General Assembly Session 55 meeting 108

Mr. Niculescu (Romania)

Romania aligned itself with the European Union statement on this very important and topical issue, prevention of armed conflict. I would like first to add a few comments on the cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and then some comments from a national perspective.

As far as cooperation between the United Nations and the OSCE is concerned, I am encouraged by the recognition granted by the Secretary-General in his report to the role played in preventing armed conflicts not only by the Member States and the main bodies of the United Nations, but also by regional organizations like the OSCE.

Each conflict is unique, but there are, however, regional conditions which nobody can ignore. It goes without saying that only a regional perspective, in conjunction with a broader, global one, can ensure the much-needed integrated and consistent approach to any conflict prevention or peace-building activities.

We are all aware that, as a regional arrangement under Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe plays a specific role in promoting peace and stability, enhancing cooperative security and advancing democracy and human rights in Europe. In our opinion, the value added by the OSCE can be seen precisely in the fields of preventive diplomacy, conflict prevention, crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation in the area of its competence.

In this context, since the very beginning of its chairmanship-in-office of the OSCE Romania has valued the unique global significance of the United Nations system, particularly the role assigned to the Security Council, and counts on its continuing support and cooperation.

When my Minister for Foreign Affairs came to the United Nations as Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE twice this year, he put forward several ideas aimed at improved cooperation between the United Nations and the pan-European organization. These ideas and proposals are essentially based on the firm conviction that the lessons learned from the conflicts and crises in the OSCE area have underlined the need for ever closer and more efficient cooperation among all organizations working together in Europe, as required by the General Assembly resolution on United Nations-OSCE cooperation and other pertinent documents of both organizations.

Allow me to briefly reiterate some of these proposals: enhanced coordination; a regular flow of information; the exchange of liaison officers; joint training of staff in the field of early warning and prevention; joint expert meetings on specific areas of early warning and prevention; the development of common indicators for early warning; and the establishment of a database on the conflict prevention capabilities of both the United Nations and the regional organizations.

I should now like briefly to offer some comments from a national perspective. Like any other country, Romania would like to see a stable environment based on the consolidation of democracy and economic prosperity. That is why Romania's Government made clear our aspirations to join the Euro-Atlantic structures, as well as our commitment to providing greater stability and security to the community to which we belong. My country is actively participating in a wide range of global, regional and subregional activities that have as their major goal both healing the wounds of past and present conflicts and preventing the emergence of new ones. Needless to say, all efforts to this end are welcome. Among them, we very much commend the endeavours undertaken by the Secretary-General, in close cooperation with the General Assembly and you, Mr. President, and with the Security Council, aimed at moving the United Nations from "a culture of reaction to a culture of prevention" (A/55/985, p. 1).

We very much support the premises of and the recommendations included in the Secretary-General's report that we are debating today, and we are ready to make our own contribution to their implementation. In particular, we share the vision that conflict prevention and sustainable development reinforce each other and, consequently, that a greater focus on social and economic development, good governance, democratization and respect for human rights is required. We consider that preventive action should be initiated at the earliest possible stage of an emerging conflict; one cannot repeat enough that prevention is not only better, but always cheaper, than cure. At the same time, any preventive strategy should address the deepest structural roots of conflicts, including the economic ones. It should not ignore their long historical roots, which often have a cultural, ethnic or religious dimension, because while trying to build peace for today we should avoid sowing the seeds of future conflicts or wars.

Mr. Hughes (New Zealand)

First of all, I should like to congratulate you, Mr. President, on convening this plenary meeting of the General Assembly to consider the Secretary-General's important report. There is a great deal of wisdom in this document, and we believe it will serve as an essential frame of reference for the Organization and Member States for some years to come.

The Secretary-General has articulated a number of key principles with which we very much agree. The Charter does, indeed, provide a strong mandate for preventing armed conflict, and all the relevant parts of the Organization, including the General Assembly, as well as the Security Council, of course, should contribute to meeting this objective.

We also agree in general with the Secretary-General's guiding principle that national Governments have primary responsibility for preventing conflict, and that in most cases the international community can do little more than provide the financial, technical and human resources to assist Governments which display the will to address the root causes of conflict. It is also the case, however, that there are instances in which Governments lack the capacity to resolve conflicts themselves, in which case much greater responsibility devolves to the international community, including the United Nations, to assist in the prevention of conflict and the protection of civilians. This is particularly true in the case of conflicts within States which, as has been said many times, is increasingly the more common variant, and which, indeed, is the form of conflict of greatest concern to New Zealand's own region, the South Pacific.

The Secretary-General's report highlights the important role to be played in conflict prevention by regional organizations. In the South Pacific, political leaders have responded to increasing levels of conflict and instability by seeking new forms of collective preventive action. At the meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum in Kiribati last year, they adopted the Biketawa Declaration, which provides a framework for regional cooperation in preventive diplomacy and conflict avoidance. The Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum has been given the tasks of elaborating this framework and of developing practical mechanisms for achieving its aims, including in cooperation with the United Nations.

