Kingdom of the Netherlands, 1996

I join my colleague,

Minister Dick Spring of Ireland, who spoke on behalf of

the European Union, in congratulating you, Sir, on your

election to the presidency of the General Assembly. As a

representative with a long and distinguished career in

United Nations affairs, you are especially qualified to guide

our work in the coming year.

As the present century draws to a close, we need to

ask ourselves what shape the United Nations is in. Is it

ready to face the world that lies ahead? Is it ready to meet

the needs of generations that are still to be born? The

realities confronting us today may still be the realities of

tomorrow, and they are formidable. We are witnessing

increasing poverty, a growing rift between rich and poor,

migration, population pressure, dwindling food stocks,

hazards to public health and the environment, drugs,

terrorism, internal conflicts and wholesale violations of

human rights: a daunting litany.

In the face of these realities, to argue in favour of

reform of this Organization would be stating the obvious.

Of course we need reform. Clearly, the United Nations,

over the years, has turned into an institutional jungle

where outsiders do not venture, an organization which for

that reason alone has lost much of its credibility and

which is badly in need of revitalization. We have to

reform. There is no alternative.

We need reforms to get back what we have lost; that

is, not power, but authority. Power is wielded on many

different levels, and by some States more than by others.

There is not very much the United Nations can do to

influence Member States to make use of their power, and

the power of the United Nations itself is rather limited.

But what the United Nations was given a lot of 51 years

ago, was authority: moral authority as well as legal

authority, the kind of authority that comes with speaking

on behalf of the world community, with voicing the

public conscience and transcending vested interests.

Indeed, if this Organization is to approach the future from

a position of strength and of confidence, and if we expect

the nations of the world to rally behind the flag of the

United Nations, its authority needs to be intact. In fact, it

needs to be growing.

Well, is it growing? Here a sobering note is due. At

this critical juncture in its history, the United Nations is

seeing its authority, the one commodity it can never have

too much of, compromised and weakened; this is also the

one commodity it cannot afford to have too little of. I

would wish to highlight some of the manifestations of

how the authority of the United Nations is on the wane

and offer some prospects for shoring it up again.

First, multilateralism, as such, is under pressure.

Many States no longer regard multilateral cooperation as

a separate goal of their foreign policy, but instead as one

of many policy instruments which they can choose to

apply or not to apply in accordance with their national

interests. Alterative sources of international leadership

have sprung up, and ad hoc coalitions are formed as the

need arises. The United Nations is regarded more and

more as a vehicle for safeguarding a nation’s particular

interests, even in the short term, rather than as the

preferred avenue for solving pressing world-wide

problems. This shopping-mall attitude towards the United

Nations is in stark contrast with the lofty principles the

founding fathers signed their names to.

16

Gradual loss of authority is also caused by

disappointment and frustration. The United Nations was

once established as an ideal form of international

cooperation. Particularly after the end of the cold war,

expectations rose as never before. For decades, the world

had been dominated and the United Nations paralysed by

two power blocs at loggerheads. The United Nations could

now finally begin to play the role originally laid out for it.

Unfortunately, this did not happen. Success stories

such as the United Nations involvement in Namibia, in El

Salvador and Mozambique were overshadowed by

disappointment over the outcome of Missions Impossible

such as Somalia, Rwanda and Bosnia. That the Member

States themselves had decided to send the United Nations

on those missions could not stem the erosion of authority

that came with them.

Frustration has mounted over effectiveness and

efficiency, two qualities that have eluded the United

Nations for a long time. It would be facile to blame the

lack of them on the Secretariat alone. The grinding manner

in which the intergovernmental machinery of this

Organization works is a major factor as well.

Criticism abounds. The track record of the United

Nations is in many ways impressive, to be sure, and even

more so when we look at the broad spectrum of the entire

United Nations system. Its achievements in the fields of

international law, human rights, development, the

population crisis, health care, the position of women, labour

conditions and disarmament are just random examples. In

reality, the list is long. Yet somehow United Nations-

bashing has become the craze these days and even a tool of

campaign rhetoric, or else it serves to distract attention

from internal problems. Nevertheless, the United Nations

moral authority is sapped by the real and the imagined and

by criticism justified or unjustified.

