Australia, 2000

I join my colleagues in

congratulating the President on his election as

President of the General Assembly for its fifty-fifth

session and you, Madam Vice-President, on your

election to your position.

I am also delighted to welcome Tuvalu as the

189th Member of the United Nations. Australia has

long-standing and very friendly relations with Tuvalu,

and we have worked closely together as members of

the South Pacific Forum and the Commonwealth. We

are pleased that Tuvalu is now a Member of the United

Nations, and look forward to new opportunities to work

together for the United Nations common goals of peace

and development.

We meet today just after the largest number of

heads of State and Government in history gathered for

the Millennium Summit. While the Summit touched on

the multitude of problems facing the world at the start

of a new century, a theme common to many speeches

was the need for the United Nations to reform so as to

meet the challenges of the era: the challenges of

securing peace, of fighting poverty and of empowering

and liberating oppressed peoples.

I want to respond to those calls for reform in my

remarks to the Assembly today.

Without continuing commitment to reform, the

United Nations — like any organization — cannot

expect to keep up with rapid change in the

contemporary international environment. In the

absence of change and adaptation, the Organization

will wither as the nations of the world bypass it in

favour of institutions and mechanisms that are more

relevant to their needs.

Australians believe that the most fundamental

task of the Organization — and the very reason for its

creation at the end of the Second World War — is the

maintenance of international peace and security. In

recent years we have seen the United Nations perform

at both ends of the spectrum of relevance and

effectiveness: at a low point in addressing problems in

Kosovo and Rwanda, and at a high point in the

resolution of the conflict in East Timor.

I am a strong advocate of an active role for the

United Nations in the restoration and preservation of

international peace and security, especially in situations

where there may be imminent danger of humanitarian

catastrophe. Appropriate action by the United Nations

in these circumstances does more than perhaps

anything else to demonstrate the continuing relevance

of the Organization to an often sceptical international

public.

Today I want to focus attention on four aspects of

reform within the United Nations system: reform of the

Security Council; electoral group reconfiguration;

reform of peacekeeping; and reform of the human

rights treaty committee system. It is our view that

progress in each of these areas must be achieved to

enable the United Nations to deliver results and ensure

its relevance and effectiveness.

Reform and expansion of the Security Council is

driven by two fundamental, interrelated imperatives:

the need to restore the representative nature of the

Council by reconfiguring its composition to reflect the

size and diversity of contemporary United Nations

membership, and the need to enhance the Council's

credibility, authority and legitimacy.

The Australian Government's view has long been

that expansion in both categories of membership is

26

needed to restore balance and equity to the composition

of the Council. New permanent seats should be

assumed by the under-represented developing regions

of the world. New permanent seats should also be

allocated to the major industrialized Powers best able

to contribute to the maintenance of international peace

and security. Equally importantly, other Members of

the United Nations should be given the opportunity to

contribute directly to the work of the Council through

periodic participation as elected members. Expansion

of the non-permanent membership would enhance the

representative nature of the Council, enabling it to act

genuinely on behalf of the whole membership.

Australia has long voiced concerns about the veto

and continues to argue that there must be limitations on

its use. Of course, all permanent members of the

Council, old and new, must remain accountable for

their performance, and to this end any new

arrangements for the Council should be reviewed after

10 or 15 years.

Regrettably, discussion on Security Council

reform has failed to reach agreement on a package of

reforms in the six years since the Open-ended Working

Group was established. The impasse is disappointing,

and I hope that this session will give new impetus to

the reform effort. It is clear from statements at the

Millennium Summit, and during this debate, that there

is strong support for reform. Renewed commitment and

flexibility are needed from all sides.

In the recent debate about United Nations reform,

one key element has largely been missing. I refer to the

United Nations electoral groups. The electoral groups

were established to ensure that there was fair and

equitable representation on United Nations bodies, so

that all Members who wanted to make a contribution to

United Nations decision-making would have an

opportunity to do so. Now that three decades have

passed since the formalization of the present groups, it

is time that we focused on their relevance to present

and future geopolitical realities.

The current group system reflects the geopolitics

of the 1960s. Since that time, more than 60 nations

have joined the United Nations, leading to significant

disparities between the size of groupings and an

inadequate level of representation for some subregions.

