Russia, 2003

Once again,

I am delighted to have this opportunity to address this

representative audience. At the outset, however, I

should like to wish the fifty-eighth session of the

General Assembly fruitful work — work to

successfully harmonize the actions of peoples and

States; work on behalf of peace, security and progress.

Those purposes were set out in the Charter of the

United Nations by our predecessors, but, as we can see,

they are still relevant. Even now, they provide a solid,

long-term foundation for the activities of the United

Nations. And, although the structure and the functions

of the Organization took shape in an international

environment fundamentally different from ours, time

has only reaffirmed their universal importance. Today,

the instruments of the United Nations are not merely in

demand; they are, as life itself has shown, simply

irreplaceable in crucial situations.

That has been made abundantly clear by the

following important fact: despite sharp differences

concerning how to resolve the Iraq crisis, the situation

is ultimately returning to the legal sphere of the United

Nations. Russia’s position in that regard is consistent

and clear. Only direct United Nations participation in

Iraq’s reconstruction will enable Iraq’s people to decide

their future. And only with active and — I want to stress

this — practical United Nations assistance in Iraq’s

economic and civil transformation will Iraq assume a

truly new and worthy place in the world community.

It is clear that, in recent years, the United Nations

has increasingly been obliged to carry out

fundamentally new tasks and to tackle threats that are

different from, but just as serious as, those it faced

before. Three years ago, at the 2000 Millennium

Summit, I said here that the common enemy of the

United Nations was terrorism. Was Russia’s voice

heeded then? Did everyone understand the seriousness

of the threat, and were our joint actions adequate? The

events of 11 September proved that, unfortunately, they

were not.

To us in Russia, however, the style of the

murderers who committed terrorist acts in Moscow, in

Chechnya and elsewhere in Russia and in New York, as

well as against United Nations staff in Baghdad, has

long been painfully familiar. That style is identical

everywhere, and the fact that the inciters of terror are

easily recognizable — with regard to both the events of

August this year and the terrorist attacks of previous

years — only attests to the global nature of this threat.

It is true that now we are listening to one another.

And we understand that the United Nations must

become — and is indeed becoming — the basis for a

global anti-terrorist coalition. Here, I wish to take

particular note of the Security Council’s Counter-

Terrorism Committee. Terrorism is a challenge to the

planet’s security and to its economic future. Therefore,

the Committee must become a real and practical

instrument for effectively fighting the terrorist threat.

I should like to focus in particular on the

humanitarian activities of the United Nations. That area

consumes the lion’s share of the Organization’s energy,

time and resources, but it does not always appear in the

headlines, nor is it always familiar to the citizens of the

more prosperous States. But it is precisely that area of

United Nations work that is so fundamental and

irreplaceable. The United Nations is helping millions

of destitute people throughout the world — victims of

hunger, of disease and of conflict — to survive and not

to lose hope. That work is exceptionally important; it

lends indisputable political and moral authority to the

entire Organization. And it is here that the

interrelationship between the moral and political content

of international activities is particularly evident.

I should like to take this opportunity to thank all

staff members of the United Nations, all non-

governmental organizations and, of course, the many

volunteers who are participating in this noble work.

Because we understand how valuable the

Organization’s humanitarian mission is, Russia views it

as a major political endeavour. We are already

contributing to this work, and we are committed to

increasing our contribution. Over the past three years,

Russia has forgiven a total of $27.2 billion in debt of

5

developing countries, and we are currently granting

significant tariff preferences to such countries.

For the first time in many years, as our country

has grown, it has become a donor to the United Nations

World Food Programme. The horrors of starvation are

well known to us from our own history. As a result of

the civil war of the past century and the forced

collectivization of the 1920s and 1930s, millions of

people died of starvation in the Volga region, in Northern

Caucasus and in other parts of our country. Hunger

became a national tragedy for the peoples of Ukraine as

well. We consider it our moral and ethical duty to

expand our participation in food aid programmes.

Russia intends to work actively to resolve acute

environmental problems. A milestone will be achieved

in that area by the World Conference on Climate

Change, scheduled to convene next week in Russia’s

capital, Moscow. We also believe it is essential that a

global system be established to monitor and neutralize

dangerous infectious diseases, and we consider the

work done by the Global Fund to be a real

demonstration of international solidarity in fighting the

spread of AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.

Of course, the United Nations, like any system

with a complex structure, needs to be improved. But

the Organization’s past and current problems have never

been problems of only the Organization per se; they have

always been created by — and they continue to reflect —

contradictions in the very system of international

relations, particularly the system of international law.

After all, politicians, including those represented in the

United Nations, including the Security Council, do not

always have at their disposal adequate and effectively

functioning legal instruments — instruments that would

enable them to deal effectively with the international and

regional crises that arise. International law must, of

course, be fluid and living, reflecting the realities of

the contemporary world. I believe that many of the

processes that are under way within the United Nations

also attest to the constant changes that are taking place

in the world. Such changes dictate a logic of evolution

in the United Nations.

