Egypt, 2004

It is

a great pleasure to have Mr. Jean Ping presiding over

the General Assembly at its fifty-ninth session. I am

confident that his wealth of experience and the friendly

ties that his sisterly country enjoys with all countries of

the world will be a major asset for the Assembly as it

discharges its tasks.

The success of the present session will build upon

the accomplishments of the fifty-eighth session under

the leadership of the previous President, Mr. Julian

Hunte, who made an important contribution to the

revitalization of the role of the General Assembly in

various fields.

I would also like to express our appreciation to

the Secretary-General for his tireless efforts to enhance

the status of the Organization and to strengthen its role

in the international arena, in particular in the area of

regional and national development.

At the outset of the fifty-ninth session we must

scrutinize the international environment in which it is

being held. We have to consider world events to

determine their direction, to decide where we stand on

them and to understand their impact, whether positive

or negative, on the achievement of our shared goal: the

promotion of international peace and security.

18

Indeed, we need to pause to see where this world

and this international community are heading. Is it and

are we ascending towards upholding the values of

democracy, justice and the rule of law, or are we

descending into tyranny, the law of the jungle and the

imposition of the policies of fait accompli? Can it be

said that events in the world today emanate from a

genuine belief in the might of right, or do they, most

regrettably, represent a consolidation of the arrogance

of power?

The events witnessed by the world today are a

cause of grave concern to all those who believe in the

tenets and principles on which the international system

was established. We are witnessing the collapse of

noble values and the disintegration of principles once

thought unassailable. National sovereignty and

territorial integrity are no longer sufficient to prevent

interference in the internal affairs of States. Indeed,

those internal affairs have themselves become pretexts

for those who wish to impose their policies on others.

The international situation forces us to consider

the critical question of what we seek from this world

and what we have offered in return. We claim that we

want a world free from conflict and wars, but what

have we done to create such a world? We claim that we

want an international community governed by legality

and the rule of law, as the Secretary-General said on

Tuesday, but are we seriously upholding the values of

legality and law? We claim that we wish to see all

peoples enjoying democracy, but should States not

practice democracy in the conduct of their foreign

relations as well?

Relations among States are by nature volatile and

easy to break, but they are reparable. It may be difficult

at times to repair them, but the calculations pertaining

to constantly changing interests will eventually make it

possible to do so. Relations among peoples, however,

are different. Their wounds are readily inflamed and

heal slowly or hardly at all. It is therefore incumbent

upon us, in our feverish attempts to achieve our own

interests, to take special care to avoid flashpoints

between peoples, civilizations and cultures. Their

memories store all of their experiences and

tribulations. Nothing stored in their collective memory

fades or disappears with time.

For more than a decade now, Egypt has called

and continues to call for the convening of an

international conference under United Nations auspices

to consider the phenomenon of terrorism and to agree

on means to combat it through effective collective

international efforts. Proceeding from our belief in the

importance and centrality of the role of the United

Nations in the coordination of international efforts to

combat terrorism, as exercised through the General

Assembly and the Security Council, we propose that

the Assembly establish an open-ended working group

to consider proposals to increase the effectiveness and

efficiency of the United Nations and its ability to

achieve international anti-terrorism goals. That could

be accompanied by the convening of regional

preparatory meetings to catalogue regional needs and

areas conducive to international cooperation, which

could in turn ultimately lead to the adoption at an

international summit of a draft comprehensive

framework convention to combat terrorism.

I should like to take this opportunity to describe

the situation in our part of the world and the threats

and challenges it faces.

The main threat to the Middle East flows from

the continued acquisition by some of nuclear weapons.

While we all agree on the dangers posed by those

weapons and on the need to halt their proliferation as

one step towards eliminating them and freeing

humanity from the threat they represent, the

international community continues to address the

question of weapons of mass destruction selectively.

While the international community seeks to impose a

strict system to monitor the imports of all Member

States within the non-proliferation regime — which,

incidentally, includes all Arab States — it turns a blind

eye to the ongoing stockpiling of nuclear capabilities

by one party in the region.

I invite all to question whether it is acceptable for

the threat of nuclear proliferation to continue to loom

over the Middle East. I leave it to all to decide whether

the international approach to the question is fair or is

one of double standards; whether it is capable of

addressing those dangers and threats, or whether we

are in need of urgent radical change. The ongoing

application of double standards will not only

exacerbate the risks of nuclear proliferation and

weaken the belief in the credibility and centrality of the

relevant international regime, but also aggravate the

tense situation in the Middle East. In order to ease that

tension and to avert those dangers, in 1990 President

Mubarak launched the Egyptian initiative to create a

19

zone free from weapons of mass destruction in the

Middle East.

