Belgium, 2000

Mr. President, I should first of all like to congratulate

you on your election to the Presidency of the fifty-fifth

session of the General Assembly. I wish you every

success in this task which is both difficult and

inspiring.

Allow me to include in this tribute the Secretary-

General who has a crucial role in promoting

international cooperation for peace, security, justice

and development in the world.

I fully associate myself with the speech made by

my French colleague, Mr. Hubert Vedrine, on behalf of

the European Union. His declaration covered quite

broadly European concerns regarding different regions

of the world and the crises they continue to experience.

Like my European colleagues, I will confine myself to

repeating the encouragements of the European Union

for the Israelis and Palestinians to seize this historic

opportunity now within their reach to conclude a

framework agreement in the coming weeks.

The new century is a blank page. It depends on us

and on our Organization to provide the appropriate

answers to the challenges inherited from the past

century. The Heads of State and Government who

gathered here for the Millennium Summit set forth the

objectives that will mobilize our energy for the coming

years. I will only mention three of our highest

priorities.

First, world peace. This is the primary

responsibility of the Security Council. It is therefore

essential to bring the ongoing reforms to a successful

conclusion and to improve the Council's legitimacy as

well as its representative character. To adapt the

Security Council to the evolution of the world is the

primary condition for its ability to respond to our

expectations. Belgium coordinates a group of ten small

and medium-sized countries in the quest for

constructive compromise formulas. Regarding the

enlargement of the Security Council, the creation of ten

new seats, five permanent and five non-permanent,

with an equitable geographical distribution, seems to us

to be a path worth exploring. As for the right of veto,

we have put forward a number of concrete and

moderate proposals seeking a voluntary and partial

limitation to the right of veto. Such a reform, a

balanced one along these lines and responding to the

wishes of most Member States can, and should make

significant progress in the months to come.

Secondly, the elimination of poverty and

attainment of sustainable development. The

globalization of the economy must proceed hand in

hand with job creation and economic take-off in the

poorest regions as well as with universally recognized

social and environmental norms. There is no more

denying that great inequalities, differences in

development, the lack of good governance and

disregard for human rights are factors which create

instability, both within States and among States in their

international relations.

Thirdly, the defence and promotion of democracy

and human rights. For us this requires equal

participation of men and women in public life and

decision-making, as well as the fight against all forms

of racism, intolerance, discrimination and xenophobia.

8

Serious violations of human rights and universal values

must therefore never be allowed to go unpunished.

This also implies a permanent quest for the

conditions, modalities and terms that underlie common

human values. Democracy and on this at least we

should all agree is much more than a statement of

fact regarding an established balance of power or an

arithmetic majority. It is a political morality that

includes loyal electoral behaviour. It is respect for, and

encouragement of the open expression of differing

points of view. It is a frame of mind based on a lofty

and optimistic conception of the human being.

I say this because, even at home in our old

European democracies which one would consider safe

and sheltered, we see reappearing the vile spectre of

rejection of differences, exclusion and xenophobic or

slanderous prejudice.

European parties are again raising and exalting

what is most sordid and most barbarous in human

nature. Saying nothing or resigning oneself to this fact

is tantamount to trivializing the phenomenon and

trivialization means corruption of the spirit.

I say this also because we must recognize that our

political systems, in theory well equipped to withstand

such assaults, unfortunately tend all too often to give in

to the temptation to minimalize them under the

specious invocation of so-called higher demands of

realpolitik.

It is not my purpose here to allege some moral

superiority but simply to remind ourselves that history

always exacts a price when one refuses to learn from

its lessons.

Belgium has participated over the past decade in

numerous peacekeeping operations under the auspices

of the United Nations, among others in Somalia,

Rwanda and in the Balkans.

Reviewing these experiences, the Belgian Senate

issued a detailed report in December 1997 containing

recommendations that prefigure, to some extent, the

recommendations contained in the Brahimi report. I

will point out a few aspects on which there is complete

convergence between the two reports.

First, United Nations forces must be prepared to

confront the worst case scenario. The Blue Helmets

must be trained, equipped and commanded for such an

eventuality.

Secondly, these forces must have at their disposal

all relevant information, as well as the capacity to

analyse such information in terms of strategy and

tactics, so they must be able to rely on an effective

intelligence capability.

Thirdly, troop-contributing countries must be

closely involved in the preparation of the mandates and

in the management of operations. The Assembly will

not be surprised to hear me plead for the

recommendations formulated in the Brahimi report to

receive wide support of all Member States. I hope that

all actors concerned the Member States, the Security

Council and the Secretariat prove their

determination and their will to extend reforms to all

levels and bodies of the Organization. I pledge the full

support of the Belgian Government to Deputy

Secretary-General Louise FrÈchette, who is responsible

for their implementation.

