General Assembly Session 60 meeting 20

The President

I give the floor to His Excellency The Honourable Denzil Douglas, Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Planning and National Security of Saint Kitts and Nevis.

Mr. Douglas (Saint Kitts and Nevis)

My Government supports the report of the Secretary-General, which reaffirms development, peace, security and human rights as fundamental to the well-being of any modern State. The Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis steadfastly contends that there is an inherent link between poverty reduction, the promotion of human rights, economic development, security and good governance.

Regrettably, the tendency has been to separate them, in favour of what some call political imperatives. I daresay policies do not and cannot exist in a vacuum. Politics is about people, and therefore national, regional or even international organizational policies must be about people. There is stark evidence of this.

The political landscape reveals clear indications of the interconnectedness of the phenomena of poverty eradication, security, economic development and governance. The task of governance is becoming increasingly difficult in the face of growing unemployment, deepening poverty, escalating energy prices and a mounting cost of living. As a consequence, we have witnessed social dislocations and civil disquiet. The fruits of globalization still do not grow among the world's poorest, who have become further marginalized and blame their Governments, which, despite their best efforts, are often relegated to the margins of political discourse and economic activities.

Some citizens have become more vocal and more open in their distrust of Government policies that fail to deliver the promises of democracy and globalization, fail to reduce poverty and unemployment and fail to improve their standard of living. The economic and political rift between rich and poor nations is steadily becoming a deeper divide as mistrust continues to characterize relations between the developed and the developing countries.

Understandably, small countries -- despite limited and diminishing resources -- are expected to participate equally in the fight against the social scourges that confront us. But that dramatically reduces our ability to make new and necessary investments in socio-economic development. It is within that context that we urge Member nations to substantively support the Millennium Development Goals. We also urge them to partner with us, recognizing our vulnerabilities to natural disasters and other external economic factors, and recognizing the need for preferred and differential treatment in trade and access to markets in developed countries. We urge developed countries to implement policies that do not undermine our efforts or reverse the gains that we in small developing countries have made. We call for equity and for a willingness to live and let live.

Despite overwhelming odds, however, the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis stands ready to do its share. At the base of our efforts and policies is the fundamental importance of strengthening the rights of the child. We believe that promoting the rights of the child goes to the heart of full and effective protection of human rights. We also firmly believe that by making sure every child in Saint Kitts and Nevis has access to primary and secondary education, to potable water and to health care, we are creating healthier, better adjusted and productive adults whose rights will have been nourished and enshrined in the policy orientation and development agenda of our proud country.

It is generally accepted that the right to development is also a fundamental right that national Governments have a primary responsibility to ensure. Long before the Millennium Development Goals were formally elaborated and adopted by the community of nations, that fundamental right was emphatically understood by the Government and the people of Saint Kitts and Nevis. As a point of reference, in this year's Human Development Report issued by the United Nations Development Programme, Saint Kitts and Nevis was ranked 49 out of 177 countries on the Human Development Index -- the second-highest ranking in the Caribbean region and, indeed, among the highest in the Latin American and Caribbean region. The report reflects the reality in Saint Kitts and Nevis, where there is an adult literacy rate of 97.8 per cent, a life expectancy rate of 70 years -- which needs upward revision -- and a combined primary, secondary and tertiary school enrolment ratio of 89 per cent. The report underscores our commitment to gender equality, starting with current parity in enrolment levels among girls and boys in school at both the primary and the secondary levels. The report also confirms 98 per cent access to safe water and sanitation. In the field of health, it notes a 99 per cent rate of immunization of infants against tuberculosis and measles in Saint Kitts and Nevis.

The Pan-Caribbean Partnership to combat HIV/AIDS (PANCAP), established by the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), has proved to be a useful and pragmatic vehicle for collective action and results. In Saint Kitts and Nevis, our own fight against HIV/AIDS uses that particular model. PANCAP has distinguished itself and has been identified as a best-practice model. We are therefore now pursuing policies aimed at universal access to treatment and care and at ending discrimination and the stigmatization of those persons affected by HIV/AIDS, while at the same time continuing our public education initiatives on preventing the spread of the virus.

A per capita income of more than $7,000 places us squarely among upper-middle-income countries. We thank the United Nations for recognizing our efforts, which are the result of policies engineered to ensure the development of the individual despite the obstacles that we face as a small economy. They also reflect the commitment of my Government to ensuring the protection of the rights of our children and their role in our country's future.

