget frozen in time.

Above all, we must make the best use of the Organization's human resources, the men and women whose job it is to implement your decisions. It is vital that we attract staff of the highest calibre and give them full opportunity to develop their talents. It is even more vital that we give them better protection when they are sent to serve the cause of humanity in situations of conflict and danger.

I shall shortly submit proposals to you for improvements in both these areas -- human resources management and the safety of personnel. I trust you will act on them promptly.

The Secretary-General

It will also be up to you to see to it that the Organization is accommodated in premises worthy of it. Today, our Headquarters, a magnificent set of buildings whose elegant silhouette is known in every corner of the world, needs urgently to be renovated and modernized. We cannot continue indefinitely to deal only with the most urgent needs, because this will be an increasingly expensive solution.

That is why I have proposed a master plan, in which I have considered several possible solutions and envisaged various ways of financing them. It emerges very clearly that major modernization works will cost a great deal of money, but it is also very clear that if we do nothing to change the situation, then the expense will soon become much greater, particularly in energy costs. I therefore call upon you urgently to take the necessary measures while there is still time.

Last, but definitely not least, it is largely up to you to ensure that parliamentarians, the private sector, non-governmental organizations and civil society in general have more opportunities to make their contributions to United Nations activities, to the fulfilment of its objectives and to the implementation of its programmes.

In this context, I am sure the Assembly will forgive me if I repeat here what I wrote in my millennium report. The agencies of civil society have made an important contribution to articulating and defending global norms.

The Secretary-General

Since I submitted the report, we have made headway on the specific proposals I made for new partnerships. We are bringing new information technologies within reach of more people in developing countries; and we are going to use those technologies to bring medical knowledge where it is most needed, and to ensure that help reaches the victims of disasters with a minimum of delay.

But we are not doing this alone. We are doing it in partnership with volunteers, with corporations and with philanthropic foundations. There is much, much more to be achieved through these and other kinds of partnership.

It is clear that the United Nations and the world's people have much to gain from opening the Organization further, including the work of this Assembly, to such a vital source of energy and expertise.

One role of the United Nations is to be the forum where international norms are agreed and promulgated, and where all voices can be heard, especially those of the poor and vulnerable, whose views and interests are often ignored elsewhere. Another role is to help form coalitions for change at the global level. And, of course, the United Nations must continue to play the primary role assigned to it by its founders: that of keeping the peace.

What sort of Organization can play these roles? One that is open, one that is flexible, one that is efficient, one that is representative of all the world's peoples and enjoys legitimacy in their eyes.

Those are the qualities which I have done my best to cultivate in this Organization since I became its Secretary-General. But, the key decisions lie in your hands.

The President

We have concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 10.

The President

The Assembly will now begin the general debate. Before giving the floor to the first speaker in the general debate, I should like to remind members of the decision taken by the General Assembly at its 9th plenary meeting on 11 September 2000, that congratulations should not be expressed inside the General Assembly Hall after the speech has been delivered.

In this connection, may I remind members of another decision taken by the Assembly at the same meeting: that speakers in the general debate, after delivering their statements, would leave the Assembly Hall through Room GA-200, located behind the podium before returning to their seats.

I should also like to remind representatives that, in accordance with the decision taken by the General Assembly at its 9th plenary meeting, the list of speakers will be closed on Thursday, 14 September, at 6 p.m. May I request delegations to be good enough to provide estimated speaking times that are as accurate as possible. This will facilitate the work of the General Assembly.

I should now like to recall for the attention of Members paragraph 21 of the annex to resolution 51/241, whereby the General Assembly indicated a voluntary guideline of up to 20 minutes for each statement in the general debate. Within this given time-frame, I should like to appeal to speakers to deliver their statements at the normal speed so that interpretation may be provided properly.

The first speaker in the general debate is His Excellency Mr. Luiz Felipe Palmeira Lampreia, the Minister for Foreign Relations of Brazil. I give him the floor.

Mr. Lampreia (Brazil)

Brazil applauds your election, Sir, to preside over the fifty-fifth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Your personal political experience and Finland's historic contribution to the promotion of peace, human rights and social development are valuable credentials that you bring to the honoured task of chairing our work.

On behalf of the Brazilian Government, I pay tribute to your predecessor, Foreign Minister Theo-Ben Gurirab. His diplomatic skills and commitments to the highest ideals of the United Nations insured him a decisive role at the helm of the fifty-fourth session.