In the broader Asia-Pacific region, we, like Australia, which spoke yesterday, believe that the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum (ARF) has a potentially invaluable role to play in conflict prevention. The ARF represents an effort to address pressing regional security issues by serving as a forum for their discussion and by building confidence among countries in the region. Members of the ARF have agreed to a three-stage process, from confidence-building to preventive diplomacy and, finally, conflict resolution. The ARF is currently in between the first and second stages of this endeavour. ARF ministers will shortly consider a paper on the definition, concepts and principles of preventive diplomacy. They will also look at mechanisms to enhance the ability of the ARF to address regional security situations through the establishment of a register of experts and eminent persons, and the enhancement of the role of the chairperson between meetings. We hope that progress can be made on these initiatives over the coming months.

The Secretary-General's analysis of the complex interrelationship between development and peace and security strikes a strong chord. While it is true that solutions to conflict lie largely within the societies and countries affected, official development assistance can play an important role, both in helping to head off conflict and in post-conflict peace-building efforts. The restoration of effective law and justice and the disarmament of combatants are areas that can be supported in this way.

In Bougainville, Papua New Guinea, for instance, official development assistance has been targeted to provide a rapid peace dividend with the aim of preventing a return to the almost habitual violence on that island that took place during the previous decade. It is pleasing to note the progress that has been made towards a comprehensive political settlement, in which the United Nations Political Office in Bougainville has played an important part.

In Solomon Islands, official development assistance is helping to fund New Zealand's contribution to the International Peace Monitoring Team led by Australia, as well as civil society efforts in support of the peace process. High unemployment and limited training opportunities for young people are major factors contributing to the conflict in Solomon Islands. We have therefore used development assistance to continue to provide education opportunities for young people who might otherwise have been tempted to become involved in the fighting.

Instability in Fiji has required a different approach, with a focus on supporting law and justice, poverty alleviation, human rights and humanitarian objectives. All of these projects are important. As the Secretary-General has observed in his report, prevention is infinitely preferable to cure. We therefore support his call for peace and security considerations to be effectively integrated into bilateral and multilateral development programmes.

There are, of course, many other factors which fuel conflict. We welcome the emphasis the Secretary-General has placed on transparency in armaments, and the useful role played by the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms. In the South Pacific, we have been made conscious of the potentially destabilizing influence of the unchecked proliferation of small arms. In recent years we have seen conflicts become very destructive through the leakage of small arms from Government stocks, and we have witnessed attacks on institutions of modern democracy as a result, the Parliament in Suva being just one example from last year. On the positive side, constructive regional approaches have been developed to address small arms concerns in the South Pacific, including the Pacific Forum's Honiara Initiative and Nadi Framework. We of course welcome the United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects, taking place here at the moment. We will be making sure that the concerns of the South Pacific are heard at the Conference, and we will be seeking a balanced and comprehensive programme of action from it.

The Secretary-General's report contains many more suggestions worthy of support. We would also in particular note its analysis of the impact of armed conflict on children. It is through the care, protection and education of children that the seeds of future conflict can most effectively be made barren. We echo the Secretary-General's call for enhanced efforts to address the needs of children affected by armed conflict, and we urge States to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. For our own part, we hope to be able to ratify this Optional Protocol in the near future.

We also support the Secretary-General's recognition of the potential role to be played by civil society in the prevention and resolution of armed conflict. Our experience in the South Pacific, including in Bougainville, Solomon Islands, Fiji and, further afield, of course, in East Timor, has shown that positive engagement by civil society groups, including international non-governmental organizations and volunteer services, community groups, and religious and women's groups, can be invaluable. We were pleased to note that part of our contribution to the Trust Fund for the Implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action will be used for the United Nations study on the impact of armed conflict on women and girls, including the role of women in peace-building and the gender dimensions of peace processes and conflict resolution.

Finally, I might note that later this month the Secretary-General is to make detailed recommendations to the Security Council on the future of the United Nations presence in East Timor after independence. East Timor is a good example of the need for the international community to build on a successful peacekeeping intervention by laying the political, economic, judicial and constitutional foundations for lasting peace and security. East Timor will require continued assistance from the international community, including an effective United Nations presence funded by assessed contributions, beyond independence if it is to achieve the desired end-state.

The United Nations and its Member States have made a significant investment to promote East Timor's security, reconstruction and development. It is important that this investment is not undermined by a precipitate reduction of international support for East Timor. The country's future peace and stability depend upon it.

Once again, Mr. President, we are grateful to you for having made available this opportunity to discuss the Secretary-General's report in this setting. The challenge henceforth will be to ensure solid follow-up to this debate in the future work of the General Assembly.

Mr. Mekdad (Syria)

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

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe9' in position 594: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg004-bk01-pa01">It is my pleasure, Sir... the role of the United Nations in this area.</p>', 594, 595, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 595
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg004-bk01-pa01">It is my pleasure, Sir... the role of the United Nations in this area.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 594