That, however, is only one side of the coin. The achievements to which I referred come at an enormous cost -- a cost that represents an enormous burden -- to our people. The past decade has been particularly difficult for Saint Kitts and Nevis. Our small island State continues to be especially vulnerable to natural disasters, external economic fluctuations and policies biased against small economies such as ours. My country has experienced back-to-back hurricanes, landslides and floods, at a cost of more than half a billion dollars. We have been forced to direct more and more of our scarce resources towards recovery and away from development.

The experience throughout the Caribbean region is very similar. It was just in July this year that our sister CARICOM nation of Grenada again suffered serious devastation, caused by Hurricane Emily, on the back of last year's devastation brought by Hurricane Ivan. The Maldives, another small island sister nation, has made pleas for a delay in the process set in motion for its graduation from the list of least developed countries, owing to the tsunami. We specifically support the Maldives' request.

In addition to the cost of recovery, escalating high prices and the cost of food imports, Saint Kitts and Nevis, as an emerging tourist destination, has faced the prohibitively high cost of implementing supplementary security measures since 11 September 2001. To further compound that grave situation, the recent rulings of the World Trade Organization relative to trade preferences have dealt a most significant blow to small economies in the Caribbean and therefore threaten to unravel their economic base.

In the case of my country, after centuries of sugar production and sales to the European market -- which have been a cornerstone of our economic support and our social stability -- we have been forced to close that industry, which finally succumbed to continuous losses and escalating debts. Saint Kitts and Nevis can no longer compete profitably in a world market that is characterized by engineered low prices for sugar and by the unfair trading practices of some countries. That has severe implications in terms of unemployment, social dislocation, psychological distress and the dramatic loss of urgently needed foreign-exchange earnings.

We have tried to prepare for such an eventuality through a process of economic diversification, but support from the international community has not been forthcoming. The cost of borrowing, the removal of grant financing from the menus of international financial institutions and the annual recovery costs from catastrophic hurricanes have become more and more onerous. Creative legal policy initiatives, especially in the international financial services sector, have been challenged and undermined by some developed countries.

In an attempt to fulfil the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, my Government has also pursued policies to stimulate and facilitate private-sector-led growth by investing in physical infrastructure and human resource development. But we need international political and economic support.

The Secretary-General underscored that threats to peace and security represent different things to different countries. If we intend to promote collective security, there must be an appreciation of and sensitivity to this diversity among countries. In the same way, we are called upon to aid in the fight against terrorism, drug trafficking, transnational organized crime and other scourges that threaten international peace and security in the more advanced countries. It is not unreasonable, therefore, to expect reciprocity of support in fighting the almost intractable problems that confront small States. To address these urgent challenges, we call on the international community to support and contribute to the full, timely and effective implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for further implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, which we consider a very important mechanism for achieving the Millennium Development Goals.

My Government was heartened by the Secretary-General's proposal for the establishment of a Human Rights Council. We also support effective change in the United Nations, which also means that the Security Council must evolve to reflect current world realities. The United Nations must also play a more enhanced role in development, and the concerns of small island developing States must be given greater attention within this Organization. Small States can offer best-practice models and creative ideas from which the international debate on development, peace, security and human rights could benefit.

We encourage greater transparency in the deliberations of critical organs of the Organization and greater opportunities for small States to be represented in the decision-making processes of these organs.

The people of Taiwan continue to be excluded from the brotherhood of nations, which was created to represent the hopes and aspirations of all peoples. My Government reiterates its call for the people of the Republic of China, Taiwan, to be consulted, effectively represented and invited to participate in the critical debates on world peace, human security, development and human rights. I believe that we would have failed to promote human rights effectively if, through political exclusion, generations of people are relegated to the margins of such important issues and the forums that facilitate their discussion.

I remain cautiously optimistic about the future. On the one hand, Governments have rededicated themselves to the struggle to build a world free from want and fear and with the freedom to live with dignity. In addition, we are poised to reform the United Nations in the hope that it can play a more effective role in this ever-changing world.

However, the tenor of last week's summit suggests a strong possibility that some developed countries may yet renege on those commitments, which could further erode developing countries' efforts to eradicate extreme poverty, generate employment, promote human security and narrow the development gap between richer and poorer countries.

We still have an opportunity for an enhanced global partnership to turn commitments into action and secure a future for our children, a future that is free from want of the basic necessities, free from fear of violence with guarantees of protection of the right to live in dignity. Only then will we build and reinforce the foundation of democracy, enhance collective security and jumpstart a process where globalization becomes a vehicle for change among all of the world's peoples.

The President

I now give the floor to His Excellency the Honourable Frederick A. Mitchell, Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Public Service of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.

