Belarus, 2007

All

of us seated in this Hall witnessed the collapse almost

two decades ago of a seemingly invincible

international system based on the antagonism of two

poles of power. It collapsed instantly. The system that

ensued, based on the antagonism of one powerful pole

to the rest of the world, is already splitting apart before

our very eyes and creating strains that will inevitably

lead to its collapse. Simple logic, which does not aspire

to explain the laws of the universe, tells us that systems

based on confrontation are short-lived. They are

doomed. But this is not the end of history: this is a

process of history. As the twenty-first century begins,

systems based on antagonism and confrontation are

becoming a thing of the past. The sands of time are

inexorably flowing out of them. New international

systems based on partnership must replace them.

Those thoughts are not a digression into the

abstract. Though still split by the old paradigm of

North-South confrontation and the imposed myth of

confrontation between developed and developing

States, and the myth of a clash of civilizations, the

international community should through its actions

today build a practical partnership that will lay the

foundations of new systems for the world order. When

we succeed in working together, we will be able to

tackle the most serious problems.

Let us take the subject of terrorism. Force alone,

even the most powerful and the most sophisticated,

cannot overcome terrorism. Its use instead causes a

further spiral of terror. We have all painfully come to

realize this. Instead, we have understood the true

impact of poverty, inequality, social vulnerability and

illiteracy on the rise of extremism and terrorism and

have taken up the fight against terrorism through joint

and comprehensive efforts, and have thus started to

undermine the very foundations of terrorism. The

decisive role in this, in our opinion, belongs to the

United Nations.

The United Nations must also reassert its leading

role in the fight against such growing evils as

trafficking in human beings and bring about

cooperation between the countries of origin and

countries of destination of modern-day slaves. Having,

in 2006, taken the first steps towards coordinating the

efforts of the international community in this sphere

(see resolution 61/180), the General Assembly should

offer to its intergovernmental and non-governmental

partners a practical vision of a global partnership in

this fight. As an optimal form of such a partnership,

Belarus would opt for a United Nations plan of action

or strategy to counter human trafficking and other

modern forms of slavery. Let us determine the optimal

format for our cooperation through a thematic General

Assembly debate and begin this without delay during

the current session.

We are certain that it is time for our common

Organization, the United Nations, to begin looking for

ways, obviously based on cooperation, to deal with

what is de facto the most topical problem facing

humankind: the energy problem. Antagonism between

suppliers and consumers of energy resources and a

price race will not resolve the energy problem. Such

antagonism is itself a superficial phenomenon. At the

end of the day, we are all energy consumers, and this,

in principle, is where we have common interests. How

are we to solve this problem, given the rapid pace of

growth of the world economy and the consequent rush

for energy sources? It is clear that the future belongs to

alternative and renewable sources of energy. This

means that today the United Nations must work out

practical arrangements for the transfer and distribution

of alternative and renewable energy technologies on a

global scale. That is a fundamental prerequisite for the

achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.

Such practical measures should include the

methods of dealing with the obvious problem that these

technologies are concentrated in the hands of a small

group of States. Otherwise, the pricing for these

technologies tomorrow will emulate today’s exorbitant

prices for traditional energy resources. If a few decades

ago the international community drew on the

enlightened minds of researchers and managed to

decide that a future controlled fusion technology, as a

perpetual source of energy, should belong to all

humanity, why can the United Nations today not take a

similar decision with respect to alternative and

renewable sources of energy? It would probably be

right to hold, during the next session of the General

Assembly, informal thematic debates on technologies

for alternative and renewable energy resources as the

common property of humankind.

The problem of global climate change a key

topic for this year’s general debate is becoming

increasingly acute. At present, the Kyoto Protocol is

the most important international instrument for

addressing this issue. In 2006, with an eye to full-

fledged participation in the Kyoto Protocol, Belarus

became the first and so far the only country to initiate

an amendment to annex-B of the Protocol. In view of

the worsening problem of climate change and

incorporating the wishes of our partners, we have

undertaken the most stringent commitments on the

reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the

Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) region.

Through joint efforts by the parties to the Kyoto

Protocol, let us ensure prompt ratification of the

amendment and its entry into force, thereby setting a

major practical precedent by enlarging the circle of

participants in the Kyoto Protocol.

The fact that Belarus takes climate change and

environmental protection issues so seriously is not

accidental. Like our neighbours, the Russian

Federation and Ukraine, for the past two decades now

Belarus has had to deal with the consequences of the

deadliest man-made disaster of the twentieth century,

the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.

Thanks to great effort and at tremendous cost the most

urgent problems of providing emergency assistance to

the population today have been dealt with. In the years

to come we will face an equally challenging task,

namely, to restore the economic potential of the

affected areas and to create a viable environment for

people and pollution-free production. As before, we

will bear the main burden ourselves. However, we hope

that the proposed proclamation by the United Nations

of a decade of rehabilitation and sustainable

development of Chernobyl-affected areas, which was

endorsed by the 2006 Minsk Chernobyl International

Conference, will have the support of the Assembly and

that a new resolution of the General Assembly will

officially announce the beginning of the decade of

Chernobyl, thus ensuring the cooperation and solidarity

of the international community.

From this rostrum much has been said about the

problems of the Doha round of negotiations on

international trade. There is one more aspect of this

subject, the unacceptable practice of certain countries

that use the process of accession to membership of the

World Trade Organization (WTO) as a convenient

instrument of pressure on candidate countries. This has

involved not only economic pressure, in order to

receive coerced and unilateral additional benefits from

WTO expansion, but also political pressure. The

United Nations must take a firm stand in favour of

establishing, with the participation of all interested

States, fair conditions for WTO accession that take into

account the trade and financial needs of the acceding

countries and their genuine development needs.

Belarus rejects the use of unilateral coercive

measures in international relations as an instrument of

political and economic pressure on sovereign States.

Such measures not only contradict the principles of the

United Nations Charter and international law but breed

alienation, mistrust and hostility among nations. We

end up dealing with simply absurd situations when

economic sanctions are imposed under the pretext of

promoting workers’ rights but lead ultimately to job

losses. By applying increasingly unilateral coercive

measures of economic pressure, including

extraterritorially, the well-known world centre of

power has assumed de facto the rights of the United

Nations Security Council. We have all witnessed this

during the current general debate in the General

Assembly.

We wish to draw the attention of the General

Assembly to a particular aspect, the abuse by the

United States of the right to be the world reserve

currency manager and its deliberate creation of

obstacles to the lawful economic activity of legitimate

companies and banks from countries that are not

deemed acceptable by the United States. This is a

wake-up call for the entire international community. By

designating States at will as acceptable or

unacceptable, as good or bad, the United States is

creating an atmosphere that suppresses dissent and

diversity in international relations. That not only brings

ideology and politicking into international relations but

is an act of confrontation with each and every one who

dares to have an independent opinion or who has the

courage to pursue an independent foreign policy. The

majority in this hall are member States of the

Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). They are non-aligned

to confrontation. Five decades ago the creation of the

Movement was a protest against confrontation and a

global response to the global challenge of

confrontation. Today it is within our power to stop

confrontation and to reject the solutions that it seeks to

impose. Tomorrow belongs to positive ideas and

actions and to interaction and cooperation for peace in

the common interest of the entire international

community.