Then there is the financial situation. From the early

days, payment or non-payment of contributions has been

indicative of the United Nations approval rating. The level

of arrears we are now facing is, however, without

precedent. Sadly, it is in large part a reflection of declining

confidence and belief in the Organization’s potential. The

present financial turmoil is not primarily the cause of the

United Nations predicament, but rather a consequence of it,

a symptom. Of course, empty coffers will lead to less

output eventually. Less output would undermine authority

even further. Less authority in turn leads to fewer

payments, which again would exacerbate the financial

crisis. And so we may see the United Nations caught in a

downward spiral. The current payment habits of some

Member States amount to a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Worse, they betray the very principles on which the

United Nations was founded. The absence of full, prompt

and unconditional payments will further erode the United

Nations authority, the same authority those very States

helped to bestow on the Organization 50 years ago.

If there is one policy area in which the United

Nations has lost much of its authority and stands to loose

even more, it is peace and security. Take Burundi. Today,

the humanitarian and political situation there is alarming.

We are witnessing a creeping genocide. Terror prevails.

In the past few months alone, thousands of innocent men,

women and children have lost their lives. An explosion of

genocide is still a real threat. We cannot allow the

occurrence of another disaster such as that which took

place in Rwanda in 1994. In that year, we claimed that

we could hardly have seen it coming. In the case of

Burundi, there will be no such excuse. The writing is

clearly on the wall. If we fail once again and a second

genocide does take place, the United Nations will suffer

its most dramatic loss of authority ever.

What can we do to enhance the effectiveness of the

United Nations and hence to help it regain the authority

it needs in order to fulfil its mandate? How can we

reverse the downward spiral?

If the United Nations is to be effective, the various

instruments at the disposal of the international community

have to be used in an integrated manner. This holds true

particularly in the area of peace and security. In this area,

political, military, socio-economic, electoral and

humanitarian assistance, as well as reconstruction and

development, will have to be applied in harmony. Hence,

an integrated approach is the only way effectively to

prevent and combat conflicts. The United Nations needs

to be on the ground when it matters and where it matters.

This is the lesson that can be drawn from recent crises in

Africa — such as in Rwanda and Somalia — where the

international response to tragic violence became

ineffective through lack of coherence.

Preventive diplomacy, on the one hand, and post-

conflict peace-building, on the other, require increased

attention. More than ever, the United Nations should

focus on the prevention of conflicts and, when conflicts

do occur nevertheless, on defusing them at an early stage.

When I addressed this Assembly two years ago, I

drew attention to the United Nations capability, or rather

17

the lack of it, to respond adequately and in a timely manner

to acute situations of conflict. Some progress has been

made since then — progress in the form of modest

intermediate steps that would in the longer run lead to a

United Nations better equipped to maintain peace and

security. Today, there is a growing number of countries that

take part in the United Nations standby-arrangements

system and in the efforts of a group of nations to establish

a United Nations high-readiness brigade under this system.

The transparency of the Security Council’s decision-making

concerning peace-operations has improved. A rapidly

deployable headquarters will soon be added to the United

Nations peace-keeping capacity.

The future of conflict prevention is linked to the

United Nations power to combat yet another threat to its

authority: impunity. Does the world community actually

have sufficient means to bring to justice those guilty of war

crimes or crimes against humanity? As the cases of Burundi

and Liberia sadly illustrate, the prospect of impunity

provides an open invitation to commit crimes without fear

of retribution and stands in the way of future reconciliation

and reconstruction. The Tribunals on the former Yugoslavia

and on Rwanda represent the single most important

endeavour of the international community since Nuremberg

to adjudicate war crimes and crimes against humanity. We

cannot let it fail. Yet the Yugoslavia Tribunal will face a

serious problem so long as it cannot gain custody of more

of the many people it has indicted. Soon, the present

circumstances will erode its authority and, indeed, that of

the United Nations as a whole.

My country feels that the establishment of ad hoc

Tribunals once again underlines the need for the speedy

creation of a permanent international criminal court. Once

this Court has been established, it will become even more

imperative that those accused of such crimes actually be

brought to trial. The United Nations should enhance its

capacity to ensure the apprehension, extradition and trial of

those so accused.

If there is one area of the United Nations where moral

and legal authority play crucial roles, it is that of human

rights. Here, the record of the Organization is impressive,

but still more can and should be done and new challenges

lie in store.

