Switzerland, 2006

We

recently celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the death

of Albert Einstein. He recommended the construction

of the atomic bomb to President Roosevelt, yet always

described himself as a militant pacifist. He shared his

qualms of conscience with Sigmund Freud. In the

course of their correspondence, the two men agreed in

particular that, if all peoples were to live in peace on

this planet, the world needed an international

organization with which all people could identify.

Empathy towards that organization could provide it

with the authority to counter war. It was in that

conviction and with the same emotion that the men and

women of my country voted in favour of Switzerland’s

accession to the United Nations almost five years ago.

Today, I affirm that we are glad to have taken that

step.

Switzerland may not have experienced war within

its own borders for a number of centuries, but that is

not enough to satisfy us, for war is not only there

where bombs fall, killing men, women and children.

We are all involved in the conflicts that ravage our

planet. So long as these wars continue, no one can talk

convincingly of peace. We can overcome that feeling

of powerlessness in the face of armed conflict by

joining together to work towards peace. The country

that I have the honour to represent is convinced that the

United Nations is the most important means of

pursuing that vision. The United Nations embodies our

hopes for peace, solidarity and justice throughout the

world.

Only through a common alliance of all nations do

we have that opportunity. No country is capable of

meeting the challenges of globalization alone. War,

terrorism, drug trafficking, the offshoring of jobs and

environmental and climate-related disasters are all

global threats. They know no borders, not even those

of powerful nations. No State, not even the strongest, is

the master of its own fate. Only through an inclusive

network with universally applicable norms can might

and violence be replaced by justice. The United

Nations has been the world’s most successful effort to

achieve that end.

Every nation and every community is guided by

its own historical and cultural experiences in dealing

with conflicts. Nations behave and organize themselves

accordingly. In Switzerland, our values are based on

the three pillars of democracy, the rule of law and

social equilibrium. That influences our view of how the

international community could address conflicts

worldwide by helping the victims of violence or

disaster, establishing a legal system and enforcing it,

and examining the deeper causes of violence and

seeking to redress them.

The first reaction of a human being towards a

suffering victim is to help that person. The United

Nations has stood by victims of natural disasters with

humanitarian assistance, be it after a tsunami or in a

drought. It also assists people affected by war. In so

doing, it has succeeded in building up positive empathy

and in strengthening trust in it worldwide.

Should the United Nations fail in its humanitarian

task, however, desperation and the tendency towards

violence increase and intensify conflicts. That can be

seen with brutal clarity in the Middle East and in

Darfur.

Why should the international community not

establish norms just like a State does? I refer here to

the Millennium Development Goals, human rights, the

climate change Protocol and international law. States

have adopted penal codes to prosecute criminals, bring

them before a court, sentence them and have their

sentence enforced. Doing justice to victims prevents

acts of vengeance and a never-ending spiral of further

violence. It also serves as a deterrent to potential

criminals.

What is good for a State should also be good for

the international community. It must treat war

criminals according to the same rules. The

international community has to fight terrorism. There

is no alternative to absolute respect for the rule of law,

human rights and international law. The Geneva

Conventions are no hindrance to that; on the contrary,

if the appropriate instruments are lacking, new ones

can be created, such as the convention on terrorism.

Above all, however, we must not betray our principles

and our values. Torture or any other illegal procedure

has no place in our struggle and represents the radical

negation of the rule of law. Recourse to such means

strips the fight against terrorism of all its legitimacy.

06-52737 14

The establishment of the International Criminal

Court (ICC) was a key date in the history of humanity.

It is in this Court that war criminals are tried, found

guilty and sentenced. Unfortunately, the process can

sometimes take a long time, as we have seen in the

case of Liberia, and sometimes it can take far too much

time, as in the case of the Balkans. War criminals must

be extradited so that justice can be done. All war

criminals, including those from the Darfur conflict,

must be made aware of the consequences of their

crimes and know that they will not go unpunished.

Respect for the law implies that all States, from

the smallest to the largest, become parties to the ICC

Statute. Public international law, while it is of

fundamental importance for small countries which are

unable to defend themselves on their own, also serves

the interests of large States, and even super-Powers, if

they do not want to find themselves accused of

arbitrary acts of imperialism.

