Egypt, 2000

It is a

great pleasure for me to convey through you, Sir, to the

President of the General Assembly our sincere

congratulations upon his election. I am confident that

he will lead the work of this Millennium Assembly

most ably.

I should also like to express our sincere

appreciation to his predecessor, Mr. Gurirab, the

Foreign Minister of Namibia, for his exceptional

leadership of the fifty-fourth session.

May I also express our high esteem for the

Secretary-General for his most efficient preparation for

both the Millennium Summit and Assembly. We

appreciate his efforts to maintain and promote the role

of the Organization and to strengthen its effectiveness

and credibility.

The convening of the Millennium Summit and

Assembly is an important milestone in the international

system and the future of the United Nations. The two

occasions constitute a unique forum to review the state

of the world and its developments and to take stock of

the performance of the Organization so as to enable it

to occupy its central place in the international system

and hence lead the movement of change on the basis of

a general consensus and a meeting of all minds.

The goal of the establishment of a stable and

effective system of collective security through dialogue

and cooperation in the context of international

democracy has been one of the most important

objectives of the United Nations and those of the

international community. It is thus necessary to allow

the United Nations to achieve its objectives by

adapting its work to the current international variables

that must take the United Nations seriously. This might

very well be the thrust of the Secretary-General's

report to the Millennium Assembly.

In our opinion, the first step down this road is to

agree on a broad modern definition of collective

security in the coming decades. Security in its most

simple and realistic definition is based on three basic

and organically linked rights, namely, the right to

safety and stability and avoidance of the scourges of

war, mass destruction and armed conflicts, the right to

development and to a decent life free from poverty,

destitution and want and the right to live in a healthy

environment free from pollution, disease and negative

social phenomena. A cursory glance at the state of

those three rights would reveal that during the last

decade of international transformations they have

become exposed to new threats, while existing ones

have been exacerbated in a manner threatening grave

repercussions.

After the end of the cold war and the end of

tensions between the two super-Powers, international

peace became exposed to a new kind of threat, the

threat resulting from the disintegration of some States,

the collapse of their national structures and the

victimization of their people due to internal strife and

negative foreign intervention.

Globalization, world market, the information and

communications revolution and the emergence of new

kinds of economic activities all hold the promise of

unlimited progress, yet they carry with them the

dangers of widening the development gap between the

developed and developing world.

As for a healthy environment, whole continents

are suffering from epidemics, environmental

degradation, backwardness and the spread of ethnic

wars as well as the increased tragedies of refugees.

Africa is the region most affected by that horrible

triangle armed civil conflicts, poverty and economic

backwardness, degraded environment, natural disasters,

deadly diseases and epidemics. There is a belt of

tension encircling the continent and economic

difficulties and problems continue. Africa has thus

reached an untenable situation that requires immediate

and firm attention in order to help it extricate itself

from that quagmire.

I must reiterate in this regard that the African

States, through the Organization of African Unity

(OAU) and other groupings, are discharging their

responsibilities as best they can. They are taking

necessary measures and steps to place themselves on

the right path towards a better future. Special mention

should be made here of the OAU Mechanism for

conflict resolution, the efforts to strengthen

peacekeeping capabilities through subregional

groupings and the establishment of common markets

and economic groupings, such as the Common Market

for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the

Southern African Development Community (SADC)

and the Economic Community of West African States

(ECOWAS). Our continent is moving towards a form

of unity on the basis of the resolutions of the recent

LomÈ summit, which will be followed up at the

upcoming Sirte summit.

An agreement was recently concluded in Arusha

on the settlement of the Burundi conflict. A new

President of Somalia, Mr. Abdi Kassim Salad Hassan,

was elected after the constructive efforts of the

Government of sisterly Djibouti. There are efforts

under way in the Great Lakes region. All these

examples prove Africa's ability to deal on its own with

some of its problems. Yet it cannot be left alone

without the support of the international community,

particularly in the field of peacekeeping and peace-

making. The United Nations must play its full role in

that field.

Meeting the new challenges faced by the

international community and achieving the goal of

establishing an effective system of collective security

for future generations require, as I mentioned earlier,

improving the United Nations performance and

adapting it to the demands of these goals. In his

message to the Millennium Summit last week,

President Mubarak stressed the need to pay special

attention to the maintenance of international peace and

to support efforts for development, poverty elimination

and narrowing the widening gap between the rich and

the poor in our world.

Allow me to address these priorities and to stress

their linkage to a number of important subjects and

necessary steps. First, there is an urgent need to

strengthen and reform the United Nations in general.