Mr. Mitchell (Bahamas)

It is my honour to congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the sixtieth session of the General Assembly. I also wish to pay tribute to the tireless efforts of your predecessor, Mr. Jean Ping, for the manner in which he guided the work of the fifty-ninth session.

I wish to extend the condolences of the Right Honourable Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, Perry Christie, and the Government and people of the Bahamas to the Government and people of the United States in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina last month. This is a scene with which the people of the Bahamas are regrettably all too familiar, and we continue to offer our assistance and support in any way possible.

The High-level Plenary Meeting held last week, at which so many heads of State and Government were represented, served as a timely and much-needed reminder of the need for us all to recommit ourselves to the purposes and principles of this Organization. At a time when some have begun to question the purpose of this Organization, the Bahamas reaffirms that the United Nations remains the best chance for all States, large and small, to achieve peace, security and sustainable development for our peoples.

One of the leaders who spoke last week was the Most Honourable P. J. Patterson, Prime Minister of Jamaica. On April of 2006, Mr. Patterson demits office after more than a decade in the service of his people and the Caribbean region as Prime Minister, and a generation as a parliamentarian and Government Minister. His statement last week was perhaps his final statement to this Assembly as Prime Minister. The Bahamas -- and the region joins us, I am sure -- salutes Mr. Patterson as he retires from active public life.

Mr. Patterson's example in Jamaica is one that we know well enough in the Caribbean region. It is the example of democratic governance and the traditions of regular elections and accountability to the publics whom we serve. The history of democracy in our region has also produced for the region an enviable standard of living in many ways. This way of life has been described by the Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, The Honourable Ralph Gonsalves, as the "Caribbean civilization" -- one that did not develop without significant investment in our people and that cannot be sustained unless that investment continues.

The region is neither poor nor rich. It falls in between, having accomplished most if not all of the Millennium Development Goals. But as we watch the development of globalization, there is a tendency to forget that this region of relatively few people and small nations requires the continued support of the developed world. Nowhere is this more evident than in the decisions taken on sugar and bananas. There is a symbiotic relationship between the region and the developed world, with many of our people leaving the region to help to sustain the way of life of the developed world. There is a major transformation right now in economies throughout the region.

Our view is that greater attention from our developed partners must therefore be paid to that region in transition, looking towards investment, particularly in education, support for the delivery of health care and continued support for democratic governance. It is not charity that is required, but a sound, sensible investment in our common future.

Haiti is our poorest member in the region and is perhaps the example from which it is best to draw lessons. We want to thank Brazil and the many sister countries of Latin America that have risen to the challenge with men and materiel. But while much has been given, there are many pledges of donor aid that have not materialized as they should. It is a complaint throughout the developing world that donors make pledges of financial and material support but do not follow through on those pledges.

Haiti today is paying the price in a real way for having charted the way towards freedom in this hemisphere when, in 1804, it struck a blow for the freedom of Africans in the West. Today, we repeat what the American Christian Bishop, T. D. Jakes, said in the National Cathedral in Washington last week when praying for the victims of Hurricane Katrina: it is what we do that counts, but what we say we will do.

Haiti is of major interest to us in the Bahamas, because, given the circumstances of its economy and its national politics, the Bahamas and the region are facing increased pressure from illegal migration from Haiti and the threat of instability. It is incumbent upon all of us in the United Nations to do all that we can to help resolve the issues in Haiti.

It is also important that we not overlook issues of global governance and institutional reform. It would be nearly impossible for small States, in particular, to sustain meaningful gains from the process of globalization without a voice and without participation in international decision-making and norm-setting bodies. It is for that reason that the Bahamas is encouraged by the discussions that took place during the high-level dialogue on financing for development, held earlier this year, which confirmed that there is a place for the United Nations in all aspects of global standard-setting and assessment. The dialogue clearly demonstrated that there is a need to address the democratic deficit in many of the international economic, financial and trade institutions.

From this rostrum last year, the Bahamas called for the convening of a global forum to address the unfairness of unelected bodies imposing mandates that are unfunded upon developing economies like ours in the region, without our countries having an opportunity to be heard and to influence the result. We call once again for such a forum, and pledge that the Bahamas will continue to work towards levelling the playing field, particularly in the financial services sector.

The images of destruction in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina are all too familiar to many small island developing States. The images have been sobering, as we realize that even the biggest and strongest of us has to grapple with the difficulties associated with the recovery from such a destructive force of nature. Last year in this Hall, we said that the native peoples of our region were so familiar with the violent storms that plague the region in the summer months that they called them hurricanes. Today, we are seeing those storms hit with a savagery unknown in recent times. It leads us to question whether we are now being confronted by cyclical change or by climate change. Either case places front and centre the need for public policy on sustainable development and the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for small island developing States.