Members of the Organization know very well

that, as a rule, all of the achievements of the United

Nations are shared successes, and that our failures are

shared miscalculations. Such knowledge, however,

brings with it great responsibility. First and foremost,

we must be extremely careful about interfering with the

fabric — the mechanisms — of the work of the United

Nations. Clearly, behind any such decision there should

be more than general political rhetoric — mere words

about so-called fair policies.

I am convinced that any attempt to modernize

United Nations instruments must be preceded by

serious analysis and careful calculation. Such an

approach should be taken, first and foremost, with

regard to the principal international legal instruments.

After all, guaranteeing that they remain effective is the

only way to avoid a legal vacuum. As long as the

norms of international law remain unchanged and

operative, we must observe them. We must ensure

continuity of security guarantees for States and for the

world as a whole.

We must analyse United Nations structures and

mechanisms and try to understand which have proved

effective and productive, as well as which have done

the job they were intended to do and which now remain

unused. We should remember that much of the

potential of the United Nations has still to be tapped.

There are many resources that we are only now

learning how to use.

I would like in particular to comment on the need

to enhance the effectiveness of the Security Council. I

am convinced that, given the deep-rooted nature of the

current differences of opinion and the importance of

ensuring that the Council remain effective, we must

work gradually and very cautiously.

We believe that at this stage we should be guided

above all by the broadest possible agreement on all

aspects of the expansion of the Council, as well as by

the need to ensure that it maintains its current high

status and the legitimacy born of agreed actions. After

all, the Security Council, as the Charter makes clear,

acts on behalf of the United Nations. The Security

Council is endowed with a specific mechanism for

harmonizing political will and for protecting the

national interests of a great variety of States, and,

through this, the interests of the entire international

community.

It is true that we often hear that the developed

countries bear special responsibility for the destiny of

the world. Such leadership, however, entails major

obligations, primarily to ensure that the interests of the

international community as a whole are reflected.

Being a world Power means working together with the

world community. Being a truly strong, influential

6

State means seeing and helping to resolve the problems

of small and economically weak countries.

In that connection, I believe that it would be

useful to intensify the work that is being carried out by

the United Nations in cooperation with the regional

international structures. That will lead directly towards

increased economic prosperity in various parts of the

world, and thus contribute to the containment of

potential threats and the maintenance of a common

global strategic balance.

We welcome the emergence of regional centres

for coordination and cooperation in a united Europe.

We favour the strengthening of integration processes in

the Asia-Pacific region. And of course, we support the

work of the Commonwealth of Independent States

(CIS), as well as that of the Collective Security Treaty

Organization and the Shanghai Cooperation

Organization, whose authority and effectiveness are

continuing to grow.

Russia is not the only country that is interested in

regional integration. Our CIS partners have also

demonstrated their practical commitment to that same

goal. This was reaffirmed during the recent CIS

summit. We consider the development of our

interaction with the European Union, which is

multifaceted in nature, to be important. Likewise, with

regard to security issues, we attach importance to the

search new forms of cooperation with the North

Atlantic Treaty Organization.

We should counter current threats to civilization

only by means of collective responses whose legitimacy

is not in doubt. In this respect, we need a systemic vision

that combines political with, when necessary, military

measures. Such measures should be agreed upon in

advance, and be sensible and appropriate.

The need to improve the peacekeeping

mechanisms of the United Nations remains on the

Organization’s agenda. The United Nations must be

able to deploy peacekeeping — and, where necessary,

peace-enforcement — operations more quickly and

efficiently, in strict compliance with the United Nations

Charter. I should like to note that Russia, which has

always supported the peacekeeping functions of the

Organization, is prepared to step up its participation in

such operations, both under United Nations auspices

and in coalition operations authorized by the Security

Council.

The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction

and their delivery systems remains a serious challenge

to the modern world. The most dangerous challenge is

the possibility of their falling into the hands of

terrorists. We know what steps must be taken in order

to eliminate such threats. These include the further

universalization of the existing non-proliferation

regimes, the strengthening of international verification

instruments and the introduction of safe technologies in

nuclear energy production. In general, this requires the

renunciation by States of excessive arsenals and

military programmes that could undermine the political

and military balance and trigger an arms race.

Russia believes that it is extremely important to

prevent the militarization of outer space. We believe

that a comprehensive agreement should be elaborated

on this issue, and invite all countries possessing

potential in this area to join our initiative. The Russian

initiative to set up, under the auspices of the United

Nations, a global system to counter these new threats has

already been supported by the General Assembly. We

propose the adoption of a new resolution during this

session setting out specific further steps in this direction.

In conclusion, I should like to recall that the solid

structure of the United Nations has enabled it to

withstand all of the many crises of the second half of

the twentieth century. It has helped to overcome threats

of global confrontation and, most importantly, helped

to promote human rights. It has also helped to assert

the principles of mutual respect and good-neighbourliness

among States. The main thrust of the United Nations

approach is that humankind has no alternative but to

jointly construct a safer, fairer and more prosperous

world. That is our duty to succeeding generations. In

that important task we can have no better help than

such time-tested instruments as the work of the United

Nations, an Organization that, for half a century, took

decisions that were crucial for the entire world.

Russia is convinced that the United Nations must

maintain its central role in international affairs. This is

particularly relevant, and particularly important, for

resolving conflict situations. This is our choice and our

strategic position of principle.