We all know that no State can function purely on

the basis of laws and ordinances. Laws and ordinances

must have the full support of the public. The same is

true for the United Nations. That is why the Human

Rights Council in Geneva will search for solutions

through dialogue partnerships rather than by issuing

threats. That will take time, a great deal of time. The

existence of the Peacebuilding Commission at the

United Nations clearly shows that the United Nations

peacekeepers cannot bring about or enforce peace by

themselves. There need to be blueprints for peace and

expert evaluations, together with a long-term “variable-

geometry” commitment on the part of the international

community, in order to prevent conflicts.

Critics who believed that the United Nations was

incapable of reform now have before them proof to the

contrary. By establishing a Human Rights Council and

a Peacebuilding Commission, the United Nations has

demonstrated that it wanted to give new life to values

such as the protection of human rights and that it could

develop new peacekeeping instruments.

Just as a democracy strives to involve all its

citizens in political decisions, regardless of their

background or financial standing, the United Nations

must not allow small groups of States or individual

States to impose their law on others. A broad consensus

must prevail. That is why we would like to see the

reform and enlargement of the Security Council, which

would undoubtedly strengthen its legitimacy. Given

that we have still a long way to go before that point is

reached, let us, rather, remain pragmatic and content

ourselves with short-term improvements to the

Council’s working methods, in particular, the right of

veto.

Every State will try to find the underlying causes

of threats to its cohesion and endeavour to overcome

them, and so it is with a community of States.

Environmental disasters give rise to mass

migration and legions of refugees. The signatories of

the Kyoto Protocol want to cut off this evil at the root.

But, here again, all States, without exception, must set

for themselves the same goals as were set at Kyoto

and, above all, take appropriate measures.

Every military conflict and every terrorist attack

stems from economic inequalities and social injustices.

That is why we must do our utmost to fight poverty,

lack of future prospects and political impotence.

Religious conflicts are also born of economic and

social inequalities. In reality, the East-West divide is

perhaps more a North-South divide. If we want to

promote religious tolerance, we must pay the price,

which is greater social and economic justice. By

adopting the Millennium Development Goals, the

world has set itself the task of reducing extreme

poverty by half by 2015. Let us give ourselves and the

United Nations the means for keeping that promise.

It is through dialogue that it is possible to address

the conflict in the Middle East, the stabilization of Iraq

and the nuclear crisis with Iran, and all the parties

concerned should do everything they can to avoid

fanning the flames of discord. Respect for the basic

principles of the Charter of the United Nations is just

as essential. In other words, no State is entitled to deny

the right of another to exist. Lastly, we cannot

disappoint those who aspire to self-determination if

they have the law on their side.

When there is a clash of cultures, the response

must be dialogue between cultures and between

religions. We have no other choice. Humiliation and

lack of respect for other cultures undoubtedly serve as

breeding grounds for terrorism. Since all States are

represented here, the United Nations is a forum unlike

any other. We are looking forward to the issuance of

the report on the alliance of civilizations by the High-

level Group appointed by the Secretary-General.

Switzerland will be very active in this endeavour.

15 06-52737

Switzerland is a neutral country. Our neutrality

has never authorized us to look upon the world with

indifference or to stand on the sidelines. It has always

meant that we have the obligation to work to establish

peace. We have never wanted to be, and have never

been, neutral towards victims of oppression and

violence or the rules of the international community

and of international law. The only legitimate ally of a

neutral country is public international law. Neutrality

means refusing all forms of hegemony and

championing the peaceful coexistence of all countries,

which all enjoy equal rights. That is how Switzerland

understands neutrality and how it intends to exercise it

here.

As I said at the outset, Albert Einstein concluded

that the empathy that people would come to feel for

community institutions could become the means to

prevent war. But how is such empathy brought about?

It develops thanks to people who, in word and deed,

commit themselves in these institutions and thereby

generate optimism about justice and peace.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan is one of these

people. He has given the United Nations the face it has

today, thank to his commitment in all areas of United

Nations activity, sometimes in the most delicate of

situations. We are greatly indebted to him, and we ask

him to accept our very sincere thanks. Switzerland is

particularly grateful for his personal involvement in

support of our country’s joining the United Nations.

And yes, I confirm once again today, we are glad that

we took that step.