In the year that has elapsed between the opening

of the fifty-eighth and the fifty-ninth sessions, the

suffering of the Palestinian people has continued. The

Palestinian people has been subject to acts of

aggression and its legitimate rights have continued to

be violated. The tragedies visited upon Palestinians

have become a permanent item of newscasts and

newspaper headlines. A new report emerges every day

of the demolition of homes, the destruction of

infrastructure, the targeting of unarmed civilians,

assassinations, collective punishments, and the

imposition of curfews and closures. There is no end in

sight to such policies. All this suffering has been met

by an inexplicable international silence, with the

exception of some timid expression of dissatisfaction

or, at best, displeasure at events unfolding there. Such

responses entrench, rather than change, the situation of

fait accompli.

Israel also continues to build the separation wall

on Palestinian lands. The wall separates students from

their schools, workers from their factories and farmers

from their fields. Had Israel’s objective in the

construction of the wall truly been to ensure its own

security, it would have built it on its own land. The

advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice

declared the wall’s construction illegal and called for a

halt to construction activities and for the removal of

the sections already constructed. The opinion sent a

strong message to the international community in

general, and to Israel in particular, to the effect that the

torch of justice still burns bright. It may have seemed

to flicker, but it has not been extinguished. The scales

of justice still prevail. They may seem to have been

upset, but they have neither fallen nor been tipped.

Our region needs the construction of bridges that

connect, not walls that separate. Our region needs a

channel for the hopes for a promising future, not

barriers that hold the region captive to the past and its

tribulations. Our region needs the serious action and

sincere cooperation of all in order to dislodge the

political peace process from its current impasse and put

it back on track.

The way out of this bloody dilemma is well

known. It was laid down by the international Quartet in

the road map that enjoys the support of the entire

international community. The ultimate destination of

that path is also well known. It was enunciated by

United States President George Bush in his vision of

the establishment of two independent States, Palestine

and Israel, living side by side in peace and security.

That is the road before us; those are its landmarks

and its goals. There is neither time for waiting nor

room for foot-dragging. Prompt and effective action is

needed to break the cycle of violence, to restore calm

and to resume the process of political negotiations.

Such negotiations are the one and only way to end the

Arab-Israeli conflict.

In that regard, Israel’s intended withdrawal from

the Gaza Strip could be a significant step. If the

withdrawal takes place in a rational, disciplined and

orderly manner, it could enable us to begin to

overcome the crisis and to put the peace process back

on track. However, if it is carried out in an attitude of

stubbornness and short-sightedness, it will lead only to

tension and further violence.

In order to achieve the goal of an Israeli

withdrawal, a number of elements must be ensured. In

particular, the withdrawal must take place as an

integral and clear part of the road map, and it must be

full and complete. The withdrawal must include all

crossing points, the seaport and the airport; otherwise,

it will be just another way to impose a blockade on and

confinement of the Palestinian people. A complete

Israeli withdrawal means not only the departure of

occupation forces from the Gaza Strip, but also an end

to the policy of incursions, raids and assassinations,

which must be followed by a withdrawal from all the

occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank.

Despite all the efforts and appeals for peace, the

bloodshed continues unabated in the Middle East. We

had pinned our hopes on the transfer of sovereignty to

the Iraqi people at the end of June and on the formation

of an Iraqi Government and National Council. It was

hoped that those would be the first steps towards the

restoration by the Iraqis of their full sovereignty on

their own national soil and towards ending the foreign

presence in that long-suffering country. However, the

events of recent months and days have shown — and

current events continue to show every day — that the

Iraqi people continue to live in conditions that are far

from stable.

We wonder whose interests are served by the

events in Iraq. Who is to benefit from the destruction

of that country, with its age-old civilization? Will the

20

events taking place in Iraq remain confined to that

country, or will they spread beyond its borders like

fire, causing destruction and desolation in the region as

they have done in Iraq?

We call upon all parties to respect Iraq’s

sovereignty and territorial integrity. The people and the

State of Iraq desperately need a breathing space for

calm reflection on the best way to bring the country out

of the devastating spiral of violence. We call upon the

United Nations to continue its pivotal role in helping

the people of Iraq to rebuild their constitutional and

legislative institutions as a first step towards the

rebuilding of Iraq by the Iraqis themselves.

