• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Russian version

Unofficial translation
Check against delivery

Mr. President,

Distinguished delegates to the 54th session of the UN General Assembly, The outgoing 20th century will, no doubt, leave a deep imprint on the history of the world. This has been an epoch of global transformations and social changes, scientific discoveries and achievements. Realisation of the idea of a Universal World Organization, which has become a common foundation uniting the entire international community has also become one of the assets of this century.

At the same time, the 20th century has witnessed most severe upheavals. Millions of people perished in the fire of the World Wars and revolutions, civil and ethnic conflicts. On several occasions, the Humanity approached the fatal brink of self-destruction. The burden of outstanding problems, inherited by the new era, weighs heavily on it. We will not be able to resolve all these problems before the advent of the third millennium, but it is incumbent upon us to lay down the foundations for their long-term resolution and start striving for it.

The main thing we should do is to define the parameters of the world we want to live in. This lies at the core of the initiative by the President of the Russian Federation Boris N. Yeltsin to develop the Concept of the World in the 21st Century. As far as Russia is concerned, fully conscious of its especial role and its responsibility, as a world power and a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council, for the world developments, Russia stands for the establishment of a multipolar world built on the solid foundation of the international law. Our country is pursuing in practice a multivector foreign policy with a view to, essentially establishing equitable and mutually beneficial bilateral and multilateral relations with all countries of the world and strengthening international security and stability.

The Concept of the World involves developing a new culture, providing for the establishment of a common system of values and a pattern of behaviour. A world without wars and conflicts, a world of democracy and prosperity should be the highest priority for all peoples and states. Every nation is entitled to its rightful place among other nations and to equal security in all respects - political, military, economic, social, and others.

How and through what mechanisms could this be achieved? Is there a body which could meet the concerns of all States in a balanced way? The reply is obvious - it is the United Nations. From the outset, the UN Charter put the Organization at the service of all Mankind. There simply does not exist any other universal mechanism to regulate international relations.

We are fully aware of the danger posed by threats and challenges, that our world faces today, e.g. militant nationalism, separatism, terrorism and extremism regardless of their forms have no borders. It is a common challenge claiming countless victims and bringing destruction to various places on our planet.

Aggressive separatism, which became a fertile soil for various extremist forces, has turned into one of the main sources of domestic conflicts and regional unsuitability. Nobody is safeguarded against it. International community and, first of all, the United Nations should decisively clamp down on any manifestations of separatism and strictly and consistently defend the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and inviolability of the national borders. It is necessary to completely eradicate instances of encouragement and support for separatist forces from without.

Recently separatism has been increasingly merging with the monster of terrorism. Even during this session we could undertake several concrete steps aimed at a more active practical international cooperation in combating terrorism. It is necessary to finalise the draft Convention on Fighting Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. We also propose to develop and adopt a declaration of principles of interaction between states with the view to stepping up the fight against terrorism. It is a bounded duty of states to protect their citizens against terrorist encroachment and to prevent on their territories activities aimed at organising such acts against citizens of other countries. Russia also supports the initiative of holding an antiterrorist conference under the auspices of the United Nations or a special session of the UN General Assembly in 2000. This event would give a powerful political impetus to the struggle against terrorism at a global level.

The UN capabilities should also be used more efficiently for fighting drug-related threats and organised crime.

Only through joint efforts, while ensuring strict compliance with the rules of international law, can we defeat this evil.

The founding fathers of the United Nations made provisions for a legally based response to violations of peace and security. The international community can take also coercive measures, but this should be done in accordance with the UN Charter and following a decision by the Security Council. Unlawful means can only undermine rightful ends. It is from this standpoint that we assess such doctrines as "humanitarian intervention".

In general, we should take an extremely careful approach to coercive measures and, what is more, not allow them to turn into a repressive mechanism to influence states and peoples regarded by some not to their liking.

Of course, the world evolution stipulates the appropriateness of the development of existing rules of international law and their adaptation to prevailing conditions, though this should be done through collective discussion and adoption of appropriate decisions rather than as a fait accompli and not from the scratch, but based on the valid rules of international law. This is precisely what Russia had in mind by its initiative to consider at the Millennium Summit legal aspects of the use of force in international relations in the era of globalization. We invite all countries to a wide and open dialogue on the issue.