I wish to make a very special reference to our Secretary-General, Kofi Annan. His moral authority has served as a beacon as we strive to fulfil the principles and goals of the United Nations. His report, "We the peoples: the role of the United Nations in the twenty-first century", is a contribution of fundamental importance to the cause of peace and justice, and to a stronger United Nations. It will serve as a permanent source of inspiration as we ponder the crucial decisions the Organization is called upon to make.

Brazil had the satisfaction to co-sponsor the resolution bringing Tuvalu into the United Nations family. We salute Tuvalu as our newest member.

For the sixth consecutive time it is my honour to take part in the opening of the general debate. On all previous occasions, I took stock both of the positive and negative aspects of the current state of world affairs, the facts that afford us satisfaction and those that are cause for frustration and even indignation. This is our daily challenge and the motivating force behind our work.

We meet here for the last time this century. We all know that the twentieth century has been marred by a fundamental contradiction. We have seen a growing abundance of intellectual and material resources that should have brought about a greater convergence of opportunities and expectations as well as of living standards throughout the world. Yet, what we also saw was a failure to harness the necessary political will to translate those extraordinary possibilities into a reality of progress shared by all. This applies not only to the international community as a whole but is equally valid for the great majority of nations represented here, among which is Brazil itself.

No doubt, we have much to gain in identifying those aspects of our relations with the international environment that are a hindrance to national development. Yet it is equally illuminating to seek within our own countries examples of success and failure that help explain the world we live in. Globalization is asymmetrical in part because it flows from national societies that are themselves socially unbalanced and seem to have lost some of their urge to bring about social justice.

Freedom -- the greatest of values -- continues to advance on all fronts and in all continents. That is a crucial development. There is cause for concern, however, that the core values of equality and fraternity are dangerously being put aside. It is imperative that these two other essential elements return to the top of our agenda. They must retake their rightful place at the centre of our policy decisions before it is too late -- before some are misled into believing that the inevitable price for preserving freedom is the perpetuation of the divide between the rich and the poor, between those who are included and those who suffer exclusion, between the "globalized" and those left behind.

If democracy and freedom are to put down firm roots within our countries, we must foster a genuine sense of solidarity that translates into effective action. Only thus will we build an international order that is conducive to the preservation of peace and can function as an engine of sustained growth. It is unacceptable that major global issues and campaigns for transnational solidarity be manipulated and exploited in order to disguise what amounts to the protection of narrow interests. Unfortunately, this is what is happening in the field of international trade.

First, the inconsistency between free trade rhetoric and the continued use of protectionist policies of various types by developed countries. As I stated at the World Trade Organization conference in Seattle, the name of this game is discrimination. And discrimination, especially when waged against the weakest, is the absolute negation of solidarity. We must reverse these grave distortions in international trade, and especially as concerns agricultural products.

It is inadmissible that the most prosperous nations, whose economies are strongly based in the manufacturing and service industries, should be legally entitled to restrict access to their markets for agricultural goods, while they call for the free flow of those goods in which they benefit from an enormous competitive advantage. It is even more intolerable that these countries be allowed, as is presently the case, to subsidize the production and export of agricultural commodities to the tune of dozens of billions of dollars. These policies cause enormous harm to exporting nations that are more efficient and competitive in this field, but lack the financial means to offer equally generous fiscal incentives to their farmers.

Secondly, not satisfied with the persistence of this highly discriminatory situation -- where what is said often deviates from what is done -- there are those in the developed countries who give voice to sectional interests and defend a new offensive against the exports of developing nations. This is what the new language of protectionism, camouflaged as humanitarian internationalism, would seem to suggest. It unfurls the seductive banner of labour and environmental standards, which, if adopted, would further restrict the access of products from developing countries to the markets of rich countries.

This rhetoric and its appeal to certain segments of public opinion might suggest that the exports of developing countries pose a threat to the economic well-being and the way of life of the more developed societies. We all know this is not true. After all, these exports represent less than a third of world trade and are made up mostly of raw materials.

The main objective of those who wish to introduce labour conditionalities into trade rules has little to do with improving the quality of life of workers in poor countries. Their fundamental aim is to protect backward sectors of their own economies that strictly speaking are no longer capable of competing effectively in a free trade environment.

Sanctions and commercial barriers are inadequate tools to enhance labour standards and to protect the environment in developing countries. Our countries and our own societies, more than any other, are interested in achieving those very same objectives, which is why we need more -- not less -- exports and economic growth.