The Bahamas, much of whose land is barely five feet above mean sea level, wishes to highlight the need to undertake global action to address the problems of climate change. With the warming of the Earth's surfaces and oceans, we have seen an increase in the incidence of natural disasters, many of them causing untold loss and damage. We have an opportunity, however, to address the adverse effects of climate change. We have a chance to make a statement here during this session that we will not neglect our common but differentiated responsibility to protect our environment and to send this message to Montreal, where, in November this year, the Kyoto Protocol can finally begin to take on a more substantial form.

For countries such as the Bahamas, the threat of devastation as a result of natural disasters is exacerbated by man-made hazards. We once again reiterate our grave concern about the serious threat posed to the security and economic development of Caribbean countries by the trans-shipment of nuclear waste through the Caribbean Sea, and continue to call on States involved in such trans-shipments to desist from that practice. In this context, I wish to highlight the continuing efforts of the Caribbean region to designate the Caribbean Sea a special area in the context of sustainable development.

The achievement of sustainable development will require healthy, productive populations that are able both to contribute to and benefit from social and economic progress. The unrelenting spread of HIV/AIDS continues to threaten that progress in all countries, but particularly in the hardest hit developing countries. The Bahamas is a leader in the fight against HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean region, and has been recognized at the international level for the progress made in turning the tide against that disease in our country. We pay tribute to Dr. Perry Gomez, our lead physician in the fight against HIV/AIDS and, indeed, to my predecessor at this rostrum, Mr. Denzil Douglas from Saint Kitts and Nevis, as well as to all the other caregivers throughout the world. We welcome this body's reaffirmation at the highest levels of the fight against that disease.

In this context, the Bahamas looks forward to the high-level five-year review of the progress made in implementation of the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS, scheduled to take place in June 2006. At that time we must undertake an honest appraisal of what we have achieved and where we are failing short, and we must determine the way forward towards achieving the full implementation of the Declaration of Commitment.

In addition, the Bahamas has seen useful ideas advanced by the United States of America, the World Health Organization and the Pan American Health Organization, to prevent a bird flu pandemic. We would like to take this opportunity to alert the world that we must fight to stop such an eventuality, and pledge our support in doing so.

By virtue of its geographical location, the Bahamas is an unwitting transit point for illegal drugs from producing countries south of our borders to consumer countries to the north. We have consistently pointed out that the Bahamas does not produce such substances and is not the ultimate destination for them. That, however, does not stop the countries that consume the drugs from blaming countries like ours for the scourge. It is very unfair to do so. It is clear that consuming nations must increase their efforts to reduce demand within their borders. We continue to cooperate with the United States and other countries in that international fight. Our successful efforts and those of the broader region have been acknowledged by our international partners in the fight. I should like to mention in particular the admirable performance of the Bahamas in its counter-narcotics effort and the superb record of our country's police in terms of dismantling drug-trafficking organizations, as well as our hard work to improve the country's ability to combat money-laundering. It is a fight that we pledge to continue.

The Bahamas, like other transit countries, is experiencing the negative social impact of illegal activities associated with that trade. The deadly nexus between illicit drugs and small arms and light weapons and other criminal activities is undermining the economic and social fabric of our nation. We therefore welcome the conclusion in June of the work of the Open-ended Working Group on the marking and tracing of small arms and light weapons. The Bahamas, like many other countries, would have strongly preferred to reach agreement on legally binding commitments on the marking and tracing of such weapons. Nonetheless, we hope that this tool will provide some of the necessary political will and momentum to make real progress in halting the illicit accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons. We also look forward to adopting concrete commitments in the near future to regulate the activities of brokers of small arms and light weapons. In addition, the Bahamas continues to call on developed countries to take the same extraordinary measures they use in seeking to stop the trafficking of drugs into their countries to stop illegal arms from reaching our shores from their countries.

The Bahamas is pleased to note the adoption by the General Assembly on 13 April 2005 of the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. We hope to be in a position to sign the Convention in the near future. We are resolute in the fight against the attacks on innocent people going about their daily lives by those pursuing dubious and nefarious political ends. The vicious attacks in London and Sharm el-Sheikh this year demonstrate clearly the urgency of our task.

However, we must also remember that the fight against those who would attack our common civilization can never be used as an excuse to curtail the rights and freedoms of our citizens, and we must ensure that all counter-measures must conform to both the letter and the spirit of international human rights law. If we lose our common humanity in the process, the other side will win. We must also ensure that a spirit of cooperation and assistance permeates our international cooperation efforts on this issue, as we unite to fight a common enemy.

