Argentina, 2003

At the

outset, allow me to congratulate you, Sir, on your

election to preside over the Assembly at this session. I

would also like to congratulate the outgoing President,

Mr. Jan Kavan, for his work at the head of this

Assembly at the previous session.

On behalf of my Government, we would also like

to reiterate our gratitude for the efforts of the

Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, to promote peace

and multilateralism, and to express our solidarity in

wake of the criminal attack that claimed the lives of

several staff members of this Organization.

We have come from the world’s South to the

General Assembly with a firm belief that revitalizing

this global representative forum is essential for

international law to become once again a rational

instrument for resolving conflicts and facing threats.

Restoring the major political role that the Assembly

played in the early days of the United Nations is key to

strengthening security for all citizens of the world.

Indeed, multilateralism is the cornerstone of this

Organization. But the cold war and bipolarity that

characterized the world after the Yalta Conference until

the fall of the Berlin Wall undoubtedly shaped the

instruments and legislation that were adopted within

that framework.

Any objective look at the international situation

that that goes beyond the particular biases of individual

Members of the Organization will reveal another

hallmark of the world today: the technological, military

and economic supremacy of one country over all the

rest. We therefore consider it necessary to reaffirm our

determined support for the purposes and principles that

underpin the United Nations, so that it can actively

work to promote peace and the social and economic

development of humanity.

But, it bears repeating, we must not limit our

commitment to multilateralism to words alone.

Promoting multilateralism requires a dual strategy.

First, an open mind is needed to objectively grasp the

full extent of the new state of affairs. Secondly, we

need to reconsider the instruments and rules so to cope

with this new reality just as was done during the era of

bipolar politics in order to save the world from

destruction. Multilateralism and security are inseparable

but are not the only factors in this new equation.

The world is changing against the backdrop of a

globalization that is creating unprecedented

opportunities and risks. The greatest risk is the

widening gap between the rich and poor. To divide the

world into central and marginal countries is not merely

an academic exercise or a matter of ideology. Quite the

contrary, such definitions reflect a grim reality of

unprecedented poverty and social exclusion. Our

priority must be to ensure that globalization works for

all, and not just for the few. Promoting the

development of the marginalized countries is no longer

simply a matter of social conscience on the part of the

central countries. It has an impact on their situation and

security. Hunger, illiteracy, exclusion and ignorance are

some of the basic elements that fuel the spread of

international terrorism and cause violent and massive

national migration flows, which have cultural, social

and economic consequences. They also inevitably

threaten the security of the central countries.

Economic integration and political

multilateralism hold the key to safer future world. We

need to build global institutions and effective

partnerships within the framework of fair and open

trade and to bolster support for the development of

those most in need. If we are to promote collective

security intelligently, we must understand that security

is not just a military issue; it depends on political,

economic, social and cultural factors as well. These are

the key challenges on the current international agenda

that the main actors must meet.

In this framework, the relations between

countries like ours and others in the international

8

community are affected by a huge and crushing burden

of debt owed to multilateral financial institutions and

private creditors. We accept our share of responsibility

for having adopted policies that caused this

indebtedness. But we also call on the international

financial institutions — which contributed to,

encouraged and promoted the growth of that debt by

dictating their terms — to accept their own share of

responsibility. It goes without saying that when debt

grows to such an extent, not only the debtor but also

the creditor bears responsibility. It is therefore

necessary to acknowledge the tangible, verifiable and

rather obvious fact that repaying such a debt entails

great hardships.

Without specific international assistance to

enable indebted countries to restore economic solvency

and thereby their ability to repay debts and without

measures to foster their growth and their sustainable

development by taking concrete steps to promote their

market access and growth of exports, debt repayment

remains a pipedream. Promoting exports of finished

products based on the natural resources that most

indebted countries have can lay the foundations for

sustainable development, without which creditors will

have to face their losses without any other realistic

options.

No one is known to have succeeded in getting

their money back from the dead. To reach the objective

of making a country viable so it can pay its debts,

intensified multilateral negotiations are greatly needed

to eliminate tariff and non-tariff barriers that hinder

access of our exports to the markets of the developed

countries, which have the largest purchasing capacity.

Indeed, there continue to be export and production

subsidies in the international trade in food products —

Argentina’s main export item — as well as tariffs,

unjustified sanitary measures and trade restrictions that

distort the terms of trade in commodities and seriously

hamper market access for finished products.

