Russia, 1999

There is no doubt that the twentieth century, which is now

coming to a close, will leave a deep imprint on the history

of the world. This has been an epoch of global

transformation and social change, scientific discoveries and

achievements. The realization of the idea of a universal

world Organization, which has become the foundation

uniting the entire international community, has indeed been

one of the positive things about this century.

However, the twentieth century has witnessed the most

severe upheavals. Millions of people have perished in the

flames of world wars, revolutions and civil and ethnic

conflicts. On a few occasions, humanity teetered on the

brink of self-destruction, and the burden of outstanding

problems it has left for the new era is a heavy one. We

cannot resolve all these problems before the advent of the

third millennium, but we are indeed duty bound to lay

down the foundations for resolving them in the long-term

and to start moving in that direction.

The most important thing we should do is to define

the parameters of the world in which we are going to live.

This lies at the core of the initiative put forward by the

President of the Russian Federation, President Yeltsin, to

develop a world concept for the twenty-first century. As a

world Power and permanent member of the Security

Council, Russia is fully conscious of its special role in and

responsibility for world developments and stands for the

establishment of a multipolar world built on a solid

foundation of international law. Our country is pursuing in

practice a multifaceted foreign policy with a view to

establishing equitable and mutually beneficial bilateral and

multilateral relations with all the countries of the world and

to strengthening international security and stability.

The world concept for the twenty-first century

involves establishing a new culture which would aim to

form a common system of values and models of

behaviour. A world without wars and conflict, a world of

democracy and prosperity must be the highest priority for

all peoples and States. Every nation is entitled to its

rightful place among other nations and to security on an

equal footing in all its aspects, including in the political,

military, economic and social areas.

How and through what mechanisms can this be

achieved? Is there a body which can reflect the interests

of all States in a balanced manner? The answer is

obvious: it is the United Nations. From the outset, the

United Nations Charter put the Organization at the service

of all humankind. There is simply no other universal

mechanism to regulate international relations.

We are fully aware of the danger posed by the

threats and challenges facing our world today: the various

manifestations of militant nationalism, separatism,

terrorism and extremism, which know no borders. This is

a common challenge which is claiming countless victims

and wreaking destruction in various parts of the globe.

Aggressive separatism, which has become a growth

medium for various extremist forces, has become one of

the main sources of domestic conflict and regional

instability. No one is immune to it. The international

community and, above all, the United Nations, must

decisively clamp down on any manifestations of

separatism and strictly and consistently defend the

principles of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of

States and the inviolability of their borders. Outside

encouragement and support for separatist forces must be

totally eradicated.

Recently, separatism has been increasingly merging

with the monster of terrorism. We could even now, during

this session, take a number of specific steps to stimulate

practical international cooperation in combating terrorism.

We must finalize the draft international convention on the

suppression of acts of nuclear terrorism. I therefore

suggest that we should develop and adopt a declaration of

principles for cooperation between States on combating

terrorism more vigorously. It is the States’ bounden duty

to protect their citizens against terrorist attacks and to

prevent activities from taking place in their territory that

are aimed at organizing such acts against the citizens of

other countries. Russia therefore supports the initiative to

convene, under United Nations auspices, a conference or

a special session of the General Assembly next year on

13

combating terrorism. Such an event would give a powerful

political impetus to the struggle against terrorism at a global

level.

The capabilities of the United Nations should also be

used more efficiently in the fight against drug-related

threats and organized crime. Only through joint efforts that

are also in strict compliance with the rules of international

law can we defeat this evil.

The founding fathers of the United Nations made

provision for a law-based response to violations of peace

and security. The international community can take also

coercive measures, but this should be done in accordance

with the Charter and following a decision by the Security

Council. Unlawful means can only undermine rightful ends.

It is from this very perspective that we assess such

doctrines as that of humanitarian intervention. In general,

we should take an extremely careful approach to coercive

measures; what is more, we must not allow them to turn

into a repressive mechanism for influencing States and

peoples that are not to the liking of some.

Of course, evolution of the international situation

means that it is appropriate for existing rules of

international law to be developed and adapted to prevailing

conditions, but this should be done through collective

discussion and the adoption of appropriate decisions, not as

a fait accompli and not working from scratch: it should be

based on valid rules of international law. This is precisely

what Russia had in mind with its initiative to consider at

the Millennium Summit legal aspects of the use of force in

international relations in the era of globalization. We invite

all countries to a broad and open dialogue on this issue.

Much has been said in recent years about the reform

of the United Nations, which is only natural. Life is an

evolving process and, as times change, any system will

need to be updated. What objectives future reform should

pursue is another matter. In our view, reform means, first

and foremost, the adoption of a package of measures to

enhance the role of the United Nations in the world arena.