Much has been said about the reform of the United Nations in recent years. It is quite natural. Life is a process and, as times change, any system needs to be updated. What purpose the forthcoming reform should pursue is another thing. The reform for us, in the first place, is adoption of a package of measures to enhance the United Nations role in the world arena. Our Organization should be ready to timely and correctly respond to the challenges that globalization presents to the Mankind. It is necessary to seriously consider how to enhance the efficiency of the UN Security Council and make this main body of the United Nations more representative through the inclusion of new influential members, including, which is absolutely indispensable, developing countries. Such a step would help to maintain the overall balance in the system of international relations, especially in the situation when the instances of the use of force in bypassing the Security Council continue. It is also beyond doubt that preservation of the Permanent Member's right of veto is indispensable for meaningful and efficient work of the Council.

In general, the entire system of international organizations should undergo a sensible and responsible reform. At the same time, it is necessary that the United Nations remain a focal point of efforts of the international community aimed at settling the most burning problems of today.

The issue of strengthening the authority of the United Nations after it has been seriously and painfully tested by the Balkan and Iraq crises, comes to the top of the entire agenda at the current session of the General Assembly. First of all we should continue strenuous efforts to restore the role of the Security Council in the world affairs.

We have managed through joint efforts to bring the settlement of the Kosovo problem back within the legal and political framework of the United Nations. Now, we need to jointly strive for a strict and consistent implementation of Security Council resolution 1244. We can not afford the re-emerging political process to be undermined again, since this could become a tragedy for the entire Europe and bring the World once again to the brink of catastrophe. Equally urgent is the issue of post-conflict rehabilitation in the Balkans. The United nations has an important role to play in meeting these challenges.

We all should draw serious lessons from the recent crises. Non-legitimate power methods only aggravate the problems bringing them to a greater deadlock. The developments in the Muddle East, where the peace process has acquired a new positive impetus lately, clearly confirm the optimum alternative of negotiation settlement. The issue of improving sanctions regimes to which the international community resorted quite frequently during the last decade is on the agenda. Sanctions are an extreme measure. They can be applied only when other means of political influence have been exhausted and the Security Council has established the existence of a threat to peace. The Council, for its part, should be guided by clear criteria for imposition and lifting of sanctions and should not allow any free interpretation of adopted decisions, much less to allow their use by anyone for selfish political or economic ends. It is necessary to take most serious account of humanitarian implications of sanctions both for the population of the states subject to such sanctions and for third countries. Punishment of entire nations, especially for an indefinite time and indiscriminately, is inadmissible.

Peacemaking is one of the key areas of the UN activities. During the past fifty years the Organization has acquired vast practical experience in this field. Having successfully survived intense disputes and ideological battles, peace making has proved its vital power and importance for securing world and regional stability. The evolution of theory and practice of present-day peacemaking confirms that there is no alternative to maintaining the central role of the UN in this sphere. Encouragement of peacemaking, strengthening of its legal basis in strict conformity with the fundamental principles of the UN Charter should become an important component of the Concept of the World in the 21st Century. Building up and modernization of the anti-crisis capability of the UN are the key prerequisites for tackling these tasks successfully. The priority here is to start practical use of the system of stand-by agreements with the UN.

Taking into account limited resources of the World Organization given high demand for peacekeeping operations, cooperation and division of labour between the UN and regional structures have become a priority. Such cooperation - and this is fundamentally important - should strictly correspond to Chapter VIII of the UN Charter while fully complying with the prerogatives of the Security Council.

For Russia the question of peacemaking cooperation between the UN and the regional organizations is far from being a theoretical matter. For many years Russian peacemakers within the peacekeeping forces of the Commonwealth of Independent States contribute to the stabilization of the situation in Abkhazia (Georgia), Tajikistan, Trans-Dniestria (Moldova). This testifies to the fact that settlement of conflicts within the framework of the CIS is a priority for Russia. As before, we do not see any reasonable alternative to political settlement of these crisis situations for which political will, patience and commitment to one's obligations are needed. We consider it important for the UN to continue to play a prominent role in finding solutions in Tajikistan and Abkhazia (Georgia).

