Indonesia, 2008

May I first

congratulate Mr. D’Escoto Brockmann on his

assumption of the presidency of the General Assembly

at its sixty-third session. I am sure that he will lead our

deliberations with great wisdom and skill. I also wish

to congratulate his predecessor, Mr. Srgjan Kerim, for

ably guiding our sixty-second session.

It is timely and wise that we focus our

deliberations on the global food crisis and on the

democratization of the United Nations. While those

two issues appear to be vastly different, they have

more to do with each other than meets the eye. For

democracy means nothing if a part of humankind is

well fed while a larger part of it goes to bed hungry

every night. Human equality is a mirage in any country

where a part of the population struggles against obesity

while a larger part of it wonders where the next meal is

coming from.

I do not exaggerate. According to the Food and

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, food

prices will remain high for the next three to five years.

Rice stocks are falling to their lowest level since the

mid-1970s. Wheat stocks are sinking to their lowest

since 1948. Compounding the situation is the explosive

growth of the world population.

There is a huge unfilled demand for food. Food

riots have already erupted in parts of the Middle East,

Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. In 33 countries,

especially those with fragile States, there is a real and

present danger of social and political unrest because

people are hungry. We must vigorously address the

problem of global food insecurity. Otherwise, peace is

at risk in the developing world and in pockets of

poverty in the developed world. What the world needs

today is a new Green Revolution — a Green

Revolution that this time embraces the entire

developing world, especially Africa. Developing

countries must now put agriculture, especially food

production, back into the core of their development

agenda. For their part, the developed countries must

put agriculture and food production into the core of

their trade and aid programmes.

In that regard, the experience of Indonesia may

be instructive. It is not easy to feed a population of 230

million, the fourth largest in the world, but there are no

food riots in Indonesia. Last year, we had a surplus

production of rice. We used that surplus to bolster our

national stockpile. That has contributed to national

stability. This year, we expect another surplus of 5 per

cent, which brings production to 36 million tons. We

are going to export part of that as our contribution to

global food security.

We can do that because we have vastly improved

our rice productivity by providing our farmers with

microfinancing, improved seed varieties, cheap but

appropriate farm technology and affordable fertilizers.

We have thus developed some experience and expertise

that worked for us and can work in other developing

countries. We will continue to share those in the spirit

of South-South cooperation.

Food security is a cause in which everyone must

be involved. In that light, I firmly believe that this

General Assembly of ours is called upon to take a

number of concrete measures.

First, we can task the World Bank and the

relevant United Nations bodies to develop ways and

means of helping national Governments to spend more

on agriculture and on rural infrastructures to empower

small farmers.

Secondly, let us ensure that the appropriate

United Nations bodies link up with regional

mechanisms for food security, such as common food

reserves and early warning systems on regional food

08-53129 16

crises. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has

such an arrangement and so do other regional

arrangements. The United Nations can serve as the

hub, while the regional arrangements serve as the

spokes of a global wheel for food security.

Thirdly, let us establish the framework for a

global partnership on food security. We should ensure

that the World Trade Organization Doha development

negotiations reach a conclusion that supports increased

food production. Let us make use of the forthcoming

review of the Monterrey Consensus on financing for

development as an opportunity to devise ways to fund

the Green Revolution.

Let us be mindful, however, that agriculture does

not always lead to a food harvest. It is even possible

that an imprudent rush to produce biofuels will lead to

a severe reduction of the food supply. It is true that by

switching from fossil fuels to biofuels, we can cushion

the impact of the skyrocketing of the world price of oil

and thereby address the energy crisis. It is also true

that, by making that switch in fuels, we reduce

greenhouse gas emissions and thereby address the

challenge of climate change.

It would be unwise and reckless, however, to

address two crises by aggravating a third. We cannot

allay the energy crisis and the crisis of global warming

by deepening the global food crisis. That will only

worsen the plight of humankind, but we can carry out a

broad range of rational and coordinated policies and

initiatives that address those crises systemically. We

can address the energy crisis by developing all

alternative sources of available energy, which will help

mitigate global warming.