There is a similar need to reform and restructure the

Security Council and to enhance its credibility. We are

determined to continue our contribution to the current

dialogue on a comprehensive and balanced package

deal on the expansion of both the permanent and non-

permanent membership of the Council. This would

enable the Council to be more equitably representative.

It would also reflect the overwhelming majority of the

developing countries, members of the Organization.

We are fully committed to the positions of the

Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization of

African Unity (OAU) in this regard. We reiterate the

need for expansion of the Council to be accompanied

by reform of its working methods and a revision of the

use of the veto power, with a view to rationalizing it.

I wish to stress here what I mentioned earlier

that Egypt has a long history of regional and

international contributions. It plays a significant role

on the African, Arab and Islamic levels, as well as in

the Middle East and among the developing countries

19

and emerging economies. In addition, Egypt has made

many contributions to support United Nations activities

and achieve its objectives. It has also contributed to the

Organization's peacekeeping operations. All this makes

Egypt eminently eligible and qualified to shoulder the

responsibilities of permanent membership in an

expanded Security Council, within the framework

suggested by the African heads of State and

Government since 1997.

Second, there is an equally urgent need to restore

the role of the General Assembly in the maintenance of

peace, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter,

especially when the Security Council fails to discharge

its primary responsibility in this regard. This would

ensure that any collective actions or measures enjoyed

the international legitimacy represented by the

Organization. There is a need to further develop United

Nations peacekeeping operations and provide them

with a rapid deployment capability. There is also a

need for concerted efforts to increase the capacity of

States, particularly African States, to participate in

United Nations peacekeeping operations, or those of

regional and subregional organizations which are

mandated and financed by the United Nations. Egypt

will address these important issues when the General

Assembly considers the Brahimi report (A/55/305).

These considerations must be kept in mind when

we address how to develop the conceptual and practical

framework of peacemaking and peacekeeping. New

ideas, such as humanitarian intervention and the

preventive deployment of forces, have, since the last

session, begun to gain currency. We have called, and

continue to call, for discussion of those ideas with the

highest degree of frankness and transparency. Those

ideas impinge on the concept of sovereignty. Some

tend to belittle the value and importance of sovereignty

when the matter pertains to the sovereignty of others.

Those very same States tend also to consider it

sacrosanct and inviolable when the matter pertains to

their own sovereignty.

Third, the sanctions regime, as one of the

component parts of the measures taken within the

current system of collective security, needs a thorough

review. Sanctions cannot last indefinitely. They must

not cause human suffering to tens of millions of people

or result in massive and destructive harm to the

economic infrastructures or social fabric of States.

Sanctions must not lead to the creation of angry

generations who will continue to be embittered by their

suffering, even after these actions are lifted.

Fourth, there is a need to recognize the

importance of continued, serious consideration of the

question of disarmament, particularly nuclear

disarmament, which is the most destructive and poses

the greatest threats. The priority of nuclear

disarmament must not be overshadowed by the

increased attention paid to small arms, light weapons

and anti-personnel landmines. This is not to say that we

do not recognize the importance of these subjects or

the need to deal with them comprehensively and

appropriately. In this regard, we reaffirm Egypt's

initiatives for the elimination of weapons of mass

destruction, including nuclear weapons. We welcome

the results of the sixth Review Conference of the

Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of

Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in the field of nuclear

disarmament in general. We welcome in particular the

Conference's recognition of the specificity of the

situation in the Middle East and its reaffirmation of the

continued validity and importance of implementing the

resolutions on the Middle East adopted by the NPT

Review and Extension Conference in 1995.

Fifth, with the accelerated pace of globalization

and trade liberalization, the gap between the rich and

poor countries is widening in a manner that threatens

grave dangers. The comparison between patterns of

production and consumption and standards of living in

the developing and developed worlds is both stark and

shocking. Narrowing this gap and correcting this

imbalance in the international structure is not merely a

moral obligation, but is vital. An international

partnership must be established to achieve this

objective.

The call for social justice within States must be

accompanied by a similar call for justice in sharing the

benefits of progress, globalization, the information

technology and communications revolution and trade

liberalization among members of the international

family in the North and the South alike. We truly need

to give globalization a human face and an equilibrium

that will enable it to contribute to bridging that gap.

United Nations literature is replete with studies

on the problems of and obstacles to development and

the elimination of poverty. This, however, is no longer

sufficient. In several international conferences we have

adopted plans and programmes of action containing

20

clear commitments to mobilize the financial resources

necessary to implement them. Yet implementation has

not been at the level of the commitments contained in

those documents.