Moreover, there is an urgent humanitarian

problem in Darfur — indeed, a real humanitarian

tragedy that requires urgent international action to

contain it. But is it inevitable that such an effort take

the form of interference in the Sudan’s internal affairs

and violation of its sovereignty? Can we not provide

humanitarian assistance and relief to Darfur’s

inhabitants without encroaching upon the Sudan’s

national sovereignty? Are there enough military forces

in the world to be dispatched as invaders to every area

that is afflicted by a humanitarian crisis?

The affairs of the Sudan, with its ethnic

composition and its religious and cultural heritage, are

by nature complex. It is our duty to help solve those

complex and difficult problems, not to make them

more so.

The Sudan has signed, with the United Nations, a

framework for cooperation to solve the problem in

Darfur and to ensure humanitarian access to the

civilians in the region. That augurs well for the early

alleviation of this humanitarian tragedy, which

threatens to have dire consequences for the entire

region. We call upon the international community not

to confine itself to criticizing one party or another and

not to lay the blame on one set of policies or another.

What is more important and useful is serious action to

help the Sudanese people to overcome the crisis.

Egypt believes that, in order to effectively face

the challenges and threats to international peace and

security, we must improve the working methods of the

United Nations. Therefore, we have participated

seriously — and will continue to do so — in the

exercise of strengthening and revitalizing the United

Nations and its organs. It is our hope that that exercise

will be comprehensive, balanced and transparent and

that it will be carried out in full respect for the

mandates that established the various organs of the

United Nations. In that context, we need to reaffirm the

need to revitalize the role of the General Assembly and

to ensure respect for and implementation of its

resolutions by establishing an effective follow-up

mechanism.

I now turn from the wider context of United

Nations reform to the most sensitive reform issue:

reform and expansion of the Security Council. The

sensitivity of that issue clearly stems from the

Council’s increasing role in international affairs and its

effect on many vital interests and on the international

balances of power.

Here, I should like clearly to state Egypt’s

position, which is based on our membership in the

Group of African States and the fact that we have the

honour to coordinate the Non-Aligned Movement

(NAM) working group on this issue. Egypt hopes that

the deliberations on this subject will result in both

reform of the Council and expansion of its

membership. The United Nations and the international

community as a whole will not gain much if the

process is limited to expanding the Council’s

membership without truly improving its working

methods so that it can better represent the general

membership of the Organization and have greater

capacity to maintain international peace and security.

Egypt is fully committed to the Declaration of the

1997 Harare Summit of the Organization of African

Unity (OAU), which affirmed Africa’s right to two

permanent seats and three non-permanent seats on an

expanded Security Council. We are also committed to

the positions of the Non-Aligned Movement with

regard to increasing the membership of the Council to

at least 26 member States. Such an expansion could be

confined to the non-permanent category should the

expansion of both membership categories prove

difficult.

What about the composition of the Council? We

call for guaranteed representation of all cultures and

civilizations in an expanded Security Council on the

basis of the current geographical distribution in the

United Nations. We believe that the Council will not be

able to effectively carry out its duties in the

maintenance of international peace and security unless

it is more aware of the nature and circumstances

prevailing in all societies and of the cultural and

21

historical heritage on which they base and formulate

their policies.

Here, we must reaffirm the legitimate right of

more than 1 billion Muslims and more than 300 million

Arabs to be represented in the Council on an equal

footing with those who represent other cultures and

civilizations. In that context, I wish to recall the

significant contributions made by Egypt at the regional

and international levels and its central role in the

African, Arab and Islamic spheres. Also noteworthy is

Egypt’s role in the Middle East and among developing

and emerging economies. As a founding Member of the

United Nations, Egypt has made well-known

contributions to the implementation of the purposes

and principles of the Organization and to United

Nations peacekeeping operations. Egypt also played a

pivotal role in establishing the League of Arab States,

the OAU, the African Union, NAM and the

Organization of the Islamic Conference. In addition, I

wish to recall that Egypt possesses the components of a

regional Power in its comprehensive sense, be it

economic, military or human. Egypt also enjoys social

and political stability. Its diplomatic outreach is among

the largest, and over the years it has developed strong

international ties throughout the world.

Egypt has in the past expressed its conviction that

it is eminently qualified to assume the responsibility of

a permanent seat in an expanded Security Council, on

the basis of the Harare Declaration. We reiterate that

the considerations to which I referred demonstrate that

Egypt is clearly eligible, and has the capacity, to take

on the responsibilities of membership of the Security

Council, in accordance with Article 23 of the Charter.

We believe that such membership could be based on a

system of rotation with our African brothers, whereby

we would fill the additional seats that would be

allocated to our continent, in accordance with any

newly established status in the Council and with the

geographic distribution as would be worked out by the

United Nations.