In addition, the original rationale for the configuration

of the electoral groups has eroded, creating dissonance

in the way many Member States organize themselves

politically and electorally.

The previous realignment of groups in 1963 was a

long and difficult process, impelled by significant

changes to the United Nations system after the entry of

many newly independent States from Africa and Asia. I

recognize that group reconfiguration is no easy matter,

and accept that change now will be similarly complex.

For that very reason, we should delay no longer in

commencing a serious debate of these issues. While

there are many possible configurations for revised

electoral groupings, and many sensitivities around

altering the status quo, the dramatic global changes

since the current system came into force have created

historical anomalies that cry out to be redressed.

Australia looks forward to working with others to

achieve that goal.

As part of the Australian Government's

commitment to a strong and relevant United Nations,

we recently completed a review of the United Nations

human rights committee system, with the objective of

improving its effectiveness. The review proceeded

from our Government's commitment to the

international promotion and protection of human rights,

and a firm belief that the United Nations has a central

role to play.

Australia has a proud human rights record, and

we take our international rights and obligations

seriously. We are party to both human rights Covenants

and to the four conventions. Within Australia, which

has a strong civil society, human rights are protected by

a range of key civil and political mechanisms,

including a strong democratic tradition, our

Constitution, an independent judiciary, a free press and

wide-ranging anti-discrimination legislation.

Internationally, Australia is a strong proponent of the

universal application of human rights standards and is

committed to continued support for international

human rights protection.

We are concerned that the committees established

to monitor international compliance with human rights

treaties are beginning to lose credibility and

effectiveness because of the way they operate. It is also

important that the international protection system work

efficiently and effectively so that democratic countries,

such as Australia, which have a proud record of

extending generous humanitarian assistance can

continue to have the confidence and support of their

27

own domestic constituencies for such humanitarian

protection.

Australia's review found that the committees

need to adopt a more consistent approach to their role

and understand the pitfalls of simply accepting without

analysis the submissions put before them by non-

governmental organizations. It is important that

adequate recognition be given to the role and views of

Governments which are democratically elected and

which take their treaty commitments and reporting

obligations seriously. The committees also need to be

more balanced and strategic about targeting key human

rights offenders and avoid unfairly focusing their

criticism on countries with good human rights records.

For some years now Australia, together with a

number of other countries, including Canada, New

Zealand and Norway, has been advocating reform of

the treaty committees. Most recently, the Australian

Mission to the United Nations in Geneva hosted a

meeting of about 20 countries to discuss treaty

committee reform. The United Nations itself has also

recognized the need for reform of the treaty committee

system, and Australia has been fully supportive of

these international reform efforts.

Australia now intends to broaden such efforts by

spearheading a high-level diplomatic initiative to

garner broad support for reforms to improve the

functioning of the committees and professionalize their

operations. Reforms could include the provision of

adequate resources to the human rights treaty

committees, improvements in their working methods,

standardized rules of procedure when considering

States' reports and better consultation between the

committees themselves to coordinate reporting

timetables and to facilitate cooperative work on reform

issues.

But Australia does not have a monopoly on good

ideas, and we want to work closely with United

Nations officials and with like-minded countries to

make the treaty committee system work more

effectively for the good of all Member States and for

the protection of human rights.

We will therefore be talking widely with others to

develop concrete proposals for reform. We will raise

these issues in the General Assembly, at the

Commission on Human Rights and in other appropriate

meetings. We also think that the regular meetings of

States parties to the six human rights treaties should

discuss reform issues and provide guidance to the

respective committees on their working methods.

Australia wants to maximize the effectiveness of

the treaty bodies. We will not shy away from our

responsibilities, but will press for the reforms that are

needed to make the system work well and achieve its

objectives. If reform does not occur, the committee

system will increasingly be ignored and made

redundant. That would be a setback for the cause of

human rights.

I now turn to the matter of peacekeeping and the

maintenance of international security. Australia has a

long and honourable tradition as a participant in United

Nations peacekeeping operations, most recently in East

Timor, and I believe that the strength of our

commitment is reflected in the recent appointment by

the Secretary-General of Australian Major-General Tim

Ford as his Military Adviser. The experience of the

1990s has clearly shown that the ability of the United

Nations to meet an expanding and increasingly

complex range of peacekeeping demands is under

strain. The decade witnessed some important successes

in peacekeeping, notably in East Timor, but also some

smaller and frankly rather unheralded operations. It

also saw some tragic failures, the costs of which were

often measured in human lives.