The Organization should be ready to respond in a timely

and appropriate way to the challenges that globalization

presents to mankind. We must give serious thought to how

to enhance the efficiency of the Security Council and how

to make that principal organ of the United Nations more

representative through the inclusion of influential new

members, including — and this is absolutely

indispensable — developing countries. This would help

maintain the overall balance in the system of international

relations, especially when the use of force, bypassing the

Security Council, continues. It is also beyond doubt that

preservation of the right of veto of permanent members

is indispensable for meaningful and efficient work in the

Council.

Generally speaking, the entire system of international

organizations needs sensible and responsible reform. At

the same time, the United Nations must remain a focal

point of the international community’s efforts to settle the

most burning problems of the day. The issue of

strengthening the authority of the United Nations after it

has been seriously and painfully tested by the Balkan and

Iraq crises is at the very top of the agenda at the current

session of the General Assembly. First of all, we must

continue strenuous efforts to restore the role of the

Security Council in world affairs.

We have managed through joint efforts to bring the

settlement of the Kosovo problem back within the legal

and political framework of the United Nations. Now we

need jointly to strive for strict and consistent

implementation of Security Council resolution 1244

(1999). We cannot afford to let the re-emerging political

process be undermined again, since that could become a

tragedy for all of Europe and could once again bring the

world to the brink of catastrophe. Equally urgent is the

issue of post-conflict rehabilitation in the Balkans. The

United Nations has an important role to play in meeting

these challenges as well.

We all should draw serious lessons from recent

crises. Non-legitimate methods of exerting power only

exacerbate problems and result in even greater deadlock.

Developments in the Middle East, where the peace

process has of late acquired a new positive impetus,

clearly exemplify the optimal alternative, that of

negotiated settlement.

Also on the agenda is the issue of improving

sanctions regimes, to which the international community

has frequently resorted over the past decade. Sanctions

are an extreme measure. They must be applied only when

other means of political influence have been exhausted

and when the Security Council has established the

existence of a threat to peace. The Council, for its part,

should be guided by clear criteria for the imposition and

the lifting of sanctions, and should not permit any free

interpretation of the decisions it has adopted, much less

permit the use of its decisions by anyone for selfish

political or economic ends. It is necessary to take very

serious account of the humanitarian implications of

sanctions both for the population of the States subject to

14

such sanctions and for third countries. The punishment of

entire nations, especially for an indefinite time and

indiscriminately, is inadmissible.

Peacemaking is one of the key areas of United Nations

activities. During the past 50 years the Organization has

acquired vast practical experience in this field. Having

successfully survived intense disputes and ideological

battles, peacemaking has proved its vital power and

importance for securing world and regional stability. The

evolution of the theory and practice of present-day

peacemaking confirms that there is no alternative to

maintaining the central role of the United Nations in this

sphere. The encouragement of peacemaking and the

strengthening of its legal basis in strict conformity with the

fundamental principles of the Charter should become an

important component of the concept of the world in the

twenty-first century. Building up and modernizing the anti-

crisis capability of the United Nations is a key prerequisite

for tackling these tasks successfully. The top priority here

is to begin truly using the system of stand-by agreements

with the United Nations.

Taking into account the limited resources of the world

Organization, and given the high demand for peacekeeping

operations, cooperation and division of labour between the

United Nations and regional structures has become a

priority. It is of fundamental importance that such

cooperation should be in strict accordance with Chapter

VIII of the Charter and should be fully consistent with the

prerogatives of the Security Council.

For Russia, the question of peacemaking cooperation

between the United Nations and regional organizations is

far from theoretical. For many years, Russian peacemakers

within the peacekeeping forces of the Commonwealth of

Independent States (CIS) have contributed to stabilizing the

situations in Abkhazia, Georgia, in Tajikistan, and in Trans-

Dniestria, Moldova. This testifies to the fact that the

settlement of conflicts within the framework of the CIS is

a priority for Russia. As before, we do not see any

reasonable alternative to political settlement of these crisis

situations, for which political will, patience and

commitment to one’s obligations are needed. We consider

it important for the United Nations to continue to play a

prominent role in finding solutions in Tajikistan and in

Abkhazia, Georgia.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in

Europe (OSCE), which is called upon to play a central role

in ensuring European security and stability, can and should

be the main United Nations peacemaking partner in Europe.