A few months ago we reviewed progress in the

implementation of the recommendations of the

international conferences on population, women and

social development. But what were the results of these

reviews? What are the ways needed to face the

obstacles that have impeded progress and made the

implementation of the recommendations of those

conferences fall below our expectations?

We have adopted the objective of halving poverty

in the world by 2015. What is the course charted for

achieving this objective and what are the commitments

made to mobilize the financial resources necessary for

its achievement? What about the numerous

programmes and initiatives for African development?

Have their achievements been commensurate with the

magnitude of the problems facing the continent? Is it

not time for a clear commitment, going beyond the

current initiatives, to lift the burden of foreign

indebtedness that is crushing Africa? We need a

genuine partnership between the North and the South.

We need real and effective support by the donors and

the international financial institutions to implement

development efforts and attempts to eliminate poverty,

not only as a moral value taking the form of freedom

from want, as mentioned in the Secretary-General's

report (A/54/2000), but also as a vital objective

connected to the establishment of peace and stability.

Sixth, in the same vein, an attempt to place

responsibility for achieving development and

eliminating poverty solely or even primarily on the

shoulders of developing countries is both dangerous

and short-sighted, because it would undermine the

concept of international cooperation, which is one of

the cornerstones of the world system, and ignore the

repercussions of the widening gap between the rich and

the poor in our world. That gap is now 16 times as

large as it was in the 1960s.

An attempt is also being made to link

international cooperation and the North's support for

the South with concepts and values that in themselves

we support but whose new conditionality we reject. I

am referring here to democracy, good governance and

human rights. Questions of democratic transformation,

improved governance and administration, increased

transparency and accountability, and promoting respect

for human rights cannot be dealt with in isolation from

the questions of development, poverty and subsistence,

for they too are vitally important subjects. Should not

the call for democracy within States be matched by a

similar call for democracy among States and

international organizations? Should not the call for the

rule of law be accompanied by a similar call for respect

for international law, the sovereignty of States and the

rights of peoples? Can good governance and

administration be achieved in the absence of a parallel

effort for the development of human resources and the

capacity-building? Is it sufficient just to pay attention

to the civil and political rights of people while ignoring

their economic, social and cultural rights, foremost

among which is the inalienable right to development?

Seventh, the success of the development efforts

of the peoples of the world at this stage depends on

their efficient use of the tools of the new age,

particularly information technology. The technological

revolution has led to a widening of the gap between

those who have those tools and those who do not.

Nevertheless, information and knowledge technologies

are of such a nature as to enable them to contribute to

narrowing the gaps between the countries of the world.

The attention Egypt pays to these global

questions does not take away from the attention it gives

to regional issues that are extremely sensitive. Among

those questions, I would like to concentrate on the

issues of peace in the Middle East and the situation in

the Sudan, which are of the utmost importance to Egypt

and, without a doubt, to many in the Arab world,

Africa and the international community at large.

The Arab-Israeli conflict entails vital issues

related to the lives of peoples and to the future of

nations. Those include recognition of legitimate rights,

sovereignty over national soil, the inalienable right to

self-determination, the inadmissibility of the

acquisition of territory by force and the right of all

States to live peacefully within secure borders. All

these issues are directly linked to international and

regional peace and security.

The logic that must govern the peace process in

the Middle East should not stem from the assumption

that one is dealing with a permanent foe or opponent. It

must aim instead at turning past animosity into good-

neighbourliness and normal relations among the

peoples and the States of the region. What is at stake is

21

the security of the region and the security and

prosperity of future generations, and not short-term

political considerations. We face a clear choice

between either settling the issue in terms of real

estate in which one party demands metres, miles or

tens of miles thereby keeping alive the seeds of

tension and conflict, or by seeking through clear

political will to establish a just and lasting peace by

which the rights of all parties are secured and their

obligations are well defined through necessary

international guarantees. The latter option must be

based on international law, something that applies to

the Israeli/Palestinian track and to the Syrian/Israeli

track alike.

There is no doubt that the overwhelming majority

of States, communities and individuals support the

achievement of a just solution that does not favour one

party at the expense of the other. Most people would

opt for peace and justice and would prefer to look

ahead to the future in a positive way. The

overwhelming majority of the Palestinian and Israeli

people also want peace, a peace that is clear and clean

and not partial, distorted or absent something that,

at the end of the day, would be more of a headache than

a concrete peace. In that regard, I would like to say that

President Arafat and the Palestinian people face one of

two choices: either no solution or a bad solution. This

is a policy that will never garner support or

appreciation or ever lead to a viable solution.

