Holy See, 2006

Not so long ago,

it appeared that our world was growing at a pace

beyond our control into a single global village. Today’s

reality, by contrast, appears more and more fractured.

Our efforts to overcome divisions and to harmonize

differences have been hesitant. As the recent struggle

between Israel and Hizbollah has tragically

demonstrated, it is not so much the lack of

peacemaking and peacekeeping experience and

resources that leaves non-combatants to suffer and die.

The more fundamental problem is the difficulty in

moulding consistent political will on the part of the

international community.

In the story of the Tower of Babel, the ancient

world gives us an image of our current divided state.

The confusion of tongues at Babel is the symbol of the

divisions, misunderstandings and hostilities spawned,

not by nature, but by human pride. Today, that same

negative fundamental attitude has given rise to a new

barbarism that is threatening world peace. Terrorists

and their various organizations are the contemporary

version of it, rejecting the best achievements our

civilization has gained. In an order of quite a different

nature, it cannot be denied that super-Powers, regional

Powers, aspiring Powers and oppressed peoples, too,

sometimes yield to the temptation to believe, despite

historical evidence, that it is only force that can bring

about a just ordering of affairs among peoples and

nations.

The ideology of power can go so far as to regard

the possession of nuclear weapons as an element of

national pride, and it does not exclude the outrageous

possibility of employing nuclear weapons against its

adversaries. Meanwhile, the implementation of the

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty appears to be stalled,

and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty still

needs to be ratified by some countries to enter into

force.

This Organization was founded on a very

different understanding of human affairs. Peace can

only be achieved by shared labours aimed at securing a

decent and dignified life for all. Due to the East-West

struggle, the United Nations was able in the past to

achieve only an impoverished sort of peace.

Recently, the Secretary-General’s proposals put

this Organization on the path to reform; its lofty goals,

however, will be reached only by overcoming the

narrow confines imposed by the dominance of national

interests, so that we may open ourselves to the vision

of a world both reconciled and based on solidarity. In

this spirit, the Holy See continues to be an advocate of

the United Nations and favours its ongoing reform in

the fields of peacebuilding, development and human

rights. In the same spirit, the Holy See commends the

decision to create the Peacebuilding Commission.

Too often, international bodies act, if at all, only

after war is under way or when innocent populations

have long been under assault. When the rights of whole

groups of people are violated — grievous examples

could be mentioned in Europe, Asia and Africa — or

when they go unprotected by their own Governments,

06-53952 32

it is entirely right and just that this Organization should

intervene in a timely manner by suitable means to

restore justice. The need to improve the system for

effective humanitarian intervention in catastrophes

brought on by war, civil conflict and ethnic strife will

be an important test of the United Nations reform

agenda.

Strengthening the capacity of this Organization to

foresee conflicts, to resolve them through negotiation

or to transform them non-violently before there is

resort to force is, therefore, a goal of primary

importance in the renewal of the Organization. In this

regard, I regret to say that Security Council resolution

1701 (2006) of 11 August 2006, which was a very good

resolution, could have been adopted with the same

wording one month earlier. If repeated pleas for

immediate cessation of the violence, made by many,

including Pope Benedict XVI, had been acted upon, the

killing of thousands of civilians and numerous young

soldiers, the flight of peoples and the enormous

indiscriminate devastation need not have occurred.

Meanwhile, none of the outcomes that some

Governments put forward as a reason for the

continuation of hostilities in Lebanon have, in fact,

been achieved.

As history has shown, for lack of sufficient

capacity for intervention and common will, millions

have died in needless conflicts — inutili stragi — that

is, “pointless massacres”, to repeat a famous phrase

used by Benedict XV, who was Pope during the First

World War. The appeal by the late Pope Paul VI,

uttered in this Hall on 4 October 1965 — “Jamais plus

la guerre”, meaning “Never again war” — today rings

like an accusation in the heart of the collective

conscience of humanity.

The surest way to prevent war is to address its

causes. It must not be forgotten that at the root of war

there are usually real and serious grievances: injustices

suffered; denial of human rights and absence of the

rule of law; legitimate aspirations frustrated, and the

exploitation of multitudes of desperate people who see

no real possibility of improving their lot by peaceful

means. How can we not be disturbed by the images of

countless exiles and refugees living in camps and

enduring subhuman conditions, or by those desperate

groups which, intent upon seeking a less wretched

future for themselves and their children, are driven to

face the risks of illegal emigration? And what of the

millions of people oppressed by misery and hunger and

exposed to lethal epidemics, who continue to cry out to

our sense of humanity? These, too, are challenges to

our desire for peace.

