Germany, 2002

First of all, I

should like to wish you every success, Mr. President, in

your responsible office. We are delighted that you, a

representative of our Czech neighbours, will preside

over the General Assembly this year. I also express my

sincere thanks to the outgoing President.

I endorse the statement of the Danish presidency

of the European Union.

One year ago, the world was shaken by the terror

of 11 September, which was disdainful of human life.

Civilian aircraft were transformed into guided missiles

whose deployment had been planned without any

regard for human life. The devastating consequences

destroyed families, shattered hopes and tore people

apart, regardless of their age, gender or religious

affiliation. Three days ago, we remembered the victims

in a moving ceremony here in New York. We have not

forgotten the images of 11 September; we have not

recovered from the shock. Our solidarity with the

United States is unbroken. We understand our

American friends. Just like them, we are not prepared

to live under the sword of Damocles that terrorism

represents.

The murderous attack on the people and the

Administration of the United States was also an attack

on all open societies. Countless States mourn their

countrymen among the thousands of World Trade

Center victims. The attack could have struck any open

society, but the terrorists consciously chose the United

States as a symbol of freedom and democracy.

We know that the new totalitarian challenge is

also directed at us all. Since 11 September 2001, the

community of nations has had to look at the question of

peace and security at the dawn of the twenty-first

century from a whole new angle. We will not be able to

negotiate with terrorists like Osama bin Laden. His aim

is to kill as many innocent people as possible, thus

creating the maximum degree of terror and fear. If the

terrorists succeed in acquiring weapons that are yet

more horrific, they will deploy them against us all

without hesitation. Therefore, we must work together

in the international coalition against terrorism to

overcome and destroy that international terrorist

network. The highly dangerous combination of

religious hatred, smouldering regional conflicts,

terrorist attacks and the danger of the deployment of

weapons of mass destruction must be prevented at any

price.

But, above all else, we must not forget: on the

one hand, terrorism must be fought resolutely by the

military and police; on the other, we need to resolve the

political and social conflicts quite rightly emphasized

in the Millennium Declaration, as they form the

breeding ground for the emergence of terrorism. Opting

for one approach and neglecting the other risks failure.

Our common goal is for the people in our

countries to be able to live in safety and freedom, and

without want. To achieve that, we need a system of

global cooperative security that, unlike the former

bipolarity of the cold war, includes all levels of global

policy relevant to security: the relations among great

17

Powers and their alliances as well as the potential

danger of regional crises and the threat posed by

asymmetrical conflicts. For one thing is clearer than

ever after 11 September: terrorism threatens world

peace just as much as civil war and regional conflicts.

Such a system, therefore, must not be toothless, but

rather must function in all three fields through reliable

verification systems and enforceable sanctions

mechanisms. I am convinced that developing such a

comprehensive system of global cooperative security

will be our central political task for the twenty-first

century.

This problem can be solved only through

multilateralism — that is, if nations work together.

Terrorism does not stop at national borders, and

shaping globalization is a task that Governments can

no longer tackle alone. Thus, the United Nations has a

major role to play in developing this security system; it

is the most important forum for establishing global

rules. No other organization has comparable legitimacy

and credibility. Decisively strengthening its ability to

act by continuing the reform path of the Secretary-

General is, therefore, a central focus of German foreign

policy.

The developments in Iraq fill us with grave

concern. Saddam Hussein's regime is a brutal

dictatorship. Under his leadership, Iraq has attacked its

neighbours Iran and Kuwait, has fired missiles at Israel

and has used poison gas against Iran and against its

own Kurdish population. The regime is horrendous for

the Iraqi people and a risk to the region. For that

reason, an effective containment policy and reliable

military control of the no-fly zones have been

implemented and a strict sanctions regime against Iraq

has been introduced since the Gulf War.

The regime in Baghdad must not own or produce

the means for mass destruction or the systems to

deliver them. Despite binding demands from the

Security Council, Saddam Hussein refuses to provide

credible and verifiable answers to the pressing

questions posed by the community of nations regarding

his weapons of mass destruction. Therefore, the United

Nations not only must maintain the pressure on the

Iraqi Government but also must intensify it.

We welcome the fact that President Bush, in his

most recent speech, turned towards the Security

Council. Even if it becomes very difficult, we must do

everything possible to find a diplomatic solution.

The Security Council and Member States must

make it unequivocally clear to Baghdad that the

unrestricted and unconditional re-admission of the

weapons inspectors is the only way to avert a great

tragedy for Iraq and the entire region. The Iraqi

Government must implement all relevant Security

Council resolutions in their entirety and without delay.

We do not, however, want any automatism

leading to the use of military force. The fight against

international terrorism remains perilous. We have not

yet managed to fully stabilize Afghanistan. Explosive

regional conflicts in Kashmir, the Middle East and the

Caucasus must be resolved or at least effectively

contained.

Certain central questions arise for us. Have all

economic and political means of pressure been truly

exhausted? What consequences would military

intervention have? What would it mean for regional

stability? What effect would it have on the Middle East

conflict? Are there new, concrete findings and facts?

Does the situation as assessed justify the taking of a

great risk, namely, taking responsibility for peace and

stability in the entire region for years or even decades

to come? Would such action gain the consent of the

Arab neighbours? What consequences would it have

for the continuation of the global coalition against

terrorism? In the face of these open questions, we feel

deep scepticism with regard to military action and thus

hold to our approach.