This is a message that developing countries must make ring out in a clear and powerful voice. We must instil in developed societies an understanding that they are not alone in the world. Above all, they must not presume to unilaterally write the rules of international trade solely according to their interests and points of view, as if the other 5 billion human beings did not have equally legitimate aspirations to progress, justice and well-being.

Nations must come increasingly to comprehend and respect differing realities and objectives among themselves. At the same time, they must recognize their commonalties and affinities; explore and enlarge areas of convergence and opportunities for cooperation; and overcome suspicions, rivalries and disputes.

Nowadays it is above all through regional integration that this learning process takes place. For most countries, it opens the door to a more intensive and meaningful participation in global affairs.

In the Americas, and more specifically in Latin America, we have set ourselves firmly on this course. The countries of the region are increasingly integrated among themselves and into the world. These are the two inseparable faces of the same forward movement.

A few days ago in Brasilia, on the initiative of President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, a meeting of Presidents of South America took place for the first time in our history. This gathering sought to bring together the leaders of South America around the common challenges that grow out of our shared geography and physical proximity. It is only natural that this first meeting should have occurred in Brazil, which shares borders with nine of its 11 South American neighbours, and has lived in harmony with all for over a century in a spirit of peace, friendship and growing determination to move ahead on the road to full integration.

The Presidents took important and concrete steps in this direction that will bear lasting fruit. In the political realm, they agreed to underscore the commitment of the countries of South America to democracy and decided that participation in future South American gatherings would hinge on the preservation of the rule of law and full respect for democratic values and procedures. They also agreed to hold consultations among their Governments in the event of a threat to democracy in our region.

In trade matters, they resolved to begin negotiations on a free-trade zone between MERCOSUR and the Andean Community, to be established before January 2002 and to be expanded into an economic zone covering all of South America, including Chile, Guyana and Suriname. To this end the Presidents decided to coordinate the planning and funding of projects for integrating the region's infrastructure, in particular in the priority areas of energy, transport and telecommunications. By working together in this way we will more quickly set up the physical links that will enhance South American unity.

Drug trafficking and organized crime are issues that affect, in different forms, all regions of the world. The Presidents highlighted the role of the Organization of American States in the fight against drugs in the hemisphere and the setting up last year of the multilateral evaluation mechanism to assess the performance of our countries in this effort. They also decided to establish systematic consultations among national agencies and to set up a South American anti-laundering task force.

The meeting of Presidents of South America was an event unique in the almost two centuries of independent nationhood for most of the subcontinent. As well as having historic significance and long-term impact, this summit will also generate results in the immediate future.

None is more significant than the commitment to democratic values. President Fernando Henrique Cardoso was very much to the point when he said:

"the South America of today is synonymous with democracy ... In this dawning of democracy, we will not tolerate abuses. And we will increasingly demand the right not only to vote, but to defend freedom, access to information and the judicial guarantees that make elections an effective exercise in democracy".

The United Nations has seen important achievements over this last year. Let me recall a few. The goal of creating a more just, tolerant society was reaffirmed during the follow-up world conferences on women -- Beijing +5 -- and on social development -- Copenhagen +5. At the Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference, modest but nevertheless significant progress was made towards freeing the world from the scourge of nuclear arms. As one of the New Agenda countries, Brazil is proud of its contribution to the success of the conference, whose results will be a litmus test for future advances in the nuclear disarmament field.

Efforts to establish an International Criminal Court have moved ahead, and Brazil signed the Rome Statute. Those that commit crimes against humanity must not, under any circumstances, go unpunished.

In the Brahimi report (A/55/305), a valuable framework has been laid out on how to strengthen the work of United Nations peacekeeping operations and, as a result, on how to overcome recent failures. The courageous Rwanda and Srebrenica reports offer us a precise diagnosis of what needs to be done.

In Timor, under the leadership of a model international official, Sergio Vieira de Mello, a new State is taking form and coming to life. We express our strongest condemnation of the attack on innocent workers at the United Nations office in Atambua, West Timor, who were helping to achieve this very goal.

In contrast with these achievements, the frustrations are well known. Peacekeeping operations in Sierra Leone and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo have still to show results; the conflict in Angola goes relentlessly on as a result of UNITA's inexcusable failure to comply with international directives and law; and there is growing awareness of the devastating dimensions of the AIDS epidemic in Africa and in the rest of the world.

Less than a week ago, in a historic meeting in this very Hall, world leaders took stock of the work and achievements of multilateralism. The outcome was a clearer reaffirmation of our determined and unequivocal commitment to reinvigorate the United Nations. We reinforced our convictions about the crucial role of this Organization in ensuring that justice is done and that international peace takes root.