Moreover, in the next 16 months we can advance

the climate change agenda through the Bali Road Map,

all the way from Bali to Copenhagen through Poznan.

Indonesia is fully committed to that process. After

hosting the Bali conference that produced the Road

Map, we have joined the troika of host countries to

give the process a push among world leaders. By 2009,

we should produce an ambitious post-2012 global

climate regime that will contain global warming to

within two degrees Celsius in the next 20 years. But

even before the process is concluded in Copenhagen,

we in Indonesia are partnering with other countries to

enhance our topical forests and coral reefs in an effort

to reduce carbon emissions.

Even as we face the challenge of global warming

in the physical world, we must also deal with the

reality of a global chill in the politico-security field.

Symptoms of that chill are the military tensions that

have arisen in Eastern Europe.

There is also a new arms race. There is more

military spending now than there was at the end of the

cold war. Moreover, the conflicts and tensions of a year

ago are still with us. The dream of establishing a

Palestinian State by the end of this year has virtually

crumbled. The Iraqi and Afghan conflicts keep raging

on. North Korea, the subject of so much uncertainty

today, is backsliding from its commitment to dismantle

its nuclear weapons programme. The nuclear issue in

Iran remains unresolved.

In the face of those conflicts and tensions, the

Security Council should have been more decisive. That

the Council has failed to resolve them is a cause for

concern. Of the issues that the Council has failed to

resolve, two are of great concern to Indonesia, namely,

those recent cases that directly infringe on the principle

of the territorial integrity and political independence of

States, both involving external intervention that led to

the secession of a part or parts of a State. Both cases

involved major Powers.

It is of the greatest importance to Indonesia and, I

believe, to many developing countries that those recent

cases do not set an ill-advised and dangerous

precedent. Developing countries in the midst of nation-

building and State-building would be extremely

vulnerable to such precedents. The danger is that it

takes only one misstep to kill principles that have been

enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, such as

the principle of the sovereignty and territorial integrity

of States. If we kill those principles, we have killed the

ideal that holds the United Nations together.

The sovereignty of States must be preserved if

there is to be a democratic spirit in international

relations. That idea is essential because, without

democracy, a world organization like the United

Nations cannot be effective. Indeed, the failure of the

Security Council to come to grips with recent

challenges to global security is due largely to the fact

that it is not democratic enough.

To make the Council more democratic, the use of

the veto power of the permanent five must be

regulated. The misuse of the veto by any one

permanent member should no longer be allowed to

17 08-53129

paralyse the entire Council. Democratization of the

Council also means an equitable distribution of its

membership, not only in terms of geographical

representation, where we already have imbalances, but

also in terms of constituencies. Hence, the world’s

major civilizations should be proportionately

represented. The world’s community of 1.1 billion

Muslims must be represented on the Council if it is to

be truly democratic.

The need for democratization is also deeply felt

at the regional level. In the Association of Southeast

Asian Nations (ASEAN), I am pleased to say, we have

responded to that need. The cause of democracy is

gaining ground in the region as we transform ASEAN

from a loose association into a true community that is

firmly committed to the promotion of democracy and

human rights. All members, without exception,

strongly share that commitment.

It is in that spirit that Indonesia is launching the

Bali Democracy Forum this December. It will be not an

exclusive forum among democracies, but an inclusive

and open forum for the countries of Asia to share their

experiences and best practices in fostering democracy.

A true democracy is always homegrown; it is never

anything that is imposed from outside.

Meanwhile, we in Indonesia continue to tend to

our young democracy. We are seeing to it that

democracy takes root, not only by holding free

elections, but also by working hard to provide good

governance, to sustain a system of checks and balances

among the three branches of Government, and to

strengthen the roles of the mass media and civil society

in our national life. Thus we pursue the democratic

ideal: democracy at the level of the United Nations,

democracy at the regional level and democracy within

the nation.

At each of those levels, we hope to see nations

and people taking control of their lives and taking part

in the decision-making processes that shape their

future. The realization of that ideal will give full

meaning to the first three words of the Charter of the

United Nations. Indeed, “We the peoples” is what

democracy is all about.