Over the past year, various issues related to the management of United Nations programmes and funds have been highlighted in the world media. Our Organization has been plagued by allegations of corruption and abuse. Therefore, during the months leading up to the present session, the Bahamas welcomed the opportunity to engage constructively in consultations to ensure a successful outcome on the question of management reform of the Organization. We reaffirm our support for the Secretary-General with respect to the bold measures that he promised in his report entitled "In larger freedom" (A/59/2005), and we believe that he should be given the necessary level of authority and flexibility to fulfil his function as our chief executive officer. However, that is not to say that we support those proposals from other quarters that would seek to transfer power from the General Assembly to the Secretary-General in matters such as the redeployment of resources. The General Assembly is and should remain the principal policy organ of the United Nations, with absolute powers in the area of setting priorities. The Bahamas also looks forward to continuing discussions on the reform of the Security Council, particularly in relation to the Council's working methods.

Let me take this opportunity to thank Mr. Kofi Annan for his fine work in leading the United Nations through treacherous seas over the past years. We will shortly celebrate the sixtieth anniversary of the signing of the Charter of the United Nations. Looking back over the past 60 years, there is much of which we can justifiably be proud. There are some cases where we must accept that the international community failed to live up to its legal and moral obligation to act for the benefit of people in need. There are some cases where our decisions were dominated by big-Power pragmatism and doubtful legalisms, as opposed to moral certainty and philosophical clarity.

As we move forward, let us be sure that we learn from our mistakes as well as our successes. We have engaged in a process of reflection, which at times has been painful. Let us emerge from this stronger, more unified and determined to act to achieve the goals adopted 60 years ago to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom. The peoples of our nations demand and deserve nothing less. Now, more than ever, we need the United Nations.

The President

I now call on His Excellency Mr. George Yeo, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Singapore.

Mr. Yeo (Singapore)

A few weeks ago, a young Muslim lawyer in Singapore told me about a recent experience he had had in an East Asian airport. Unlike others holding Singaporean passports who were clearing immigration, he was told to stand aside. When he asked the reason, the immigration officer muttered that there were "too many Mohamads" that day. Smiling to himself, the Singaporean waited patiently and peered around, wondering how long he had to wait. The officer then warned him to stand still. He suddenly felt a chill along his spine.

Muslims all over the world are being profiled by security agencies. Since 11 September 2001, Muslims travelling to Western countries have been subject to all manner of interrogations and searches. Although the profiling is now done more subtly now, it continues. And in East Asia, profiling is increasing.

When sudden threats appear, perhaps it is natural to expect a certain overreaction from the affected communities. After Pearl Harbour, all Japanese people living in America became suspect, including those born there. Many were interned. By today's standards, that was an affront. But at that time, it was widely felt to be a necessary precaution. Shocked by that reaction, Japanese-American leaders set out to prove their Americanness, for example by forming the Japanese-American 100th Infantry Battalion, which fought heroically in the European theatre.

The travails of the Japanese-Americans were not unique. Tribalism is a basic human instinct. We may proclaim that all men are brothers, but we reflexively distinguish degrees of closeness. Divisions of race, language, culture and religion run deep in human society and emerge under stress. The ascendancy of the West in the past few centuries created tremendous stress in non-Western communities, upsetting all relationships and giving rise to a variety of responses, all of which sought to reconcile each community's sense of self with the needs of a Western-defined modernity. In Asia, for example, the re-emergence of China and India on the global stage has been a prolonged struggle of reconciling transformation with tradition.

That is the broader historical context against which the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims in the world must be viewed today. It is a subject that concerns us all deeply in the United Nations.

There are two evolving developments which feed on each other. The first is change within Islam itself; the other is the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims in different parts of the world. Both require our close attention.

The response of the Islamic world to the challenge of modernization will affect the development of the entire world in this century. In some ways, it is comparable to that of the Chinese response to modernization, and it will probably take much longer. The decline of the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century took place at about the same time as the decline of the Qing Dynasty in China. Both collapsed at the beginning of the twentieth century. After many twists and turns, China has finally re-emerged onto the global stage with a bright future ahead of it.

There are about as many Muslims in the world as there are Chinese. In contrast to China, however, the Islamic world is unlikely to re-coalesce in the foreseeable future. Once Ataturk refused the caliphate and with iron determination started reforming Turkish institutions on the Western model, the Islamic world lost its centre. From then on, different Islamic societies experimented with different approaches and moved in different directions. It has been a mixed story.