The OSCE, which is called upon to play a central role in ensuring European security and stability, can and should be the main UN peacemaking partner in Europe. When this scheme fails to work, not only particular European suffer but complications emerge in providing for global and continental security. In a broad sense, the OSCE peacemaking parameters - from conflict prevention to peacekeeping operations and post-conflict rehabilitation - are to be determined in the European Security Charter. Russia also proposes to reflect in the Charter such principles important for the destinies of Europeans as ensuring the security and the foundations of relations of European and Euro-Atlantic organizations in this area. Then the Charter will indeed become a kind of political Constitution for the Europe of the 21st century. As the Istanbul OSCE Summit which is expected to adopt the Charter is approaching fast, we should press ahead with the elaboration of a substantial instrument.

The Conference on Interaction and Confidence Measures in Asia may become an important factor of stability on the Asian continent after a new positive impetus it received at a recent Almaty Foreign Affairs Ministers' Meeting of the founding states. The ASEAN Regional Forum, a venue for an active dialogue on a broad spectrum of urgent international issues, is yet another example of the focus of the Asian continent on the formation of solid structures of security and cooperation on the continent.

It is necessary to enhance the potential of African regional and subregional organizations which are acting in close cooperation with the United Nations to curb and cope with conflicts and humanitarian catastrophes emerging in Africa. It is the duty of the international community to render every possible support to African peoples.

While strengthening legal and practical basis of peacemaking activities a special attention should be paid to what is commonly called the human rights dimension. This relates not only to measures to minimise human sufferings caused by armed conflicts, but to efforts aimed at preventing humanitarian crises as well.

In this connection I cannot but mention the following. The situation when in the centre of Europe, due of arbitrary actions of authorities countless thousands of people found themselves deprived of their citizenship, the right to use their native language and enjoy full rights in the state of their residence, is unacceptable. Civilised integration, rather than latent assimilation - this is the way out of the prevailing humanitarian situation in these countries. We welcome efforts of the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the CBSS aimed at eliminating violations of human rights and freedoms of non-indigenous population of Latvia and Estonia. We hope that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights will make her contribution to these efforts.

The situation, when as a result of attempts to rely on unilateral power methods a risk appears to lose positive dynamics in the sphere of disarmament, can not but cause concern. If political and legal fabric of regulating international relations continues to disintegrate even further, then trends to ensure national security through an arms race will become stronger. Russia consistently advocates reduction and limitation of nuclear arsenals and strict compliance with the non-proliferation regime. For without this it would prove impossible to ensure the strategic stability.

We realise the importance of the early ratification of the START II Treaty, initiation of the START III negotiations under which Russia would be prepared, on a reciprocal basis, to agree to further considerable reduction of strategic offensive armaments. Naturally, this process will only be feasible if the existing agreements in this field, first of all the ABM Treaty, are strictly observed. We believe that the General Assembly should come out clearly in support of the preservation and observance of the ABM Treaty, which is a cornerstone of strategic stability. For unilateral actions aimed at undermining the time-tested regime established by this Treaty are fraught with extremely dangerous consequences. A collective search for political and diplomatic solutions is the alternative to military responses to the problems of proliferation. This is precisely what Russia's initiative concerning the global system of control over missile and missile technologies proliferation is aimed at.

Substantive discussions on threats to the international information security must also be continued within the framework and under the auspices of the UN. Time has come to reach, through joint efforts, a common understanding of such threats and measures to reduce them.

The 20th century has brought about economic globalization. All economies have become open and closely linked as a result of science and technology advances. All these factors have provided a powerful impetus to social and economic development while creating specific problems. The gap between industrial and the former colonial worlds has not only persisted but began to widen. Development assistance should remain a main focus of the future UN activities. Crises, primarily financial ones, have assumed international character. We must draw appropriate lessons and improve the existing architecture of the world financial system. The UN and its specialised agencies should also play a role here.

Expansion of human economic activities have brought about globalization of natural and man-made disasters. This has become a major destabilising global factor. Challenges related to the prevention of such disasters and liquidation of their consequences require that the most advanced technologies for the benefit of the world community as a whole be used. Why not consider the establishment, under the auspices of the United Nations, of a specialised International Emergency Agency, which would assume relevant functions?

A widely known saying reads: "It is much easier to win a war than peace". The UN founders had won the war and laid the foundations for peace. It is our duty to win this peace and make it comprehensive and irreversible.