The fulfilment of the Millennium Development

Goals and the resumption of the latest World Trade

Organization (WTO) trade round promise economic

progress, the alleviation of poverty, a reduction in

terrorism and increased social harmony. Building peace

for tomorrow requires that justice be done today.

Like development, the protection of human rights

is an essential pillar in the edifice of world peace, for

peace consists in people’s unimpeded enjoyment of

their God-given rights. The Holy See hopes that the

newly formed Human Rights Council will enhance the

enjoyment of those rights by all peoples and by the

citizens of every nation. Diversity among cultures

allows for differences in the emphasis and

implementation of human rights, but human nature,

which is their foundation and is common to the whole

of human society, permits no basic human right to be

eclipsed or subordinated for the sake of other rights.

Every Government must clearly understand that

violations of the fundamental rights of the person

cannot be exempt from scrutiny by the international

community under the pretext of the inviolability of a

State’s internal affairs.

With respect to fundamental human rights, I

would like to draw attention to three primary rights.

I turn first to the right to life. The increasing

recognition of the sacredness of life, witnessed also by

the growing rejection of the death penalty, needs to be

matched by a thorough protection of human life

precisely when it is at its weakest, that is, at its very

beginning and at its natural end. Secondly, respect for

religious freedom means respect for the intimate

relationship of the believing person with God, in both

its individual and social aspects. Indeed, there is

nothing more sacred. Thirdly, there is the right to

freedom of thought and expression, including freedom

to hold opinions without interference and to exchange

ideas and information and the consequent freedom of

the press. The observance of this right is necessary for

the fulfilment of each person, for the respect of

cultures and for the progress of science. We must

acknowledge, however, that not all fundamental

rights — and in particular the three which I have

mentioned — are adequately protected in every nation,

and, in more than a few, they are openly denied, even

among States sitting on the Human Rights Council.

33 06-53952

Although in some cases religion continues to be

cynically exploited for political ends, it is my

delegation’s firm belief that, at its best, truest and most

authentic, religion is a vital force for harmony and peace

among peoples. It appeals to the noblest aspects of human

nature. It binds up the wounds of war, both physical and

psychological. It provides sanctuary to refugees and

hospitality to migrants. It weaves bonds of solidarity that

overcome every form of mistrust, and through

forgiveness it lends stability to once-divided societies.

Twenty years ago, the late Pope John Paul II

brought together the leaders of the world’s religions to

pray and to bear witness to peace. That collective

witness was renewed in 1993 during the Bosnian war

and in 2002 following the barbarous 11 September

terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. More

recently, on 23 July of this year, faced with the

spreading war in Lebanon, Pope Benedict XVI invited

Christians and all believers to join him in a day of

prayer and penitence, imploring God for the gift of

peace for the Holy Land and the Middle East.

In this past generation, leaders and adherents of

the world’s religions have shown themselves time and

again to be willing to dialogue and to promote

harmony among peoples.

On Wednesday 20 September last, Pope Benedict

XVI repeated his unequivocal support for inter-

religious and intercultural dialogue and expressed the

hope that what he had said at the University of

Regensburg might be a boost and an encouragement for

positive and even self-critical dialogue, both between

religions and between modern reason and the faith of

Christians. The Pope, as is well known, expressed

sadness that some passages of his academic address

could have lent themselves to misinterpretation. His

real intention was to explain that it is not religion and

violence, but religion and reason that go together, in

the context of a critical vision of a society which seeks

to exclude God from public life. Two days ago, while

receiving the ambassadors of the countries of the

Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)

accredited to the Holy See, he added:

“The lessons of the past must … help us to

seek paths of reconciliation, in order to live with

respect for the identity and freedom of each

individual, with a view to fruitful cooperation in

the service of all humanity … respect and

dialogue require reciprocity in all spheres,

especially in that which concerns basic freedoms,

more particularly religious freedom”.

If, on the one hand, religious motivation for

violence, whatever its source, must be clearly and

radically rejected, on the other it must be emphasized

that in political life one cannot disregard the

contribution of the religious vision of the world and of

humanity. In fact, as the Pope affirmed, were reason to

turn a deaf ear to the divine and relegate religion to the

ambit of subcultures, it would automatically provoke

violent reactions, and violent reactions are always a

falsification of true religion.

It falls to all interested parties — to civil society

as well as to States — to promote religious freedom

and a sane social tolerance that will disarm extremists

even before they can begin to corrupt others with their

hatred of life and liberty. That will be a significant

contribution to peace among peoples, because peace

can be born only in the hearts of human beings.

Together with this heartfelt wish, it is my honour

to conclude by conveying to you, Madam President,

and to the peoples here represented the cordial

greetings of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI. Upon

the deliberations of this General Assembly, he invokes

an abundance of Almighty God’s blessings.