Austria, 1994

Allow me to congratulate the President sincerely on his

election to preside over the forty-ninth session of the

General Assembly. I am particularly pleased to see a

representative of a French-speaking African country occupy

this important position. We trust that the forty-ninth

session will, under his enlightened leadership, pay special

attention to the political, economic and social problems

facing his continent, so sorely tried over these last few

years.

Next year the United Nations will celebrate its

fiftieth anniversary with a series of activities throughout

the world. The image of the United Nations in the eyes

of world public opinion will depend largely on its status,

on the extent to which it has remained faithful, 50 years

after its founding, to the principles of the San Francisco

Charter, which are still valid.

I believe it must be a priority to strengthen the world

Organization in the spirit of Article 1 of the Charter, so

that it can effectively carry out its mission of maintaining

international peace and security. Let us also recall here

the words of the great philosopher, Sir Karl Popper,

recently deceased, who wrote: "Our primary objective

must be peace. But we must not hesitate to wage war for

peace." We have given the United Nations the

responsibility of deciding when to use force to preserve

peace. This weighty responsibility has to be exercised

when necessary.

The Security Council is of paramount importance in

preserving peace in the world. In order to maintain and

strengthen the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Security

Council, Austria advocates a slight increase in its

membership. Every Member of the United Nations must

be able to see and understand how views develop within

that body. They must all be able to feel sure that

discussions in the Council take account of the views of

interested countries, for example, countries contributing

troops for peace-keeping operations.

The importance of the United Nations must be

preserved and developed, not only as a system for the

maintenance of international peace and security, but also

as a forum for discussion and an instrument for

coordination at the global level. On the first point, much

remains to be done. In the social and economic sphere

and in the field of development, important progress has

been made, notably with the reform of the Economic and

Social Council, which has permitted better guidance of

operational activities for development.

A solid financial basis is absolutely vital to the

effective discharge of the United Nations mission. Non-

payment or late payment of mandatory contributions by

Member States is a violation of the Charter and of the

duty of international solidarity. The burden thus created

falls, above all, on those Members that are called good

12

payers and those that provide troops, expenditures that are

reimbursed by the United Nations only after considerable

delay. This chronic problem, which is getting worse, can

be resolved only by timely and full payment of mandatory

contributions by all Member States. As one of the 20

countries that, in 1994, paid their full contribution in a

timely fashion to the regular budget of the United Nations,

and as a regular participant in peace-keeping operations,

Austria will, along with the Secretariat and other interested

delegations, seek a solution to this difficult problem.

On the eve of its fiftieth anniversary the United

Nations faces new challenges at the world level.

Sustainable development, the monitoring of world

population growth, the elimination of poverty, the creation

of opportunities for productive employment, social

integration, equality for women, better protection of human

rights, non-proliferation of nuclear weapons - all are major

themes of our era and have been or will be the subject of

international conferences. The task of the United Nations

is to draw the necessary conclusions from the results of

these conferences and to define the outlines of sustainable

human development at the world level. The Secretary-

General’s reports, "An Agenda for Peace" and "Agenda for

Development", are essential elements in a discussion that

has already led to a broader understanding of the idea of

security.

The protection and promotion of human rights is one

of the central tasks of the United Nations. The

accomplishment of this task has benefited from the vital

impetus provided by the Vienna Declaration and

Programme of Action. While we can be pleased with the

outcome of the World Conference on Human Rights, the

lasting impact of the final document of Vienna will none

the less be measured by the continuing will of the

community of nations to give effect to its provisions more

rapidly and to guarantee them more effectively than in the

past.

A crucial role is to be played in this connection by the

High Commissioner for Human Rights. Austria welcomes

the swift implementation of this central provision of the

Vienna document. In the few months that he has occupied

his post, Mr. José Ayala Lasso has fully lived up to the

expectations arising out of his difficult and important

mandate. His official visit to Vienna began a dialogue with

all Governments. It seems to us a matter of priority to

promote coordination of international protection of human

rights within the United Nations system, and in this the

High Commissioner will, of course, have a determining role

to play. We should also strengthen the various mechanisms

for protecting human rights, as well as the role of the

Special Rapporteurs. This should make it possible to

react more quickly to violations of human rights and to

prevent them more effectively. The resources needed for

the High Commissioner’s work should be provided as

soon as possible.

Effective protection of human rights is not only a

duty towards each individual; it is also an essential

contribution to ensuring stability, development and

security. History teaches us that we must resolutely

oppose all flagrant violations of human rights, such as

genocide in the Nazi concentration camps or by the

Khmer Rouge, as soon as they are brought to light. This

makes it all the more difficult to understand that the

resolution adopted by the United Nations Conference on

Human Rights relating to Bosnia and Herzegovina has

remained a dead letter, thereby jeopardizing the credibility

of our world Organization.

In this connection, I wish to pay a particular tribute

to Mr. Tadeusz Mazowiecki, former Prime Minister of

Poland and Special Rapporteur of the Commission on

Human Rights, for his excellent work, of which the world

community should be proud. I would also hail President

Izetbegovic´ of Bosnia and Herzegovina who, with great

self-discipline and in a very constructive spirit, has

accepted to speak with those who are committing a kind

of genocide against his people. This is remarkable

conduct from an extraordinary individual.

