Australia, 1999

May I begin by adding my

congratulations to those of my colleagues on your election,

Sir, as President of the General Assembly at its

fifty-fourth session. You are no stranger to these halls —

you were here first as an observer and later as a

representative. You bring a wealth of experience to your

position, and we are pleased to see Namibia taking

leadership roles in both the General Assembly and the

Security Council.

Before I move to the main substance of my remarks

today, I want to take this opportunity to mention two

matters.

First, I welcome the three new members of the

United Nations: Kiribati, Nauru and Tonga. Having

worked closely with these three countries in our own

Asia-Pacific community, it is a particular pleasure for me,

as the Foreign Minister of Australia, now to have the

opportunity to take that cooperation into this larger family

of nations.

The second matter is one that seized the attention of

the entire Australian population earlier this year: the fate

of two CARE Australia workers, Steve Pratt and Peter

Wallace, who were imprisoned by the Federal Republic

of Yugoslavia. Thanks in no small measure to the support

of the international community, Steve and Peter were

released from prison on 1 September. The efforts of

Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the High Commissioner

for Refugees, Mrs. Ogata and the High Commissioner for

Human Rights, Mrs. Robinson, and the continued support

of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of

Humanitarian Affairs, were invaluable in gaining the

men’s release.

I would also like to thank President Ahtisaari of

Finland, the Greek Government, Nelson Mandela, Pope

John Paul and the many other individuals who generously

lent their support to this cause. The international

community’s cooperation in this case demonstrates the

strong commitment we share to protecting our

humanitarian workers from persecution, and to ensuring

their capacity to carry out their important work in safety.

Australia will continue to support international efforts to

secure the release of Branko Jelen, a Yugoslav national

and an employee of CARE Australia, who continues to

serve time in a Yugoslav prison.

You, Mr. President, take up your responsibilities at

a most auspicious time, as the nations of the world enter

a new millennium. As they do so, it is appropriate for us

to reflect on the past and the future of the United Nations,

what it has achieved and what tasks remain unfulfilled.

8

Of course, the various aspects of this subject are as

numerous and diverse as the operations of the United

Nations itself, which has evolved from a modest operation

in the early days after the end of the Second World War to

become an Organization that touches on just about every

facet of human existence.

Today I want to concentrate on just two matters. The

first is perhaps the most fundamental task before this

Organization: the maintenance of global peace and security

through humanitarian intervention. This is a subject that has

been at the centre of my own thinking, especially over

recent weeks because of the role Australia has played in the

resolution of the conflict in East Timor. I believe that the

activities of the United Nations in that Territory stand as an

example of the kind of work to which this Organization can

really add value.

The other matter — the reform of the United

Nations — is on the face of it a rather prosaic matter. But,

in truth, reform is the key to every single function of this

Organization, for without it we cannot hope to equip the

United Nations to face the demands of our ever-changing

international environment. The United Nations must change

and adapt, or become increasingly irrelevant.

I turn now to the question of the future of East Timor.

It is now just over a week since the first elements of the

International Force in East Timor (INTERFET) began

arriving in Dili to commence the task set for it under

Security Council resolution 1264 (1999) of 15 September

to restore peace and security in East Timor, to protect and

support the United Nations Mission in East Timor in

carrying out its tasks and, within force capabilities, to

facilitate humanitarian assistance programmes.

I am pleased to report that INTERFET’s deployment

has been smooth and peaceful, and that elements of the

force are now spreading across the territory of East Timor.

It has begun the vital work of bringing peace back to the

troubled island, and of assisting in creating the right climate

for the provision of the food, shelter and medical assistance

that the East Timorese desperately require. This is the latest

chapter in the long association of the United Nations with

East Timor, an association that has lasted for more than a

quarter of a century. The process that has brought us here

has been long and difficult, but at last we may be

approaching a peaceful resolution of the tragedy that has

beset the East Timorese people for so long.

The fact that we have arrived at this point owes much

to President Habibie of Indonesia. It was President Habibie

who led his country down the path of democracy after the

departure of former President Soeharto. Under President

Habibie’s guidance, Indonesia held its first democratic

elections in more than four decades, and it now awaits the

election of its next President. It was also President

Habibie who decided to allow the people of East Timor

to choose between greater autonomy within Indonesia and

independence. Those were momentous decisions —

decisions that reflect the massive strides that Indonesian

society has made in just a few short months. Australia

stood by the Indonesian people as they began their

transition to democracy, and we will continue to do so in

the years ahead.