The different responses of Muslim societies to the challenge of modernization are accompanied by a great ideological debate among political and religious leaders. Good governance has become a major issue, with calls for greater transparency and more democracy. In this debate, it is natural that some groups should look back to a romanticized period when the Islamic world was united and pristine and seek its re-establishment in the twenty-first century. Such were the ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, which emanated from Egypt at the beginning of the twentieth century. The ideology of that movement continues to inspire Islamic groups in various parts of the world today. If only Muslims were to abide strictly by the teachings of Islam, there would be no corruption, Governments would be just and effective and Islamic societies would become strong again.

In many Islamic countries at various times, these groups have been suppressed for being subversive, and those who funded them were thought to have ulterior motives. This struggle for the soul of Islam is an ongoing process. However, it is not a struggle unique to Islam. For more than 200 years, Europe was bloodied by religious wars, which ended only with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which created the system of modern European States. But even then, there was still religious persecution, which led many Europeans to flee to the New World. In the twentieth century, the soul of Europe was torn by communism, fascism and anti-Semitism. It was precisely to overcome those divisions that the European Union was established by stages, creating the longest period of peace on that continent.

How Islamic society evolves in the coming decades is mainly for Muslims to decide. Generally speaking, non-Muslims would have no standing to participate in this debate but for two factors which have become critical and which have strategic importance for us all.

The first factor is the emergence of the ideology of Al-Qaida and its sister organizations, such as Al-Jama'a al-Islamiyah. This ideology is a malignant mutation of the ideas associated with the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups that argued for a return of Islamic society to an idealized past. It takes those ideas to an extreme and preaches hatred against non-Muslims worldwide, justifying violence against innocent bystanders even if they are Muslim. The suicide bomber has become a potent weapon in its armoury. The followers of this ideology will not hesitate to use weapons of mass destruction if they can get their hands on them. We have a duty in the United Nations to join in the global war against them.

The second factor necessitating the involvement of non-Muslims in the Islamic debate is the growing Muslim diaspora in many non-Islamic countries. As minority communities, Muslims living in countries like France and Germany, for example, have to accept certain limitations in the practice of their religion. With growing religiosity in recent years, issues like the wearing of the headscarf have surfaced. What constitutes a reasonable compromise varies from country to country. For example, Singapore allows aspects of sharia law to apply to Muslims, including Muslim men being allowed four wives, although only under stringent conditions. It would be hard for non-Muslims to accept this in Europe.

The fact is that while some human values are universal -- and we should find more of them -- many are not. We have to accept this diversity in the world. A greater tolerance of diversity in the world would create better conditions for peaceful cooperation between Muslims and non-Muslims and would influence the debate within Islam itself.

If non-Muslims tar all Muslims with the brush of terrorism and non-Muslim majority communities treat minority Muslim communities as problem communities, the future will be troubled for all of us. In such a climate, Muslim extremists will gain ascendancy, and the terrorists will find fertile ground for recruitment everywhere.

It is ridiculous to argue that terrorism is inherent in Islam. To do so is to play into the hands of the terrorists. That such views are increasingly being expressed in reputable journals and newspapers is troubling. Of course one could find blood-curdling passages in the Koran and the Hadith, but these passages must be read in context. We find similar passages too in the Old Testament. As we would not, therefore, argue that terrorism is inherent in Judaism and Christianity, so we should not make Islam the problem. That would be a big mistake. There were periods in history when Islamic society was considerably more advanced than Western society.

Equally, it would be a big mistake for Muslim leaders to allow Muslim extremists to make claims on behalf of Muslims worldwide without contest. This causes non-Muslims to suspect that Muslims are generally in sympathy with them. To be sure, there are genuine grievances that have to be addressed, like Palestine, Chechnya and the future of Iraq, but these are issues that are more political than religious. The strategy of the extremists is to polarize Muslims and non-Muslims worldwide, thereby widening their base of support. Muslim leaders have to counter this strategy. It is also essential for them to reach out to non-Muslim audiences as well. The recent bombings in London led to a strong anti-Muslim backlash at the grass roots that threatened the fabric of British society. This in turn put pressure on Muslim leaders in the United Kingdom to condemn the terrorists in clear terms.

In the end, the fight against the terrorists has to be won within Muslim communities themselves. It is a battle for hearts and minds that requires Muslims to work together with non-Muslims against a common enemy.

We have to make a concerted effort to understand each other better. With globalization, all societies have become multiracial and multireligious to a greater or lesser extent. The pluralism we hold as an ideal in the United Nations is not a choice; it is a vital necessity.

