Czech Republic, 2000

I would like to

start by congratulating you, Mr. President, on being

elected to preside over the fifty-fifth session of the

General Assembly, and wish you much success as you

carry out this important post. I would also like to take

this opportunity to thank your Namibian predecessor,

Minister Theo-Ben Gurirab, for the responsible work

and efforts he invested in United Nations activities

throughout the year and, in particular, for the role he

played in the preparation of the Millennium Summit.

Let me also take this opportunity to welcome the

admission of Tuvalu to the United Nations, another

expression of the openness and universal character of

this Organization.

The Millennium Summit brought interesting,

stimulating ideas embracing the huge potential posed

by the experience of the population of the whole

planet, formulated in the words of the highest

representatives of Member States. The Summit, the

most representative gathering ever, gave us a unique

opportunity to make a multifaceted review of

5

challenges the world is facing at the threshold of the

new millennium. The unexpectedly positive Summit

results are generally being appreciated and approved.

However, the implementation of those 32 United

Nations Millennium Declaration provisions, as well as

of an unprecedented Security Council resolution 1318

(2000), will not be easy, cheap or rapidly attainable.

The start of the 1990s was characterized by

buoyancy and great expectations in handling long-term

problems connected with the era of Communism in the

world, the onset of democracy and the stress on the

importance of observing universal human rights.

Bound up in this optimism were expectations that were

sometimes unrealistic.

Those expectations proved unfeasible in the

second half of the decade. The intricate nature of the

problems, difficulties in finding lasting solutions, and

internal and external crises quite clearly exposed the

bounds and the possibilities of the international

community, and the United Nations was no exception.

Disillusionment and disenchantment sometimes led to

the assertion and the defence of utilitarian and other

particular interests, which led to feelings of belonging

and solidarity being greatly undermined.

The inhabitants of the world, suffering from the

ravages of war, poverty, disasters and various forms of

oppression, expect actions of us today.

Can we match these expectations? I hope, and

firmly believe, that we can. There is no longer time for

further devaluation in the significance of the words

development, security, cooperation and solidarity. We

can no longer abuse the trust and patience of so many

people. If reaching a compromise and consensus

continues to be impossible for our diplomats, then it

will be all the more difficult to find it among States and

entities in individual countries.

The United Nations is expected to be able to

prove its ability to adapt quickly and carry out internal

reform, primarily of the Security Council. The Security

Council has to reflect the reality of today, not that of 50

years ago. Only a truly representative and effective

Security Council will be able to overcome its current

impotence, sometimes veiled in high-sounding but

empty phrases. If no remedy is found now, after the

Millennium Summit, the United Nations risks loss of

credibility, and it will greatly reduce its influence on

many processes which are now shaping the world. Here

I am thinking especially of those processes we include

under the term globalization.

Globalization does not stop at Forty-second

Street. It is rushing around the world with the force of

a typhoon, picking up speed as it is fed ever new

discoveries in information and communication

technology. But globalization is a much more

comprehensive phenomenon than the mere

standardization of traffic regulations, television

systems or bananas. Globalization entails development

and human security, as well as poverty and human fear.

But it also encompasses human thinking. If it does not

embrace solidarity and social justice, it will continue to

divide the world between winners and losers, as was

mentioned here from this rostrum recently by the

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer. The United

Nations can help with this issue. If it fails, it will be

guilty of loosing this crucial opportunity of making the

United Nations again into a highly respected

Organization able to tackle the most important global

problems. We have to find the political will and the

means to do so.

I would like to dwell on the topic of

peacekeeping a little. What I have said about huge

optimism and subsequent disenchantment is just as

applicable to this area. I am convinced that lasting

solutions to conflicts can only be found by peaceful

means and by negotiations between all parties

involved. Peacekeeping remains a key instrument

wielded by the international community, as it

establishes peace and peaceful coexistence among the

nations.

We welcome the priority given to peacekeeping

last week. The Millennium Summit meetings, together

with Mr. Brahimi's report, present a unique opportunity

to strengthen the United Nations capacity for

peacekeeping operations. Our pledges to enhance the

effectiveness of the United Nations in addressing

conflicts at all stages, from prevention to settlement to

post-conflict peace-building, should bind the

international community from the very moment it

approved them last week.

Far-reaching but realistic intentions announced

from this rostrum by Minister Vedrine on behalf of the

European Union earlier this week thus meet our

expectations of how to bring into life the Millennium

Summit recommendations, anchored in a firm belief in

the United Nations potential.

6

Any reform of the United Nations would not be

complete without reforming its crucial body: the

Security Council. Its role is irreplaceable. The

decision-making process should respond not only to a

change in the nature of today's crises, but also to the

necessary comprehensiveness of their solutions. An

increase in the effective capacity of the United Nations

Secretariat to act via the reorganization of its

Department of Peacekeeping Operations, closer

cooperation and coordination with regional structures

is an integral part of the process. We must look for

ways to react quickly, promptly and effectively.