The effective protection of minorities involves great

difficulties in many countries. I am pleased to be able to

inform the Assembly that, in 1992, Austria and Italy were

able to resolve their dispute over the Southern Tyrol. The

dispute related to the implementation of the 1946 Treaty

of Paris on the situation of the German-speaking and

Ladino-speaking populations in Southern Tyrol. It was

also dealt with in General Assembly resolutions 1497

(XV) and 1661 (XVI), adopted at the fifteenth and

sixteenth sessions respectively.

The solution that was agreed to by both sides was to

establish relatively comprehensive autonomy in southern

Tyrol. This seemed on the whole to be an adequate basis

for ensuring the continued existence of the German-

speaking and Ladino minorities.

13

Given the constant changes in the atmosphere -

particularly the economic and financial atmosphere - there

has to be a dynamic autonomy if its objective is to be

attained. This will require ongoing flexibility and

understanding on the part of the relevant authorities. A

solution to the minorities problem on the basis of territorial

autonomy must, over the long term, aim at ensuring that all

those who live together under the same roof view such

autonomy as a positive thing that protects their respective

interests.

The unanimous statements made by Prime Minister

Berlusconi, Foreign Minister Martino and Interior Minister

Maroni that they would not touch the autonomy of southern

Tyrol seem to us to be a guarantee that we shall continue

on the same road.

Austria is proud, as one of the headquarters countries

of the United Nations, to host a number of important

programmes that meet the immediate interests of the

individual and also have a decisive impact on international

relations. These include protection from drug abuse, the

struggle against crime, questions on the use and control of

nuclear power and on the preservation of the system for the

non-proliferation of nuclear weapons - all of these are

major activities of the United Nations at Vienna, as is

international cooperation on outer space and on the

promotion of international industrial development.

Following recent political changes, important new

areas for United Nations activities have emerged in Eastern

Europe and Central Asia. Vienna sees itself as an

important point for coordinating activities to support and

assist those States as they move towards democracy, a state

of law and a market economy.

On the eve of its fiftieth anniversary, the United

Nations currently has more than 70,000 people in 17

different peace-keeping operations. More than three times

the regular budget is being devoted to those operations.

Austria, which has been involved for decades in such

operations, is aware of the enormous challenge that this

poses to the United Nations and its Member States in terms

of funds, personnel and organization.

One of the most important events to take place within

the framework of the activities organized in Austria in

connection with the fiftieth anniversary will be the very

high-level conference set for early March 1995 in Vienna.

This conference will be devoted to the discussion, analysis

and preparation of recommendations on how best to take up

the challenge of measures to preserve peace on the eve of

the new millennium. I am particularly pleased and

grateful that the Secretary-General has been kind enough

to agree to deliver the opening address in Austria.

Austria is in favour of strengthening civilian peace-

keeping operations and of stepping up United Nations

activities in preventive diplomacy. Thus, the Austrian

Federal Government has established, in the city of

Schlaining, a centre for civilian peace-keeping operations.

This year, we held our second seminar on the re-

establishment of peace and on preventive diplomacy, a

seminar in which high officials of the United Nations

participated. Also in Schlaining, we have a regular

training programme, with international participation, for

civilian international operations relating to peace-keeping

and peace-building.

For a quarter of a century, the non-proliferation

Treaty has successfully prevented the proliferation of

nuclear weapons and has also successfully prevented the

abuse of nuclear power for military purposes. The 1995

Review Conference will take a decision on extending the

non-proliferation Treaty. Our common goal must be the

unconditional and unrestricted extension of the Treaty.

Austria also has good reason to hope that the substantive

negotiations currently under way in the Conference on

Disarmament with a view to the conclusion of a

comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty will lead to nuclear

disarmament.

As the host country of the International Atomic

Energy Agency, Austria is aware of the importance of

this control mechanism for the application of the Non-

Proliferation Treaty. The success of any future agreement

on a nuclear-test ban will, in the final analysis, depend on

the effectiveness of the work done by organizations

responsible for its implementation and verification.

A year ago, the Austrian Federal Government

decided to offer Vienna as headquarters for the future

organization to be established under the nuclear-test-ban

treaty, and I would wish to extend this invitation again

today before the General Assembly.

This year once again, our hopes of seeing an end to

the fighting in the territory of the former Yugoslavia have

been dashed. Despite international initiatives and peace

plans, the actual prospects for an equitable and lasting

solution are not very good. The reconciliation between

the Bosnian Croats and the Bosnians, which stemmed

from the Washington Agreements, should not make us

forget that the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina continues

14

to leave innumerable victims in its wake. The toll of dead

and displaced persons grows daily more terrible. The

aggressor has gone so far as to attack or lay siege to cities

that have been declared United Nations protected areas.

Despite repeated international condemnation, the

Serbian side has continued its practice of "ethnic

cleansing". Austria strongly condemns these crimes,

wherever and by whomever they may be perpetrated, and

we shall never stop calling for an end to such practices.