In 1998, at its fifty-third session, the General Assembly declared in resolution 53/22 that 2001 would be the United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations. In 2001, at the fifty-sixth session, the General Assembly adopted the Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilizations (resolution 56/6). And this year the United Nations sponsored numerous meetings on interfaith dialogue. A few months ago, the first Asia-Middle East Dialogue was held in Singapore to promote greater understanding between two important regions of the world.

We need to translate our declarations of principle into everyday language and into practice. Are there limits to what politicians can say to win votes? Should religious leaders be allowed to preach hatred, even in close confines? What do we teach our children in school? What does all this mean to the immigration officer at the airport who does not know that Mohammed is the most common name in the world?

Singapore, a cosmopolitan city-State with a multiracial and multireligious population, is particularly vulnerable. We have experienced ugly racial and religious riots before and have learned that racial and religious harmony should never be taken for granted. It has been necessary for the Government to involve itself in many aspects of ordinary life, including discouraging Christian missionaries from targeting Muslims for conversion, stopping mosques from sharply turning up the volume of their loudspeakers when calling the faithful to prayer, limiting the size of joss sticks which Buddhists and Taoists burn for their rituals and arresting those who incite racial and religious hatred. What may appear to be a small thing to one community can be a serious provocation to another.

This has become the world we live in. We cannot ignore the diversity around us in our everyday life or the tribalism which is in our nature. We will continue to disagree on many things such as the nature of democracy, gender relationships, the death penalty, stem-cell research and what we can or cannot eat. The moment we dismiss those differences as unimportant, or lightly condemn those who disagree with us, the trouble begins.

Therefore, as we strive to achieve the Millennium Goals in the United Nations -- and they are worthy Goals -- a key task for us is to accept, even celebrate, the differences that divide us in our daily lives. To paraphrase Pope John-Paul II, it is only because we are many that we are one, and the United Nations expresses that ideal.

The President

I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Singapore for his message on the need for tolerance, mutual understanding and respect.

I give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Karel de Gucht, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Belgium.

Mr. De Gucht (Belgium)

Allow me to congratulate you most warmly, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly. Through you, I would like also to thank your predecessor, Mr. Jean Ping, for the manner in which he conducted the preparatory work for the summit of Heads of State and Government which has just taken place. We are very grateful to him for having successfully met that challenge.

Even though we had hoped for a more ambitious agreement, the summit allowed us to create a much-needed new impetus and new strategic guidelines for our Organization. Only a stronger and more legitimate United Nations will be able to respond to the challenges of the twenty-first century and implement the collective security consensus that we endorsed in the summit's outcome document.

Belgium is a strong advocate of efficient multilateralism. I emphasize the word "efficient" because this is not just a declaration of faith. We need credible structures and strong institutions capable of effectively implementing our international commitments and addressing our common concerns. It is all too easy to indulge in rhetoric; we have to translate our words into action. That is why, in that context, I am pleased with the progress made during the summit.

I am particularly pleased with the consensus reached whereby security, peace, development and human rights are not only interlinked but mutually reinforcing. That is a significant step forward in our efforts to build a more peaceful, more prosperous and more equitable world. That idea will guide our actions and form the basis of our approach. Without peace, there can be no development, and human rights can often be sorely tested. In the absence of development and respect for human rights, stability and security become elusive.

The link between development, stability and human rights becomes most acutely apparent in fragile or failing States. These are often States devastated by conflict or by civil war -- States whose leaders are no longer capable of meeting the basic needs of their people. Often, their economic situation has deteriorated dramatically, and sometimes their society itself is in disarray. A large number of the people of such States may be displaced. They may have fled, may be subject to abuse or exploitation and therefore cannot enjoy any of the guarantees that a State should be able to provide to its citizens.

Some States are at risk of becoming zones of lawlessness, in which terrorist and criminal activities can thrive. The uncontrolled exploitation of natural resources can fuel all sorts of criminal networks or conflicts -- often with an ethnic dimension -- in which large numbers of weapons can circulate uncontrolled.

Such States must return to peace, stability and the rule of law. They must take control of their own future and gradually begin to consider their prospects for development. This is not an easy task. The challenge is tremendous. Almost simultaneously, it is necessary to rebuild State institutions; disarm combatants, give them new prospects and reintegrate them into communities that are often impoverished; reorganize the army and security forces; and give the State the means to restore its authority, organize elections and create conditions conducive to development.

We must help them break that vicious circle and regain their place in the community of nations. In that respect, the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission is crucial. The creation of such a Commission not only illustrates our common resolve to help such States on their path to recovery; it allows us, first and foremost, better to coordinate and focus our efforts. Political, humanitarian, military and financial resources must be mobilized and used effectively to achieve our common goals.