Brazil has always been convinced of this.

In the absence of the United Nations, human rights would be more vulnerable; the distance between antagonists would be wider; the difficulties in eradicating poverty would be greater; the growth of tolerance would be slower and democratic practices would face even stronger opposition.

It may be that the Millennium Summit only gave expression to what we already knew. The historic legacy of this Summit should, then, be our renewed willingness to act.

We all know that it is by mobilizing political will that we can make a difference. The United Nations is the model political forum of the international community and its central goal is to provide the ways and means to bring to life our dearest ideals, values and aspirations.

In this hall there has often been a divorce between words and deeds, between objectives and the tools to achieve them, as if they hailed from different universes, distant and isolated from each other.

It is only through political dialogue, and consultation among States made possible by multilateralism that a degree of rationality and predictability can be brought to the workings of global forces.

To foster multilateralism is to strengthen the United Nations and the modern understanding of the individual as the central beneficiary of international action. Only thus can we look forward to progressive and just governance in this integrated world.

It is our obligation to fulfil our common commitments, so vigorously underscored during the Millennium Summit. We must do so with determination and a sense of urgency.

The President

I now call on Her Excellency Mrs. Madeleine Korbel Albright the Secretary of State of the United States of America.

Mrs. Albright (United States) --> -->

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>

Python 2.6.6: /usr/bin/python Wed May 22 20:12:32 2013

A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.

/data/vhost/www.undemocracy.com/docs/trunk.py in ()

194 if __name__ == "__main__":

195     pathpart = os.getenv("PATH_INFO")

196     maintrunk(pathpart)

197

198

maintrunk = <function maintrunk>, pathpart = '/generalassembly_55/meeting_10/highlight_S-RES-1284(1999)'

/data/vhost/www.undemocracy.com/docs/trunk.py in maintrunk(pathpart='/generalassembly_55/meeting_10/highlight_S-RES-1284(1999)')

131     elif pagefunc == "gameeting":

132         LogIncomingDB(hmap["docid"], hmap["gadice"] or "0", referrer, ipaddress, useragent, remadeurl)

133         WriteHTML(hmap["htmlfile"], hmap["pdfinfo"], hmap["gadice"], hmap["highlightdoclink"])

134     elif pagefunc == "agendanumexpanded":

135         LogIncomingDB(pagefunc, hmap["agendanum"], referrer, ipaddress, useragent, remadeurl)

global WriteHTML = <function WriteHTML>, hmap = {'docid': 'A-55-PV.10', 'gadice': '', 'gameeting': 10, 'gasession': 55, 'highlightdoclink': 'S-RES-1284(1999)', 'htmlfile': '/home/undemocracy/undata/html/A-55-PV.10.html', 'pagefunc': 'gameeting', 'pdfinfo': <pdfinfo.PdfInfo instance>}

/home/undemocracy/unparse-live/web2/unpvmeeting.py in WriteHTML(fhtml='/home/undemocracy/undata/html/A-55-PV.10.html', pdfinfo=<pdfinfo.PdfInfo instance>, gadice='', highlightth='S-RES-1284(1999)')

322         if dclass == "spoken":

323             if not gadice or agendagidcurrent == gadice:

324                 WriteSpoken(gid, dtextmu, councilpresidentnation)

325         elif dclass == "subheading":

326             if agendagidcurrent and (not gadice or agendagidcurrent == gadice):

global WriteSpoken = <function WriteSpoken>, gid = u'pg007-bk02', dtextmu = u'<h3 class="speaker"> <span class="name">Mrs. Alb... am in office, but for as long as I am alive.</p>', councilpresidentnation = None

/home/undemocracy/unparse-live/web2/unpvmeeting.py in WriteSpoken(gid=u'pg007-bk02', dtext=u'<h3 class="speaker"> <span class="name">Mrs. Alb... am in office, but for as long as I am alive.</p>', councilpresidentnation=None)

69     print '</cite>'

70

71     print dtext[mspek.end(0):]

72

73     print '</div>'

dtext = u'<h3 class="speaker"> <span class="name">Mrs. Alb... am in office, but for as long as I am alive.</p>', mspek = <_sre.SRE_Match object>, mspek.end = <built-in method end of _sre.SRE_Match object>

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe1' in position 11287: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg007-bk02-pa01">I am honoured to addre... am in office, but for as long as I am alive.</p>', 11287, 11288, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 11288
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg007-bk02-pa01">I am honoured to addre... am in office, but for as long as I am alive.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 11287