When this arrangement fails to work, not only do specific

European countries suffer, but providing for global and

continental security becomes complicated. In a broad

sense, OSCE peacemaking parameters, ranging from

conflict prevention to peacekeeping operations and post-

conflict rehabilitation, should be defined in a charter on

European security. Russia proposes too that the charter

should also reflect such principles important for the future

of Europeans as ensuring the security and the foundations

of the relations between European and Euro-Atlantic

organizations in this area. Then the charter will indeed

become a kind of political constitution for the Europe of

the twenty-first century. As the Istanbul summit of the

OSCE, which is expected to adopt the charter, is

approaching fast, we should press ahead with the

formulation of a substantive document.

The Conference on Interaction and Confidence-

building Measures in Asia may become an important

factor for stability on the Asian continent after the new

positive impetus it received at the recent Almaty Foreign

Affairs Ministers’ Meeting of the founding States. The

Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)

Regional Forum, a venue for active dialogue on a broad

spectrum of urgent international issues, is yet another

example of the focus of the Asian countries on the

formation of solid structures for security and cooperation

on the continent.

It is necessary to enhance the potential of African

regional and subregional organizations, which are acting

in close cooperation with the United Nations to curb and

cope with conflicts and humanitarian catastrophes

emerging in Africa. It is the duty of the international

community to render every possible support to the

African peoples.

While strengthening the legal and practical basis of

peacemaking activities, special attention should be paid to

what is commonly called the human rights dimension.

This relates not only to measures to minimize human

sufferings caused by armed conflicts, but also to efforts

aimed at preventing humanitarian crises.

In this connection, I cannot fail to mention the

unacceptable situation of countless thousands of people in

the centre of Europe who, due to arbitrary actions by

authorities, have found themselves deprived of their

citizenship and of the right to use their native language

and enjoy full rights in their State of residence. Civilized

integration, rather than latent assimilation — this is the

way out of the prevailing humanitarian situation in these

15

countries. We welcome the efforts of the Organization for

Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Council

of Europe and the Council of Baltic Sea States (CBSS)

aimed at eliminating violations of human rights and

freedoms of the non-indigenous population of Latvia and

Estonia. We hope that the United Nations High

Commissioner for Human Rights will make her contribution

to these efforts.

The risk of losing positive dynamics in the sphere of

disarmament as a result of attempts to rely on unilateral

power methods cannot but cause concern. If the political

and legal fabric regulating international relations continues

to disintegrate further, then trends to ensure national

security through an arms race will become even stronger.

Russia has consistently advocated the reduction and

limitation of nuclear arsenals and strict compliance with the

non-proliferation regime. For without this, ensuring

strategic stability would prove impossible.

We realize the importance of early ratification of the

START II Treaty and of the initiation of START III

negotiations, under which Russia would be prepared, on a

reciprocal basis, to agree to considerable further reduction

of strategic offensive armaments. Naturally, this process

will be feasible only if the existing agreements in this field,

first of all the ABM Treaty, are strictly observed. We

believe that the General Assembly should come out clearly

in support of the preservation and observance of the ABM

Treaty, which is a cornerstone of strategic stability, because

unilateral actions aimed at undermining the time-tested

regime established by this Treaty are fraught with

extremely dangerous consequences. A collective search for

political and diplomatic solutions is the alternative to

military responses to the problems of proliferation. This is

precisely the target of Russia’s initiative concerning the

global system of control over proliferation of missiles and

missile technologies.

Substantive discussions on threats to international

information security must also be continued within the

framework and under the auspices of the United Nations.

The time has come to reach, through joint efforts, a

common understanding of such threats and of measures to

reduce them.

The twentieth century has brought about economic

globalization. All economies have become open and closely

linked as a result of advances in science and technology.

All these factors have provided a powerful impetus to

social and economic development while creating their own

specific problems. The gap between the industrial and the

formerly colonial worlds has not only persisted but has

begun to widen. Development assistance should remain a

principal focus of future United Nations activities. Crises,

primarily financial ones, have assumed an international

character. We must draw the appropriate lessons and

modernize the architecture of the world financial system.

The United Nations and its specialized agencies should

play a role here.

The expansion of human economic activities has

brought about a globalization of both natural and

man-made disasters, and this has become a major

destabilizing global factor. The challenges related to the

prevention of such disasters and the elimination of their

consequences require that the most advanced technologies

be used for the benefit of the world community as a

whole. Why not consider, therefore, the establishment,

under the auspices of the United Nations, of a specialized

international emergency agency which would assume

relevant functions?

A widely known saying reads: "It is much easier to

win a war than a peace." The United Nations founders

won the war and laid the foundations for peace. It is our

duty to win this peace and to make it comprehensive and

irreversible.