Basic principles of the international order continue to

be trampled underfoot and lose their credibility. Specific

resolutions such as those on military guarantees for

protected areas or return of refugees to their home, have not

yet been implemented. All international initiatives and

efforts for the repatriation of refugees have been made a

mockery by "ethnic cleansing", which continues to be

practised and, in the final analysis, continues to be tolerated

at the international level. The arms embargo imposed by

the Security Council in September 1991 has a unilateral

impact, to the detriment of those countries that have taken

over from the former Yugoslavia and that are threatened by

Serbian ambitions. And so we have arrived at a situation

where the legitimate Government of Bosnia and

Herzegovina is unable fully to exercise its right to

legitimate self-defence, while at the same time that State

cannot even benefit from adequate protection under the

system of collective security. On the other hand, we do not

see any attempt on the Serbian side to abandon the idea of

a Greater Serbia based on the illegal conquest of territories

by force. This can be seen from the fact that the peace

plans prepared by the European Union and the contact

group have still not been accepted by the Serbian side,

although on many points they do respond to their

aspirations.

In its resolution 943 (1994) of 23 September the

Security Council set forth the conditions for a suspension

of sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

(Serbia and Montenegro). The Belgrade Government must

allow international observers to control the blockade against

the Bosnian Serbs. The observer Mission now being

established along the Serbo-Bosnian border is, as Austria

sees it, a step in the right direction but, and I stress the

point, it remains to be seen how effectively the Mission

will be able to carry out its task and whether credible

consequences will in fact be drawn from the conclusions

arrived at by the observers.

In Croatia also the situation remains largely

unchanged: contrary to the provisions of the 1992 Vance

plan which was approved by the Security Council, more

than one quarter of the country remains in the hands of

the rebel Serbs. So far there has been neither

demilitarization of these regions under the supervision of

the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) troops

nor has it yet been possible for the civilian population to

return. Recent protests show to what extent the situation

has become untenable for displaced persons within

Croatia.

Against the backdrop of the extremely harsh

judgements often pronounced on Croatia one must not

forget the very clear terms of the legal opinions of the

Badinter Commission in January 1992. From these texts

it is clear that, in principle, Croatia met all the conditions

set forth by the European Union for recognition of new

States in Eastern Europe. I realize that in some areas,

such as administration, practices vis-à-vis the minorities

and the media, improvements are still much to be desired.

But we should not measure Croatia by different and

harsher criteria than the criteria we use for other countries

in central and south-eastern Europe because we have

greater access to Croatia and because there are more

transparent structures there, and there is no other country

in Europe, apart from Bosnia and Herzegovina, that has

been subjected for years to a violent military attack with

which it has to cope under extremely difficult conditions.

The situation in Kosovo, which has been too

neglected because of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina,

is continuing to deteriorate. The Belgrade authorities

have pursued their systematic action against the Albanian

majority of the population. There is still a danger that

mass violence may erupt. Observer missions sent by the

Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe

(CSCE) which were expelled in 1993 have not been

authorized to return despite intensive international efforts

to that end. In that region, which is almost 90 per cent

inhabited by Albanians and has been fully autonomous

during the past couple of decades, we are witnessing the

exercise of a kind of power that is tantamount to that of

an occupying regime.

The situation in former Yugoslavia shows that what

the great French philosopher, Blaise Pascal, said in his

Pensées remains as true as ever. He said that justice

without force was powerless and that force without justice

was tyrannical. The collective security system of the

United Nations which is part of the post-war order, has

not really been applied by the international community in

the case of the conflict in former Yugoslavia. The hope

that the collective security system would be used as an

15

instrument of peace following its successful use after the

Iraqi invasion of Kuwait has proved disappointing.

Unfortunately, Bosnia and Herzegovina is not an

isolated case. It would be a serious mistake not to mention,

at least, some other tragedies - Rwanda, Angola,

Afghanistan, Haiti, Tajikistan, and so on. There is too long

a list of hotbeds of crisis and violence, where the law of the

strongest tramples underfoot the principles of the Charter of

San Francisco. At the same time we must draw strength

and optimism from some positive developments, historic in

their significance. I may mention, for example, free and

democratic elections in South Africa, an end to the policy

of apartheid, autonomy in Gaza and Jericho, and an end to

the state of war between Jordan and Israel. In South Africa

and in the Middle East age-old objectives of the United

Nations have finally been attained or are about to be

attained. Austria, in so far as it can, actively supports these

peaceful processes, not only in the interests of the peoples

concerned but also in the interests of greater hope of

resolving other similar problems.

The year 1994 is of historic significance to Austria.

A huge majority - 66.58 per cent - of the Austrian people

came out firmly in support of joining the European Union,

a community of States that holds the same values as, and

plays an increasingly important role in, the United Nations.

This was the largest support in a European State for the

idea of European integration.

With that democratic force we will continue to support

this goal, and - as of 1 January I hope - as a member of

this community we will contribute in a spirit of solidarity

and openness to the attainment of the objectives of the

United Nations as we have done in the past.