The Czech Republic's approach to the reform of

the United Nations Security Council has been voiced

many times, and we prove it through our active

participation, notably in the open-ended working group

of the General Assembly and in the so-called Group of

10. Unfortunately, deliberations on Security Council

reform are still short of bringing fruit, being effectively

paralysed by the particular interests of several States.

The new millennium must soon see a new, enlarged and

more representative Security Council, preferably with

five additional permanent seats for both developed and

developing countries and a few more non-permanent

seats. We all have to take to heart the appeal of the

Millennium Declaration to further strengthen our

efforts in this regard.

Whether for programmes or for peacekeeping, in

the new millennium the United Nations needs a

sustainable and equitable system of financing. In this

regard, we are ready to cooperate actively in

discussions about making adjustments for the scale of

assessments for both the regular budget and the

peacekeeping budget. We express our appreciation to

the countries that have announced their preparedness to

assume additional financial responsibility by moving

voluntarily from group C to group B in the

peacekeeping operations scale.

The Czech Republic has voluntarily committed

itself to remain in group B, but that is not a solution to

the problem. A new scale is urgently needed. However,

negotiations about such a scale should not be trapped

in endless debates over past unpaid debts. All arrears

should be settled before the adoption of a new, and

hopefully fairer, scale of assessments.

The anniversary we mark this year of the tragic

massacre in Bosnian Srebrenica leads me to the issue

of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

The international community's objective is to achieve

peace, but lasting peace requires justice. In this respect,

the International Criminal Tribunals set up by the

Security Council are of prime importance. Besides

punishing offenders, those International Tribunals have

another extremely important function: to prove

personal guilt in criminal cases and, thus, to reject the

notion of collective guilt. The Tribunals are also

important as deterrents for those who may be thinking

of easing their way to power over the bodies of the

innocent. The Czech Republic therefore highly

appreciates the work done by the International

Criminal Tribunals to investigate the crimes committed

in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and supports the

establishment of a similar body to punish crimes

committed in Cambodia and Sierra Leone.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the

Former Yugoslavia increased its activities during the

last year, bringing to The Hague war criminals who had

greater responsibility for crimes committed. War

criminals have been prosecuted there, but their political

and military leaders remain at large. Recent

developments, however, have shown that leaders

themselves are not immune from international

jurisdiction. That trend is best illustrated by the efforts

of the international community to establish an

International Criminal Court, which most Member

States of the United Nations voted for at Rome in 1998.

The creation of a functioning International

Criminal Court, an institution that can play an

important role in projecting the principle of justice into

international relations and in building an increasingly

efficient system for the protection of human rights, is

one of the priorities of Czech foreign policy in the field

of international law. The Czech Republic is taking all

the necessary steps to ratify the Rome Statute as

quickly as possible.

Developments in international law are directly

bound up with the issue of human rights. I believe that

the commitment of the United Nations to the right of

every human being to a dignified life in safety should

become the focus of attention of all Member States of

the United Nations. The long and frequently painful

process of making progress in international human

rights, at the outset of which stood the terrible

experience of the Holocaust, has resulted in the

concept of universal human rights. The United Nations

is playing a key role in implementing that concept.

7

However, I think it would be wrong to use our

contemporary understanding of human rights when we

look back at events long past. In the last decade, the

international community demonstrated both its

determination not to accept abuses of human rights and

its willingness to defend the principle of the personal

safety of human beings, even to the detriment of the

well-established concept of national sovereignty.

Accepting limits to absolute sovereignty for the sake of

human rights is a matter of political principle and

morality that forms the basis of the values of the

United Nations. As I said here last year, we would

prefer, if any actions do infringe on the sovereignty of

Member States, that those actions be made legitimate

by a proper United Nations mandate. Human rights is

not a process that has been completed; it is still

progressing. However, we should not judge history by

the standards of today.

The protection of human rights is one of the

fundamental principles of Czech foreign policy.

Compared with other international compacts, those on

human rights enjoy a privileged status in Czech law. I

am pleased that the Czech Republic subscribed during

the Millennium Summit to the Optional Protocol to the

Convention on the Rights of the Child on the

involvement of children in armed conflict. Due efforts

to complete a protocol to the Convention against

Torture should be made. The Czech Republic also

made an active contribution to the preparation of the

Declaration on human rights defenders. I believe that

the decision made this year by the United Nations

Commission on Human Rights on the appointment of a

special rapporteur of the Secretary-General for human

rights will help give rise to the mechanism we need for

the implementation of the Declaration.

The last of the more general issues I would like to

draw attention to is the issue of sanctions. By that I do

not mean weapons embargoes. The Czech Republic

views them as instruments capable of reducing the

intensity of a conflict, supports them and observes

them without reservation. A problem, though, lies in

the efficiency and impact of blanket economic

sanctions. The last 10 years have provided ample proof

that in Cuba, Iraq and Yugoslavia, to take just three

examples, blanket economic sanctions, whether

declared unilaterally or multilaterally, have been

unable to achieve their objective.