Regardless of the problems that have beset the

transition process in East Timor, President Habibie and

his administration deserve full credit for actually initiating

that process. I also want to make special mention of the

role played by the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, in

seeking a peaceful resolution of East Timor's status.

The conclusion on 5 May this year of the tripartite

Agreement among Portugal, Indonesia and the United

Nations owed much to the hard work and perseverance of

the Secretary-General, who helped guide the parties

towards a settlement that provided for a credible and

orderly ballot on East Timor's future. In doing so, he

maintained the honourable tradition of his predecessors as

Secretary-General, who since 1983 had been working with

Portugal and Indonesia towards a comprehensive and just

solution to the region's difficulties.

It would be remiss of me if I did not also mention

the sterling work done both before and after the

conclusion of the Agreement by the Secretary-General's

Personal Representative, Ambassador Jamsheed Marker,

and his deputy, Francesc Vendrell. The work of those two

men was crucial to the successful outcome of the

negotiations and to the holding of the ballot in East

Timor.

Of course, the conclusion of the tripartite Agreement

was just the beginning of the process to allow the East

Timorese to decide their own fate. With the establishment

by the Security Council on 11 June of the United Nations

Mission in East Timor (UNAMET), the practical work of

holding the popular consultation got under way. Under the

leadership of Ian Martin, UNAMET began the difficult

and often dangerous task of organizing a vote in only 12

short weeks. Thanks to the enthusiasm and application of

Ian Martin and his team, that task was accomplished with

results that few could have ever dreamed of. The fact that

9

more than 450,000 people were able to register to vote and

that 98.6 per cent of them actually did so is a remarkable

tribute to the courage and the thirst for democracy of the

East Timorese people.

But it is also a tribute to the effectiveness of

UNAMET and its staff, and a fine example of how

effective the United Nations can be in situations of conflict

and transition. The work done by UNAMET staff in the

days before the ballot and in the tragic days following it

deserves our highest praise. Unarmed, in a tense and

emotionally charged atmosphere, they carried out their

duties magnificently. In particular, the military liaison and

civilian police components of UNAMET, led respectively

by Brigadier General Rezaqul Haider of Bangladesh and

Commissioner Alan Mills of Australia, played crucial roles

as the interface between UNAMET and the Indonesian

police and military authorities.

UNAMET carried out its work at great risk to the staff

involved, and, tragically, several locally engaged employees

paid for their dedication with their lives. That fact is a stark

reminder of the great personal cost that is often associated

with United Nations operations, and a reminder to us all of

the need to make the security and personal safety of United

Nations staff one of our most urgent priorities. The United

Nations must rely on its staff to carry out its various

mandates. A threat to the person of a United Nations staff

member must be treated as a threat against the United

Nations itself.

It is a matter of unfortunate record that the upsurge of

violence in East Timor after the ballot on 30 August swept

up not just United Nations staff members, but hundreds and

maybe thousands of East Timorese. The world has

witnessed the most horrible cruelty visited on the island's

population by people who were unwilling to accept the

outcome of the vote. To the great credit again of President

Habibie, he sought military assistance through the Security

Council. In response, the Security Council delivered a

strong resolution and a positive mandate for peacekeeping

operations, a mandate that will ensure that the will of the

East Timorese people, as expressed in the 30 August vote,

will be carried out.

We in Australia have been very heartened by the

positive international response to the call for military forces

to make up the international force in East Timor and its

successor peacekeeping force. As I have mentioned, the

international forces under the command of Major-General

Peter Cosgrove, have begun to restore order in East Timor.

There are currently some 3,200 personnel on the ground,

drawn from a range of countries, with strong

representation from our own Asia-Pacific region. The

large number of countries participating in the force, and

their wide geographical representation, is evidence of the

widespread international determination to see a peaceful

and orderly transition in East Timor's status.

I am also very pleased to note that UNAMET

personnel have now returned to the island, and will be

able to continue their important work.