As to the so-called flexibility, which has been at

the forefront of commentary lately, it should mean only

flexibility within the realm of international law and not

outside it. If we are talking about flexibility on

Jerusalem, that cannot in any way mean accepting

Israeli sovereignty over Al-Haram al-Sharif. It could

instead mean arrangements for the new Palestinian

State that would give it sovereignty over all its

territories while respecting the holy sites and

guaranteeing their protection and free access to them.

That would assume that, as a full-fledged member of

the international community, the sovereign Palestinian

State would be in charge.

The peace process is but a few miles away from

the finish line. We hope it will not take many long

years for Syria and Palestine to travel those few miles.

We also hope that the sponsors of the peace process

will be wise and able enough to propose honest

solutions to the parties in order to enable the honest

broker to lead the negotiations to a certain conclusion.

At this juncture, I would like to salute President

Clinton's enthusiasm and tireless efforts in steering the

peace process during an eleventh-hour attempt to find a

lasting solution during his Administration.

In order to achieve that objective it is essential to

uphold one guiding principle that cannot be

circumvented, namely, full withdrawal from all Syrian

and Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem, in

return for Israel's right to be integrated into the Middle

East as a partner with equal rights to security, peace

and cooperation. That is the essence of resolutions 242

(1967) and 338 (1973) and of the principle of land for

peace. Lasting peace and security can be established

only on that basis. If Arab territories, or any part of

those territories, remain under occupation or if any

question is settled in a manner inconsistent with the

principles of fairness and justice, it would create a time

bomb that could explode at any time. The desired peace

and security cannot be fully realized without the

establishment of a full-fledged, independent Palestinian

State.

The stability of peace and security in the Middle

East is tied to the need for serious consideration of the

question of armaments in the Middle East. Permanently

defusing tensions calls for dealing with the problem of

the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and

their delivery vehicles. This will also contribute

directly to the maintenance of international peace and

security. Peace and stability in the Middle East will not

be complete or lasting without the establishment of a

comprehensive regional security system that ensures

control over the quantity and quality of armaments in

the region and establishes a zone free from weapons of

mass destruction, in accordance with President

Mubarak's initiative, which enjoys global

understanding and support.

The Sudan is a State of unique character in

regional relations. It is at once a major component of

the Arab world and an integral part of the African

community. Its stability is also vital for the security

and stability of the Horn of Africa, the Red Sea and the

Nile basin. The importance Egypt attaches to this

brotherly country therefore stems not only from the

fact that it is Egypt's strategic twin, but because it is a

central factor to the security of a vast and vitally

important region.

Many efforts have been made, and many

initiatives have been presented, to achieve peace in the

22

Sudan, most of which were made in good faith.

However, they all dealt with the situation from a single

perspective, that of the southern Sudan against the

north.

Consequently, Egypt and Libya saw the need to

complement those efforts with a comprehensive

programme aimed at achieving broad national

reconciliation encompassing all the factions and all the

parties. The objective is to create a new Sudan, where

stability and harmony prevail within a basic framework

of unity and territorial integrity, equality among its

citizens, and consensual self-determination by all its

citizens and component parts. This will bring comfort

and reassurance to the Sudanese people and to all its

neighbours.

The Egyptian-Libyan initiative has gone a long

way towards bringing the parties closer. The

coordination of this initiative with that of the Inter-

Government Authority on Development (IGAD) is

possible. Efforts will continue to ensure the convening

of a conference on national reconciliation to achieve

peace in that important country.

The achievement of peace in the Middle East, the

Horn of Africa and in the continents of Asia and Africa

as a whole is a necessary condition for world stability.

The situation in Afghanistan, Kashmir, the Caucasus,

Sri Lanka, the continued tragedy of Iraq, and the

conflicts in Africa and their attendant social and

economic problems all give rise to serious concerns

about the new world order about its credibility and

effectiveness. We must act quickly in order to resolve

these problems in a context of international legitimacy

and within the framework of the United Nations.

Finally, amid all that, the United Nations stands

as an expression of the will of the international

community. The purposes and principles of its Charter

are a guiding beacon. Let this Millennium Summit and

Assembly be a new turning point that will put us on the

right path towards a world of greater security, justice

and stability, a world that builds upon the achievements

of the twentieth century and closes the chapter on its

grave errors.