Poorly nourished, isolated and sick people are

hardly likely to rise up against a governing elite that

will never allow the consequences of sanctions to

affect it or its faithful supporters. The result is that

changes in the conduct of the rulers are even less

likely.

Growing globalization and the economic and

information interconnection of the whole world

influence and change the conditions affecting the

efficiency of sanctions. The Czech Republic would

therefore prefer the use of smart sanctions targeted

against leading representatives of a State that refuses to

observe international law. In my opinion, such

sanctions could include a ban on the issue of entry

visas and the freezing of assets abroad. I think it would

be particularly useful and expedient if the examination

of the issue of peacekeeping also included the issue of

sanctions. The Czech Republic believes that a similar

approach namely, the appointment of a panel of

experts on this issue and subsequent discussion of a

report drawn up by that panel would be of immense

benefit in improving our collective efforts to achieve

peace and security by punishing perpetrators and not

victims.

Allow me to mention how the Czech Republic

views some of the most topical questions of

international policy.

We believe that boosting defence capacities to

protect against potential attack is an absolutely

legitimate step by any government. In the case of

National Missile Defence, however, we are talking of a

concept about which there are many questions. In our

opinion, security, as it is conceived of today, is

comprehensive and integral something that cannot

be built up to the detriment of other partners.

The Czech Republic believes that the way to a

safer world lies primarily in the continuation of the

disarmament process and the non-proliferation of

weapons of mass destruction, leading ultimately to a

world free of nuclear weapons. We support the view

that a more intense disarmament process will lead to

savings in the funds spent on arms. Employing such

savings for peaceful purposes would increase the

ability of the international community to tackle

pressing challenges such as the widening gap between

rich and poor countries, and to deal with ethnic and

religious conflicts, environmental preservation and so

on. I would like to assure the Assembly that efforts to

renew the momentum of the disarmament process will

8

continue to have the unequivocal support of the Czech

Republic.

The Czech Republic therefore welcomes

President Clinton's decision to leave the verdict on

National Missile Defence to the new President.

The Czech Republic is monitoring the situation in

the Middle East closely, as a traditional and active

supporter of the peace process established by Security

Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and the

principle of land for peace. The Czech Republic

resolutely opposes the exploitation of the developments

that took place after the Camp David summit to attack

the peace process as a whole as well as the positive

results achieved so far in negotiations between Israel

and the Palestine National Council (PNC). The Czech

Republic also emphatically rejects the misuse of this

situation to carry out acts of violence, which can only

result in unnecessary suffering and more victims. This

is not the way to achieve the much-desired peace and

stability in the Middle East. The Czech Republic

supports the establishment of an independent Palestine,

but it would prefer the emergence of such a state in an

atmosphere of general support enjoying the consensus

of all those involved. That is why we believe that the

PNC's postponement of this step by two months creates

a certain space for further deliberations. We wish them

to be fruitful and successful in their outcome, although

we are fully aware that even with good political will on

both sides, the issues are thorny and laden with

emotions and the burdens of history.

Last year from this rostrum I said that Kosovo

would be the benchmark for the success of

international institutions. I also said that Kosovo was

going through a period when peace must be

defended that is, a period in which it is vital to

achieve political stability and democratization,

economic stabilization and the gradual development of

the region.

We can be proud of what the Kosovo Force

(KFOR) and United Nations Interim Administration in

Kosovo (UNMIK) have done to assist the return of

ethnic Albanians who were chased out of their homes

by Serbian forces.

Regardless of these tremendous efforts, however,

we cannot be quite satisfied with the developments in

Kosovo. In fact, some of the objectives of the relevant

resolution have not been achieved. The positive

developments we have seen so far in Kosovo concern

mostly one ethnic group; the other still lives under a

security threat. There is still a very long way to go

before a multi-ethnic, multicultural and democratic

way of life prevails in the area.

In keeping with Security Council resolution 1244

(1999), the possibility, on a permanent basis, of the

return of non-Albanian ethnic groups and the building

of a multi-ethnic, pluralistic and democratic society

must remain our objectives, no matter how unattainable

this aim may seem today. To give up on this objective

would be tantamount to an admission of defeat on the

part of the international community.

Certain negative features of the developments in

Kosovo also hinder the chances for the democratization

of Serbia. They play into the hands of those forces in

the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Serbia which

build their election campaigns on xenophobia, on the

continuation of the political isolation of the Federal

Republic of Yugoslavia and Serbia, and on the

continuation of sanctions.

In our view, the time has come seriously to

consider taking further steps in Kosovo, including at

the level of the Security Council. The Council has

already taken the first steps in this direction, but it is

imperative for it to return to the Kosovo issue soon.

Obviously, many things will depend on the results of

the forthcoming elections in the Federal Republic of

Yugoslavia.

The world beyond the doors of this Hall is

changing rapidly. Our children will live and work in an

environment that we can only guess at. It is our

collective responsibility to do all we can to ensure that

it is a world of peace, prosperity, solidarity and

tolerance.