In discussing the activities of the United Nations in

East Timor, I must also mention the humanitarian work

done by United Nations agencies. Mrs. Sadako Ogata, the

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, has

travelled to West Timor to examine the plight of East

Timorese refugees in that territory, and Australia fully

supports her efforts.

Australia is also the staging point for humanitarian

assistance operations being carried out by agencies such

as the World Food Programme and the United Nations

Children's Fund. Additional relief efforts are also planned

by the World Health Organization and the Food and

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Australia

has already pledged $7 million towards the humanitarian

efforts of United Nations agencies and other

organizations.

The United Nations is also seeking to address the

human rights violations that have been widespread in East

Timor. Security Council resolution 1264 (1999) called on

those responsible for violence in East Timor to be brought

to justice. Australia supports efforts by the Indonesian

Government and the United Nations to bring to account

those responsible for the grievous acts of criminal

violence visited upon the East Timorese people, and will

offer all appropriate assistance in this regard.

More generally, there is now an urgent need to move

as soon as possible to the third phase of the United

Nations plan for East Timor. This will require all parties,

most especially Indonesia and Portugal, to work closely

with the Secretariat. Australia will do what it can to assist

in this process, which will build the foundation for the

transition in the territory's status.

In its activities in East Timor, the United Nations

has demonstrated some of its fundamental strengths as an

organization. It is helping to bring about the resolution of

an international problem that had been festering for a

quarter of a century. It provided the infrastructure that

10

allowed a free and fair expression of the will of the East

Timorese people. And when the security situation could not

be controlled, it facilitated the creation of an international

force to put the transition process back on track and end

gross violations of human rights.

I have been struck by the deep historical resonances of

this process, for when the United Nations was established

at the end of the Second World War, part of its rationale as

an organization was to have been the impartial and

objective resolution of international problems, free of the

old cycles of retribution through resort to aggression. The

ancient resort to armed force and the notion that might was

right were to have been overturned, and in their place the

community of nations was to cooperate to settle

international disputes and solve global problems. The world,

having won a victory over nazism, was determined that

similar evils would never again prevail.

Well, we have seen plenty of occasions in the past 50

years where practice has not measured up to the ideals. But

every now and then, the process works, and I believe that

many elements of the work of the United Nations in East

Timor are evidence of that. Of course, that is not to say

that the process cannot be improved; of course it can. But

if we can identify and build upon the positive elements of

our East Timor experience, I believe that we can not only

improve the situation of the people of that territory, but

may also be able to provide a speedier and more thorough

resolution of other international crises in the future.

We need also to draw lessons from the negative

aspects of events in East Timor. Through our efforts there,

we have shown what the United Nations can do well. Let

us build on that effectiveness, and strive for an organization

that is even more relevant to global peace and security in

the next millennium.

I now turn to another aspect of increased

effectiveness: the question of United Nations reform. In a

recent report on preparations for the Millennium Assembly

and the millennium summit, the Secretary-General

described the United Nations as a unique institution. No

one could disagree that the contribution of the United

Nations to the pursuit of peace and security, to the

economic and social advancement of all peoples and to the

promotion of human rights over the last 50 years or so has

been not just of enormous value, but also truly unique in

world history.

The twenty-first century, however, will bring with it

new challenges and, I hope, new opportunities.

Under the direction of Kofi Annan, this Organization

has begun the important and necessary steps to equip

itself to face these challenges through genuine

administrative and management reform. This has included

promising changes in financial and personnel practices,

significant economies, improving coordination between

United Nations bodies, significant rationalization of

Secretariat structures and more efficient use of

technology. Such reforms make the work of the United

Nations more efficient and provide real savings for the

Organization. Those savings can then be used for other

programmes that benefit all Member States, but

particularly the developing Members of the United

Nations.

The challenge for the United Nations — and, let us

all recognize its Member States — is to ensure that this

momentum is sustained and taken forward. A former

Australian Prime Minister, Sir Robert Menzies, said over

40 years ago that “when we talk of the United Nations,

we should remember what it is in fact, and not be led off

by dreams of what we would like it to be in another kind

of world.”

We need to accept that the United Nations exists in

a real world and be realistic about what it can achieve.

