Czech Republic, 2005

Let me begin by

congratulating Mr. Eliasson on his election to the

21

presidency. He is at the steering wheel of one of the

most challenging sessions of the General Assembly in

history — not only because it is the sixtieth

anniversary of our Organization but mainly because of

our agenda and the gravity of problems awaiting

resolution. While thanking his able and devoted

predecessor, Mr. Jean Ping, I would like to wish the

President every success in the coming months of hard

and hopefully rewarding work.

The European Union invested a huge effort in the

preparations for both the High-level Plenary Meeting

and our current session, and the Czech Republic was an

integral and active part of this process. We heard the

statement of the European Union presidency a few

days ago, and I have no intention of repeating it.

Rather, let me present here several ideas and comments

of a more general nature.

Millions of our fellow human beings in Africa

and elsewhere are trapped in absolute poverty, with

little or no access to education, medical and other

services, and are deprived of a dignified existence. In

their regions or in other parts of the world, fascinating

technical achievements and thriving economies enable

large numbers of people to enjoy an unprecedentedly

high quality of life. Some may simply conclude that

there are several distinct worlds on our planet. But

while the gaps may still be widening, let us be sure that

we all live in only one increasingly interconnected

world. There is no way to separate the rich from the

poor or to separate different ethnic groups. And the

responsibility for our future is equally indivisible.

Moreover, we are repeatedly reminded that

despite many advancements this world is still very

fragile and vulnerable. What is the common feature of

the 9/11, Bali, Madrid, Beslan, Baghdad or London

terrorist attacks; floods in China or in Central Europe

in 2002 and again in 2005; drought in parts of Africa;

the Indian Ocean tsunami; and devastating hurricanes

in the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico? They all

expose in their own way the vulnerability and fragility

of our civilization.

Developed or developing, big or small, we

continue to be vulnerable to the forces of nature as well

as the forces of evil. Fortunately, the worst of

situations tends to awaken the best in human character:

after any such disaster or terrorist attack we have seen

raising waves of solidarity on a global scale, we have

seen renewed determination to fight the evil.

It is our duty to tap this positive energy. Although

no one will ever achieve 100 per cent security, much

can be done by deepening our cooperation,

strengthening preventive measures, stepping up our

efforts in combating terrorism, enhancing the

mechanisms of development and humanitarian aid and,

in the long run, simply fulfilling the Millennium

Development Goals. If reformed and mandated, the

United Nations can play a central role in this process.

Last year, many of us spoke of reform, and

reform has indeed been one of the most frequently used

words since then. There was much expectation in the

air, much sincere effort to bring about change, as well

as many brilliant contributions to the debate: the report

of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and

Change, the final report of the United Nations

Millennium Project “Investing in Development” (the

Sachs report) and the Secretary-General’s report “In

Larger Freedom”.

After several rounds of discussion, we could say

we knew the diagnosis and could prescribe the

necessary medication, hoping that the summit would

add the most needed ingredients: the political will and

the means of delivery.

So, was the summit a success or a failure? I tend

to view its results, the outcome document, with sober

optimism. The challenge was enormous: to bring

together development, security and human rights and to

craft a new delicate balance among the elements that

constitute our global agenda. In my view, the summit

managed — and this could be its major achievement —

to set the tone, to set at least rough parameters of a new

equation, the fine-tuning of the details being left for

the coming months. We have guidance for further talks

on assistance and relief for developing countries. We

have a prospect of increasing development aid,

including from the Czech Republic.

At the summit, we agreed that the human rights

machinery needed strengthening and redesigning.

Indeed, it was probably the first time at such a major

event that human rights was placed on an equal footing

with issues such as development and security. But

many pieces of the puzzle have yet to be put in place.

In shaping the future Human Rights Council, we

have to make sure that the progressive features and

experience of the Human Rights Commission are not

lost, while avoiding its weaknesses and what

specifically did not work, securing cooperation from

22

countries such as Belarus, Cuba, Myanmar, Zimbabwe

and others which repeatedly failed to respond

adequately to the international community’s concerns

about human rights.

Moreover, the summit reinforced our

commitment to join forces in fighting terrorism, made

the groundbreaking decision to create the

Peacebuilding Commission and endorsed the twin

concepts of responsibility to protect and human

security — all of which bring new hope to those facing

lawlessness and oppression and which extend existing

standards of peace and security.

But there are also areas where the summit failed:

among others, disarmament and non-proliferation and,

most notably, the expansion of the Security Council.

Our reform mission remains unfinished, but must

continue.

If it is to face up to new challenges and tasks, the

Secretariat must be strong and healthy. It has to

undergo profound reform. The need for such a reform

is further underlined by the recent findings of the

Volcker report. I welcome the emphasis that the

summit put on United Nations management and its call

for efficiency, effectiveness and accountability.

All in all, the summit took many steps in the right

direction, shaping our vision and sharpening our tools.

But there is another, hidden part of the story. Do all of

us really want the United Nations to grow stronger and

more efficient? Will a better, reformed — and truly

universal — United Nations be able to spare the world

all of its troubles? Will it be able to find solutions to

every conflict and bring lasting peace to every

notorious hot spot, including the Balkans, the Middle

East, Iraq, Afghanistan and a number of places in

Africa? Will it be able to prevent millions of people

from dying from hunger and diseases such as

HIV/AIDS? Will it be strong enough to guarantee and

promote democracy and human rights?

There is hope, and there is a chance — but the

answer depends on us. I can assure the Assembly that

the Czech Republic is ready to carry out its part of the

assignment, including in the Security Council if elected

for the period 2008-2009.