I would also like to point out that, in our opinion,

the conclusions of the Brahimi report cannot be

dissociated from other discussions to be held during the

fifty-fifth session, specifically those on the revision of

the scale of assessments for peacekeeping budgets. In

this regard as well, Member States will have to keep an

open mind in order to set up an equitable system of

financial burden sharing that is adapted to the current

shape of the world.

Another sensitive question manifests itself clearly

in the light of recent experiences, namely the proper

role of the United Nations in relation to regional

organizations, and indeed even in relation to the

initiatives of neighbouring States in a conflict zone.

Lessons to be learned from the Yugoslav crisis are not

the same as those that can be drawn from recent crises,

particularly those in Africa. The goal in this regard is

not to deny the merits of the regional approach. On the

contrary, Belgium supports the creation of regional

rapid reaction forces in the service of peacekeeping, as

was underlined one week ago by our Prime Minister,

Guy Verhofstadt, before this very body.

It has to do more with highlighting the fact that

the merits of the regional approach clearly can never

justify inaction on behalf of the international

community or some sort of oratory diplomacy that

passes off solving problems to regional bodies and

organizations or to temporary coalitions. The Security

Council, as the supreme authority in matters of peace

and security, must be able to play its role, although it

9

should certainly be possible to refer some tasks to

regional institutions most able to take action.

I would like to make one last observation

regarding preventive diplomacy and peacekeeping. The

arsenal at the disposal of the United Nations is not

limited to sending troops. Other means are available

and, moreover, have been used repeatedly during recent

years. I am referring to sanctions, and in particular to

economic sanctions. This type of coercive measure, if

applied by the Security Council in accordance to the

Charter, can indeed produce the results envisaged when

their use is well targeted and limited in time or when

they are inscribed in a realistic timeframe. But

experience also shows that when they are applied

indiscriminately or when they serve overtly ambitious

political objectives, their effectiveness tends to

decrease after a certain amount of time, and they may

even produce results wholly opposite to the ones

initially envisaged. It is increasingly rare for sanctions

to be an useful instrument. Too often, they only

penalize populations without reaching the targeted

rulers, who often understand how to exploit the

boomerang effect of such sanctions.

I would like to move now to a subject dear to my

heart, Central Africa. During the past year, my country

has expressed strongly its desire to be involved in, and

to contribute to, the mobilization of the international

community in support of the Lusaka peace process. It

is essential that all Congolese parties engage resolutely

and without preconditions in a dialogue, as they agreed

to do in Lusaka. It is equally essential that our

Organization and its Members who have the means to

do so support the rapid deployment of the United

Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic

Republic of the Congo (MONUC), even though some

of the conditions and modalities of that operation may

have to be reviewed in the light of the Brahimi report.

One thing is certain: without the presence of a

peacekeeping force there will be no peace. Nor will

there be peace, or even a permanent cessation of

hostilities, without a dialogue between the Congolese

parties. Both these questions are obviously linked. In

order to overcome the current impasse it is essential to

make progress where possible. It therefore seems to us

that the problem should not be stated in terms of

preconditions, order of events or priorities. In any

event, the responsibility of the Security Council and

the international community remain in place. Without a

political leap by the parties to the conflict, and without

the necessary material support of the international

community, the peace process is doomed to fail.

In Burundi, where action by the countries of the

region and the remarkable facilitation undertaken by

former Presidents Nyerere and Mandela have started to

yield promising yet still incomplete results, it is also

time for our Organization and the principal donor

countries to act to consolidate the gains achieved and

to set the country once and for all on the path to peace

and development. It is in this spirit that Belgium will

participate actively in the meeting organized by the

European Commission that is to be held in Brussels on

15 September to prepare for the donors' conference

soon to be convened by France on the request of

Nelson Mandela.

Regardless of how well-intentioned they may be,

efforts in the cause of peace can sometimes be to little

avail, given the greed and rivalries fuelled by the

illegal exploitation of local resources. Resources

attained in that way are financing wars, which

themselves become a source of profit. The problem of

the diamond trade in conflict areas is at the centre of

this question. We know that war diamonds represent

only a fraction of international trade, but these illegal

revenues nevertheless contribute to destabilizing the

situation, encourage the logic of war and spread

corruption and anarchy. Belgium is active in the efforts

to create a global system of verification. It is high time

indeed to put in place a realistic and effective legal

framework binding on everyone in order to regulate the

trade in diamonds.