Increased attention for human rights will increase the

moral authority of the United Nations. In this regard, its

authority should rest firmly on the Universal Declaration,

adopted by this Organization in 1948

“as a common standard of achievement for all

peoples and all nations” (resolution 217 A (III),

eighth preambular para.) —

in other words, a universal framework. Forty-five years

later, in Vienna, the universality of human rights was

once again expounded by the United Nations membership

as we know it today.

Yet, universality of human rights is under pressure.

Ever since Vienna, the discussion of what is called

cultural particularities seems to have chipped away at it.

Some Governments claim that their nation’s human-rights

performance cannot be held up to the same standards as

other nations’ due to differences in their historical,

cultural and religious backgrounds.

Let us make no mistake. There are differences in the

way people look at human rights in the various regions of

the world and the ongoing dialogue in the United Nations

would be ill-served if we chose to deny that there were

any differences at all. True, religious and ethical values,

cultural backgrounds and philosophical convictions should

be borne in mind at all times and, by themselves, are

even protected by the Universal Declaration. But their

link to human rights as such and to the concept of

universality is a very particular one. The international

community has expressed it nowhere more accurately than

in the Platform for Action adopted in Beijing one year

ago. As we agreed in Beijing, rather than detracting from

the ambit of universality, cultural differences should

contribute to the full enjoyment of human rights. The

States Members of this Organization agreed in Vienna

that, regardless of their political, economic and cultural

systems, it is their duty to promote and protect all human

rights and fundamental freedoms.

Increased emphasis calls for more financial

resources. A larger part of the United Nations budget

should be devoted to human rights. This, in turn, will

enhance the moral authority of the Organization in the

eyes of the multitudes who are still deprived of their

human rights today. Letting the programme wither away

will produce the opposite effect.

The General Assembly, being the only plenary organ

of the United Nations, is the most conspicuous.

Credibility and authority are very much tied to the

Assembly’s performance. Sadly, this body sees many of

18

its resolutions ignored. We should vigorously seek to infuse

new vitality into the Assembly’s proceedings and in the

relevance of its achievements.

Two weeks ago, the Assembly effectively lived up to

its responsibility by adopting the Comprehensive Nuclear-

Test-Ban Treaty by an overwhelming majority. The

adoption of the Treaty by this world body lends authority

to the new norm outlawing nuclear testing. My country

feels privileged that it was called upon to preside over the

negotiations. Adoption of the Treaty contributes to the

ultimate elimination of all nuclear weapons, a goal to which

my country remains fully committed. We aim for a

propitious entry into force. But even in the absence of entry

into force, the authority of the United Nations will make it

more difficult for any State to act against the Treaty.

Increased attention should be given to those activities

of the United Nations which are not of a strictly political

nature or concerned with security, namely, the socio-

economic aspects and the strengthening of those parts of

the United Nations system dealing with such matters as

poverty, population, food security, urbanization, equality of

women and the environment. These areas are crucial for the

future of the world and for the quality of life on this planet.

These are also areas where the Organization is especially

qualified to identify and debate the problems and where it

has set up an impressive array of operational activities. A

series of world conferences in recent years has helped to

upgrade the authority of the United Nations system. They

have set an agenda for the United Nations and the Member

States to follow during the coming decades. The World

Food Summit in November should do the same. The

Summit faces the awesome problem of a world that may

have to feed 10 billion people by the time the United

Nations is 100 years old.

There is, of course, a risk that expectations have been

raised too high once more and that disappointment will lead

once more to loss of authority. The United Nations and its

Member States have to make sure this does not happen.

The United Nations will play a major role in the fields of

advocacy, coordination and monitoring. Although the

United Nations itself contributes to implementation through

its field operations, the Member States bear the primary

responsibility for full implementation at the national level.

Together, they can succeed in ensuring that the world

community reaches the goals it has set for itself.

The authority of the United Nations is at stake. It will

not disappear in a clap of thunder. It will die with a

whimper. It stands to fade away gradually, without at any

time making alarm bells ring, and with it, the

Organization may well slide into the margins of the world

scene. The United Nations needs a new sense of direction

and purpose to become, once again, a beacon for mankind

as intended by the authors of the Charter. That requires a

sustained effort of all Members of this Organization.

There is little time left. Let us use it well.