That is particularly true in the case of sub-Saharan African countries that are ravaged by deadly and prolonged conflicts, with the primary victims being the civilian population.

The establishment of such a Commission would generate great hope. It is our common responsibility to make it a success. Belgium wants to contribute actively, including by sharing the experience it acquired in the transition processes in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and in Burundi.

Belgium also attaches great importance to promoting the protection of human rights. My country welcomes the strengthening of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the decision to establish a Human Rights Council. But we regret that the summit was not able to finalize the Council's modalities.

Belgium has fully supported the reform and will continue to focus on it. Democracy and respect for human rights are some of our common values and underpin our efforts to promote peace and stability. From now on, those values will be part of our collective security consensus and must be incorporated into our global approach throughout the entire United Nations system. They are our common responsibility.

Among the summit's other achievements, I should like also to highlight the "responsibility to protect". This represents a step forward in the quest for solutions to the most glaring injustices. In the aftermath of the genocides that marked our last century, we solemnly pledged that such atrocities would never happen again.

Let me now turn to good governance, which is essential if our efforts to create a more stable and prosperous world are to be successful. The summit outcome document repeatedly underlines its importance, and rightly so.

Good governance is not a moralistic concept imposed from the outside. It is not about giving good or bad grades, and even less about good and bad students. It is not for others to say what are good policies and what are bad policies. No -- good governance is synonymous with effective governance and goes hand in hand with sovereignty. It is about governance that can produce results, make a difference for citizens and create fertile ground for development. Without it, the support of the international community cannot produce the desired results. Without it, the aid of the international community will not find the fertile ground essential to create the conditions for greater prosperity and stability.

We have pledged to attain the objective of allocating 0.7 per cent of our gross national product to official development assistance. We will keep our promise. But we are aware that development is not only a question of money; first and foremost, it is a question of the effective use of resources. The necessary conditions must be established. What matters is the outcome on the ground. Poverty is not inevitable; all peoples have a future that belongs to them. They must take charge of it.

We accordingly have stated, in paragraph 11 of the summit outcome document (resolution 60/1), "good governance and the rule of law ... are essential for sustained economic growth, sustainable development and the eradication of poverty and hunger". In the same outcome document, we also clearly reaffirmed our commitment to good governance and the rule of law, and reaffirmed that each country must take responsibility for its own development. Those are the terms of our global partnership for development, as set out in the Millennium Declaration, the Monterrey Consensus and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation.

All components of the international community have demonstrated generosity. That is particularly true of the European Union. But the international community can hardly be held responsible for the failure of States to protect or assist all or part of their populations. It is difficult to understand why today we must launch donor appeals to deal with the large-scale destruction of houses by a Government that deliberately leaves some 500,000 of its citizens homeless.

That reasoning with regard to the subject of good governance also applies to the similar concepts of democracy and the rule of law. Those are extremely important objectives, both for the development of our societies and for the security of States. But, neither democracy nor the rule of law can be artificially imposed from outside. This is not about dictating exogenous models; we must take a bottom-up approach in creating suitable conditions for the emergence of mechanisms that ensure people's equitable participation in their own governance, in a spirit of inclusivity. In that regard, our first priorities should be the modernization of societies and States and the emancipation of women and children and their inclusion in the global dynamic. Past experience shows that the shortest path to democracy and the rule of law is the modernization of society. The role -- indeed, the responsibility -- of the international community is to galvanize that modernization process.

We have a great responsibility. Before the end of the year, the Peacebuilding Commission must be established. We also have the task of making the Human Rights Council operational. I sincerely hope that the spirit that prevailed during the summit will also guide the work of the sixtieth session of the General Assembly. We must continue to show determination, perseverance and vision in carrying out our work. Only through constant commitment will we make the United Nations the primary instrument for international relations.

That is the important task ahead of us. Our own credibility is at stake. We must once again make the United Nations the instrument par excellence of our strategy to build a more stable and more prosperous world for all. Our peoples demand that. Belgium is willing to rise to that challenge and to shoulder its responsibilities.

The President

I now call on His Excellency Mr. Rodolphe Adada, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Francophonie of the Republic of the Congo.

Mr. Adada (Congo)

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'\xf6' in position 340: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg012-bk02-pa01">I should like at the o...ce, freedom and justice throughout the world.</p>', 340, 341, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 341
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg012-bk02-pa01">I should like at the o...ce, freedom and justice throughout the world.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 340