I would now like to speak about non-proliferation

and disarmament. Last April, during the Review

Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-

Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Belgium intervened

vigorously to express its concerns regarding a certain

number of elements that could lead to the weakening or

putting into question the very foundation of the non-

proliferation regime negotiated in recent decades. We

certainly welcome the conclusions of the Conference

and the reflection that it triggered. That has led to a

favourable climate for the implementation of the plan

of action. That being said, numerous States still refuse

to adhere to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, while others

have not yet ratified the Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.

We have followed closely, and with some

concern, the debate in the United States on anti-

ballistic defence. Belgium is not opposed in principle

10

to the idea of anti-missile defence. We are only stating

that the political perception, the analysis of the threat

and the means to counter it vary greatly from region to

region. There is no unique or universal response, but

what is essential is to make sure that an anti-missile

system, whatever it may be, should contribute to

general stability and to the consolidation of mutual

confidence. In other words, the decisions will have to

be taken not only on the basis of a strategic and

technical analysis, but also on a consensual basis that

builds upon the overall political and strategic balance.

We welcome the decision by the American

Administration to postpone its decision on the

launching of a programme. Besides the question of the

feasibility of such a programme, its unilateral nature

would have a negative impact on our common

disarmament objectives. We now hope that this

decision will encourage negotiations for a START III

agreement between the United States and Russia. Rapid

progress on a new, substantial reduction of strategic

nuclear arms could in turn lead to breaking the impasse

in negotiations for a fissile materials cut-off treaty at

the Disarmament Commission in Geneva.

Belgium also welcomes heartily the adherence to

date by 138 States to the Convention on the prohibition

of anti-personnel mines. Further efforts have to be

made in order to implement it and mobilize the

necessary funding to eliminate these especially

inhumane weapons forever.

I have dwelled mainly on peace and international

security. I would like to turn to the two other subjects

that Belgium considers a priority in the programme of

action of the Millennium Summit. Without these

priorities, our efforts in the field of security would be

fruitless. I am referring to universal respect for human

rights and worldwide development.

The protection of human rights is a leading

feature of my country's foreign policy. Our

participation in the Commission on Human Rights will

enable us to further enlarge our initiatives and our

political action. We will be able to act more directly in

the fields where we have a particular interest, such as

the fight against racism and xenophobia, and the rights

of the child. Belgium was actively involved in the

negotiation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention

on the Rights of the Child aimed at sparing children as

much as possible from the suffering and consequences

of armed conflict. The signing of that Protocol on the

occasion of the Millennium Summit, as well as our

country's signature of the second Protocol, on sexual

exploitation of children, are specific signs of our

common will to reinforce the protection of the rights of

the child.

I would like to reiterate my country's wish to see

the death penalty permanently abolished all over the

world. I also appeal to countries that are not in a

position to do so at this time to adopt a moratorium as

a transitional measure. We certainly cannot accept the

death penalty still being implemented in cases of those

who were minors at the time of the offence, pregnant

women or the mentally ill.

We are following very closely the evolution of

international law and jurisprudence aimed at

condemning persons convicted of crimes against

humanity. My country has been at the forefront of

national legislation in this context and hopes that these

measures can serve as a deterrent and an example for

other States. We have just ratified the Statute of the

International Criminal Court, and we are encouraging

other States to do the same in support of this important

commitment.

Let me say a few words on globalization and its

problems. Globalization is the expression of an

inevitable technological evolution. It makes little sense

to condemn this evolution as a whole, for it is natural

and has many positive effects, but we need to channel

its dynamics towards real economic and social progress

for the well-being of a larger number of people. But the

globalization of the economy and trade cannot simply

mean the renunciation of our political and institutional

responsibilities. The risk is very real. We are already

witnessing a form of abandonment of responsibilities in

the case of Governments and Parliaments confronted

by the gigantic challenges of globalization and the

almost impossible task of dealing with them at the

national level. In the absence of a really effective and

recognized global authority, the dynamics of

globalization could lead us into a political vacuum.

There will be no new economic world order without a

new political world order in which national democratic

institutions, politically representative and accountable,

can play a role. This is another challenge facing our

Organization and its Member States. We will have to

provide an answer in the new millennium.

The United Nations system is at the heart of the

issue of globalization, whose effects are becoming

more and more evident. Questions have been raised;

now it is time to find the answers. We are convinced

that only the United Nations system, with all its

spheres of activity, is in a position to harmonize global

economic development with human development.

Here, more than anywhere else, we realize that human

beings, wherever they come from, share a high degree

of common aspirations, as well as the same fears, the

same needs and the same dreams. This belief has to

guide us in all our actions, both here and at home.