The failure of the World Trade Organization

negotiations in Cancún should serve as a wake-up call

to us in this regard and should be remedied by making

the greatly sought-after link between business

opportunities in international trade and the growth of

indebted countries and their debt-repayment capacity. It

is paradoxical and even ridiculous that we should be

called upon to repay our debt while we are being

prevented from trading and selling our products.

On the other hand, although it is true that the

objectives of the multilateral institutions, such as the

International Monetary Fund (IMF), include shortening

the duration and lessening the imbalance of payments

of member countries and instilling confidence by

giving them opportunities for readjustment, without

taking measures that undermine national or

international prosperity, it is also necessary to redesign

those multilateral institutions. Redesigning multilateral

lending agencies should include changing the models

so that the success or failure of economic policies is

measured in terms of success or failure in the fight for

development, equitable distribution, the fight against

poverty and maintaining adequate levels of employment.

This new millennium should banish adjustment

models in which the prosperity of some is based on the

poverty of others. The dawn of the twenty-first century

should mean the end of an age and the beginning of a

new collaboration among creditors and debtors.

In a nutshell, it is essential to take note of the

close connection that exists between security,

multilateralism and economics.

The defence of human rights occupies a central

place in the new agenda of the Argentine Republic. We

are the children of the mothers and grandmothers of the

Plaza de Mayo, and we therefore insist on permanently

supporting the strengthening of the system for the

protection of human rights and the trial and conviction

of those who violate them. All of this is based on the

overarching view that respect for persons and their

dignity arises out of principles preceding the

development of law, whose origins can be traced to the

beginnings of human history. Respecting diversity and

pluralism and relentlessly fighting impunity have been

unwavering principles of our country ever since the

tragedy of recent decades.

We strongly advocate a peaceful settlement of

international disputes, particularly in a matter as dear

to our feelings and interests as our sovereignty dispute

with regard to the Malvinas, South Georgia and the South

Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas.

The United Nations has recognized that this is a

colonial situation maintained by the United Kingdom

and that it must be settled through bilateral

negotiations between the Argentine Republic and the

9

United Kingdom. We value the role of the United

Nations Special Committee on Decolonization and

express our fullest willingness to negotiate in order to

conclusively settle this longstanding dispute, a steady

objective of the Argentina Republic. We urge the

United Kingdom to agree to resume bilateral

negotiations to resolve this major issue.

Also with reference to the Southern regions, we

undertake to protect the interests of the international

community in Antarctica, ensuring that the activities

carried out there are consistent with the Antarctic

Treaty and its 1991 Madrid Protocol on Environmental

Protection. We shall take steps at the relevant forums

for the installation of the authorities and the operation

of the Antarctic Treaty Secretariat at its designated

seat, Buenos Aires.

We express our support and wish for a stable and

lasting peace in the Middle East based on the

inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-

determination and an independent and viable State,

while at the same time recognizing the right of Israel to

live at peace with its neighbours within safe and

internationally recognized borders.

We have spoken of progress and collective

security as the global challenges of today. We have

highlighted the close link that exists between economic

problems and security. We firmly condemn all terrorist

actions. We know what we are talking about. In 1992

and 1994 we suffered, first hand, our own Twin

Towers. The attacks on the Israeli Embassy and the

AMIA Jewish Community Center took the lives of over

100 of our compatriots. We can bear witness to the

need to fight effectively against the new threats posed

by international terrorism.

The vulnerability of all countries in the

international community to this scourge can be reduced

only through intelligent, concerted and multilateral

action sustained over time. The fight against terrorism

requires a new rationality. We face an enemy whose

logic is to trigger reactions symmetrical to its actions.

The worse, the better, is the favoured scenario, and that

logic partly accounts for the increasingly spectacular

— almost cinematographic — nature of its operations.

Legitimate responses and the support of international

public opinion are both fundamental to confronting

those new forms of violence.

This view places the problem of international

terrorism in a dimension that goes beyond a unilateral

or military solution. On the contrary, merely

responding through the use of force, however

impressive such force may be or appear to be, in many

cases ends with the perpetrators being presented as

victims. This closes in a perfect circle the perverse

logic to which we have been referring.

As we see, in view of the complexity of the

situation, it is no longer useful to take shelter in old

alignments, anachronistic ways of thinking or outdated

structures. The new challenges call for different and

creative solutions so as not to be left behind by changes

in the world in the technological, economic, social and

undoubtedly even cultural fields.

Let us rise to the challenge of thinking anew for a

new world. To combine different ideas and create

practical means to put them into practice in the service

of the people we represent is our duty.