I would like to pose the further question of

whether a peaceful solution to the question of the

Middle East could not contribute considerably more to

the establishment of regional stability, to the successful

fight against terrorism and to the effective control and

disarmament of weapons of mass destruction. In that

way, would the regime in Baghdad not be isolated

much more effectively, thus generating political

pressure for change? Would this cooperative approach

to finding a new order for the region not be a more

promising way to bring democracy to the Middle

East — one that would be supported by the regional

Powers?

Nowhere is the connection between terrorism and

regional conflict more obvious than in the Near and

Middle East. The breakthrough to peace is therefore of

paramount importance in that region of the world. The

consensus among the international community of

nations on the Middle East question is now greater than

18

ever. We must all pull together to achieve the goal

envisaged by President Bush for 2005, that of two

States, Israel and a democratic Palestine, living as

neighbours within secure and recognized borders. The

European Union has devised a road map to achieve that

goal. An early conference on the Middle East could

help to build bridges and accelerate the process.

Together with our European Union partners, we are

ready to make a considerable contribution in that

respect.

A comprehensive peace in the Middle East must

also include Lebanon and Syria. Saudi Arabia's

significant initiative contains the assurance that the

Arab world would then also be ready to fully normalize

its relations with Israel.

Without a just and lasting solution to regional

conflicts, we will not be able to eliminate the

recruitment base for terrorists and thus successfully

counter the asymmetrical threat. Afghanistan is an

obvious example here. The Taliban system has

collapsed there and the Al Qaeda network has largely

been destroyed. We are still a long way from being able

to call the situation in the country stable and secure,

but progress can be noted. The implementation of the

provisions of the Bonn Conference agreement began

with the formation of a legitimate Interim

Administration. The process that was launched on the

Petersberg was taken to the next level with the

convening in June of the emergency loya jirga. For the

first time in years, the Afghan people have the chance

to lead a life of dignity based on self-determination.

The people of Afghanistan will only grow in

courage, however, when they see and feel that the

international community is also standing by its pledges

for the reconstruction of their country. The

commitments of the donor countries must materialize

in the form of concrete projects.

A system of global cooperative security must be

based on a comprehensive security concept. This must

embrace not only military security but also the

economy, human rights, democracy and culture.

“To achieve a safer world, we must create a better

world”: that is how President Bush summed up the

situation in his impressive speech to the German

Bundestag last May. Shaping cooperative global

security therefore also means shaping a new global

economic order. Account must be taken of the needs of

all — the developing and the developed world alike.

Resources must be more fairly distributed and poorer

countries must be able to participate in international

trade and take advantage of the opportunities of

globalization. This will necessitate free market access

for all, as well as the realization of economic and

political freedoms and a just and reliable legal

framework.

We must not close our eyes to the problems of

Africa, in particular. The food situation in the South of

the continent is a particular source of concern.

Countless people are going hungry and comprehensive

assistance is needed there. In Zimbabwe, however, the

former granary of Africa, a wholly irresponsible policy

is the reason for the difficult situation. In Zimbabwe,

hunger is caused principally not by failed harvests or

droughts but by self-destructive governance — a policy

of keeping a grip on power through the suffering of the

people. Such a policy relies upon the fact that the

international community's humanitarian conscience

and readiness to assume responsibility will reduce the

consequences. We must hold this policy up against the

benchmarks defined by Africa itself in the framework

of the New Partnership for Africa's Development.

Climate and energy policy is a key component of

the new global economic order. The Kyoto Protocol

can be seen as a milestone in global climate protection.

I am delighted that several countries have recently

announced plans to ratify the Protocol, and hope that

this will happen as soon as possible so that it can enter

into force. In the long term, a sensible energy policy —

and that means, above all, the promotion of renewable

energy sources and economical energy consumption —

is the best solution to the climate problem. Work must

therefore start today. Let us not forget that difficult

economic and ecological problems, with their social

and humanitarian repercussions, will increasingly

endanger stability and security too.

The protection of human rights must be one of the

pillars of a global security system. All efforts to secure

peace will fail if human rights are not protected and

made a reality. We need a binding global set of values

to prevent and overcome conflicts that emerge through

inequality, injustice and the denial of freedom. Here,

too, States are called upon to play a decisive and active

role. Moreover, we must be careful today to ensure that

basic human rights are not annulled under the pretext

of combating terrorism. No one has the right to an

“anti-terrorism bonus”.

19

Cooperative global security will have to measure

up to the binding legal framework in which it is

embedded. It is imperative for the globalization process

to be flanked by a growing set of international rules,

because international law and the rule of law constitute

the indispensable foundations for peaceful and ordered

coexistence. That is why the establishment of the

International Criminal Court is so important to us. Its

Statute entered into force on 1 July; Germany, along

with all the other members of the European Union, is

among the 79 States to have ratified it. The Assembly

of States Parties gave the green light this week to the

establishment of the Court. Next spring we will

celebrate its opening in The Hague. The International

Criminal Court will start work as soon as possible and

as efficiently as possible. But it must not be weakened

in its work from the outset.

My country is applying for a non-permanent seat

on the Security Council for the period 2003-2004.

Germany wants to play an active role in developing the

international security system within the United Nations

along the lines that I have outlined. I would like to ask

all members for their vote in the election on 27

September.