We need to ensure that the Organization's structures and

processes better reflect the realities of the twenty-first

century. We need an expanded, more representative and

more transparent Security Council, and an electoral group

system which reflects the geo-political and economic

realities of today rather than the early nineteen sixties. To

achieve real reforms on these and other subjects, Member

States must work together in a sustained and cooperative

manner. And they must also demonstrate their

commitment to the Organization by paying their

contributions on time and in full.

Reform of the United Nations means building a

stronger and more effective Organization that can deliver

on its commitments to the world's people. It means less

waste and more practical activities. It means developing

an Organization that is equipped to meet whatever

challenges the new century may bring.

Ultimately, it means creating a United Nations that can

maintain its relevance when many national and

international institutions are falling by the wayside, made

obsolete by the rapid pace of change.

I want to conclude my remarks with a call for the

United Nations to concentrate on building on its strengths.

I have mentioned the need to stick with a programme of

thorough and fundamental reform, for that is a basic

prerequisite for the continued effectiveness of the

Organization. But I have also mentioned the United Nations

work in East Timor as an example of how the Organization

can, and does, make a real difference in the resolution of

complex and challenging foreign policy and humanitarian

problems. Not only was the United Nations able to

administer a ballot in circumstances in which many

observers thought the task impossible, but it was also able

to provide for the insertion of a peacekeeping force when

law and order broke down. Those who wished to

exterminate an entire community were foiled.

Those are great strengths. But we need to be able to

consolidate them to make the United Nations a more

effective Organization. We must, for example, be able to

ensure that the United Nations can intervene quickly when

rapidly deteriorating conditions threaten entire nations. That

was the lesson of Rwanda. I was struck by the comments

made by the Secretary-General on this subject when he

addressed the Assembly last week. As the Secretary-

General suggests, changing international circumstances —

including the spread of notions of individual rights and the

idea that the international community has a responsibility to

respond effectively to humanitarian crises — are

challenging traditional notions of national sovereignty. The

United Nations needs to focus on these challenges and

begin the process of defining when and how the

Organization should act in the face of humanitarian crises.

It may be an old cliché to say that the world is

growing ever smaller, but it is true just the same. In days

gone by, the nations of the world may have been forgiven

if they acted too slowly in the face of a humanitarian crisis.

Tales of atrocities, famine and natural disaster took weeks

or months to filter out from the more inaccessible areas of

the globe. Today, those same stories are likely to be on

television screens within hours, or even minutes.

In the face of such indisputable evidence,

Governments will be forced to act. Those that resist will

have to face a domestic and international audience as well

informed as they. That is the kind of environment in which

the United Nations will increasingly have to function,

where the results of inaction will be seen instantly and the

consequences of failure subject to instant and very telling

scrutiny.

Some will be concerned about interference in national

sovereignty, and obviously that is an important and

legitimate concern. Others will say that the greater principle

is that of natural human solidarity. But whatever view is

correct, this environment is a fact we now have to deal

with, whether we like it or whether we don't. When we

all gather here in New York each year, it is easy to get

caught up in the daily business of the United Nations, in

the resolutions, the committee meetings, the briefings and

the caucusing.

How often do we stop, and remind ourselves of the

purposes for which we meet? If we genuinely wish to

uphold the Charter, if we really do want to maintain

international peace and security, help develop our

economic and social strengths and promote respect for

human rights and fundamental reforms, surely we can

start by upholding the most basic right of all, that of life.

In the face of acts of genocide, or of human rights

abuses on a horrendous scale, the nations of the world

must act. I am a firm realist when it comes to foreign

policy, but am also a great believer in the value of

idealism. More than 50 years ago, our predecessors

created the United Nations in the firm hope that there

could be a new international order to replace the old, a

spirit of cooperative international action that could avoid

the competition and aggression that caused two world

wars.

As we approach the end of this century, it is true

that the United Nations has not lived up to all the hopes

of its founders. But the great promise of the Organization

remains. The United Nations response to developments in

East Timor has shown just what positive action on the

part of this Organization can accomplish. We know the

great things this body can achieve. Let us all try to build

on those achievements, so that we may create an

Organization that can truly address the most pressing

problems of the international community. We can build an

active and practical United Nations to meet both the

aspirations of its Member nations and, also, the legitimate

needs of all humanity.