I commend the Secretary-General's commitment

to blunt scrutiny and review of the United Nations

performance, including the reports on Srebrenica and

Rwanda. We particularly commend his initiative in

convening the Brahimi Panel on United Nations Peace

Operations. The Brahimi report (A/55/305) is a

landmark document, setting out a blueprint for

modernizing the United Nations peacekeeping and

related functions. We must move expeditiously to

consider its recommendations.

Let me highlight briefly five points that, in

Australia's view, are among the most significant

lessons of recent experiences.

First, military intervention must be used only as a

last resort. All efforts must be made to find peaceful

solutions. In this context, we welcome the Brahimi

report's emphasis on preventive action and peace-

building.

Secondly, when the United Nations is deployed,

there must be a peace to keep. There are real dangers in

sending troops indefinitely into harm's way in the

28

absence of a clear peace plan and reasonable prospects

of achieving it. Disputing parties must be committed to

peace and must be held accountable for their actions.

Thirdly, peace operations must have a mandate

from the Security Council that is appropriate to the job

they are being asked to do. If the environment is

hostile, they must be appropriately equipped and able

to project credible force.

Fourthly, deployment must take place quickly

once a decision is taken by the Security Council.

Delays can lead to the further deterioration of a

situation and can cost lives. The Brahimi report offers a

number of useful ideas to speed deployment which

merit careful consideration.

Fifthly, United Nations peace operations must

have a clear exit strategy. This is linked in particular to

the clarity of Council mandates: as the Brahimi report

rightly stresses, mandates must be clear, credible and

achievable. It is also linked to the efficacy of

accompanying peace processes and peace-building

efforts.

We welcome the attention given to these issues in

the Brahimi report. We also support the point that the

United Nations must be given the resources it needs to

carry out the demands that we make of it. There is no

question that the Department of Peacekeeping

Operations needs to be strengthened and reformed.

Ultimately, it is our responsibility, as Member States,

to support a stronger and more effective United Nations

peacekeeping capacity. This includes placing the

financing of peacekeeping on a surer footing and

paying our assessed contributions in full and on time.

I cannot conclude without referring to the

question of East Timor. When I addressed this

Assembly one year ago East Timor was in the throes of

the most appalling violence at the hands of a brutal and

lawless militia. Since then important progress has been

made in restoring security and building the foundations

of an independent East Timor. Australia pays tribute to

the men and women of the International Force in East

Timor and of the United Nations Transitional

Administration in East Timor for their commitment

and, in too many cases, their sacrifice.

East Timor faces a long and difficult path to

peace and prosperity. Australia is playing a major role

in the territory's reconstruction through the United

Nations and other organizations, as well as bilaterally.

We are committed for the long term to helping the East

Timorese build their emerging nation not only for the

benefit of the East Timorese, but in the interests of

stability and security in our region.

Regrettably, the pro-integration militia continue

to pose a significant threat to security and stability.

Intimidation and violence against Timorese refugees

and humanitarian aid personnel in the camps on the

East-West Timor border must be halted. The killing of

workers of the Office of the United Nations High

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) earlier this

month deserves the world's strongest condemnation.

Australia reiterates its call on Indonesia to fulfil its

responsibility to provide effective security in West

Timor, including by bringing to an end militia activity,

bringing to justice those responsible for crimes,

creating the necessary conditions for the return of

UNHCR and resolving the refugee situation. We urge

the Indonesian authorities to take all possible steps in

this direction, including cooperating with the proposed

Security Council mission.

If the United Nations is to remain relevant and

credible, it must work on its strengths and maintain a

strong commitment to a continuing programme of

reform and renewal. The challenges that face the

Organization are formidable, but not insurmountable.

The need for change is clear and urgent, but I believe

that it is not beyond the ingenuity and good will of our

generation to emulate our predecessors in grasping the

reform nettle.

At the Millennium Summit the world's leaders

highlighted the need for the United Nations to meet the

challenges of the new century. Let us heed their call,

and work together with renewed determination and

commitment to make this Organization mo