France, 2009

In

speaking to the General Assembly in France’s name

today, I am well aware that we all have a historic

responsibility in the current circumstances.

In the midst of a financial, economic and social

crisis that has no precedent in the history of the United

Nations, and faced with the threat a global ecological

disaster, we must now invent a new world where the

follies of yesterday are no longer possible. That is our

responsibility. Now we all know towards what

catastrophes our obstinate attempts to solve the

problems of the twenty-first century with twentieth-

century ideas and instruments may lead us. No one

among us can claim any longer that he did not know.

There is a universal awareness that the path that

the world has taken over the past few decades is a dead

end. This awareness is born of sorrow, suffering and

fear. We are politically and morally accountable for the

suffering on our planet. Tens of millions of men and

women have lost their jobs and their homes. A billion

human beings are suffering from hunger, and hundreds

of millions have no access to water, energy or minimal

health care.

To those hundreds of millions of people, we, the

heads of State and Government, and no one else, must

restore hope. Those who are paying the price of the

crisis had no role in bringing it about. We owe an

answer to the people who are outraged by the

behaviour of those in the financial world who led us to

the brink of chaos and continue to seek to enrich

themselves indecently. We owe an answer to those who

are still dying in absurd wars from another age, while

humankind has so many challenges to face.

France’s answer is unambiguous. Things cannot

go on as they were. We must change. We cannot allow

it to start all over again, leading to another disaster

tomorrow. After such a strong disavowal of our usual

thinking and our deep-rooted prejudices, the task

before us is precisely the same as that faced by men of

good will who sought here to build a new political,

economic and monetary world order after the Second

World War. The generation that preceded us was equal

to its responsibilities. The question today is: Will we be

equal to that same responsibility?

The world will change. It cannot be otherwise.

The only question is: Will the world change because

we are able to act with wisdom, intelligence and

courage, or because fresh crises will arise if we are not

wise enough to take the path of radical change?

The truth is that we have already waited too long

to regulate globalization, fight global warming and

curb nuclear proliferation. And I should like solemnly

to tell the leaders of Iranian that they would be making

a tragic mistake in relying on the passive response of

the international community in order to pursue their

military nuclear programme.

We have waited too long to re-establish peace in

the Middle East by giving the Palestinian people the

State to which they are entitled in the name of law and

in the name of justice. And we have waited too long to

guarantee the people of Israel the right to live in

security, which the tragedies of history have made so

necessary for them.

We know what we need to do now: increase the

number of permanent and non-permanent members of

the Security Council. I say in the name of France, it is

unacceptable that the African continent does not have a

single permanent member on the Security Council — it

is unacceptable because it is unjust. It is unacceptable

that the South American continent, with such a great

power as Brazil, or India with its population of one

billion, or Japan or Germany, should be excluded from

among the permanent members of the Council. It is

unacceptable, and I say here that the legitimacy of the

United Nations is riding on this reform. Either the

United Nations reforms and its legitimacy will grow, or

09-52179 46

the reform fails and then decisions will be taken

outside the United Nations.

We must reform the International Monetary Fund

and the World Bank; that is indispensable. Voting

rights need to be more equitably distributed. The

missions of both the Fund and the Bank need to be

redefined. To maintain the Fund as the guardian of an

orthodoxy that has been so severely shaken by the

crisis would be a tragic mistake.

The international system has to be reformed. We

cannot have a politically multipolar world with a single

currency. That is not acceptable; it is not possible. We

have to re-engineer the financial capitalism system. If

we have a system in which the real price of risk or the

real price of rare resources is not being paid, that is a

suicidal system.

We need to eliminate tax havens, for we must not

tolerate places where money derived from speculation,

crime and fraud is stashed. It is up to us. No one in the

world would understand if we were to fail to live up to

this objective.

We need to curb the price swings of commodities

that are subject to excessive speculation, starting with

oil, since this instability is unsustainable. The countries

that have commodities must be paid a fair price for

their resources. We must not accept the speculation that

destabilizes the world over the costs of commodities.

In Copenhagen, we need to commit to

quantitative targets for greenhouse gas emissions. We

can no longer put off the moment of choice. We need to

set up a world environment organization. We need to

acknowledge the legitimacy of the principle of a

carbon tax border adjustment mechanism so that

nobody can profit from environmental dumping.

We cannot let the law of trade be the only law. I

believe in free trade, but there are fundamental

standards. We are members of the World Health

Organization. How can we impair the right to health of

those who have nothing? We are members of the

International Labour Organization, which has defined

the fundamental standards in this field. How can we

accept that those standards be flouted? The right to

health, the right to a minimum respect for one’s social

rights and the right to protection of the planet are just

as important as the right to trade. There is no single

right that is more important than the others.

We cannot ask developing countries and poor

countries to comply with these standards if we, the

rich, do not help them in their efforts. We all belong to

the same human race. We all live on the same planet.

We are all facing the same challenges.

So yes, we need to be able to share our

technology. France is ready to do so, and so are the

other wealthy countries of the world. Yes, we will need

to come up with further resources for development

assistance and for meeting the ecological challenge

together. I do not hesitate to say that we will find these

resources by taxing excessive gains from speculation

and profits. We do not have to look far for resources;

they are right there. I would like to appeal to all States,

to all international organizations, that the

recommendations made by the commission chaired by

Joseph Stiglitz be disseminated broadly. Let us make

no mistake about the way we measure economic

growth.

The task is a huge one, and it is only just

beginning. That is all the more reason for starting now

and starting quickly. We have little time remaining.

Each of us needs to realize what would happen if we

had to go home and explain to our fellow citizens that

we have been incapable of reaching an agreement, of

finding new solutions at a time when they are suffering

so grievously from the consequences of the crisis. I

wish to say very clearly that nothing would be worse

that a mediocre compromise in Pittsburgh and in

Copenhagen. World opinion and the current

circumstances demand that we find a real solution to

the problems and not just to pretend.

If we do nothing, the threat of the worst crisis is

not behind us but ahead of us. We are at one of those

moments in history when political decisions will have

a profound and lasting impact on the future. We have

no choice; we must take risks, since the greatest risk

today would be to do nothing, to let ourselves be

carried along by the force of habit, to think that we still

have time. France has come to tell you that we have no

more time.

I hope that this year, 2009, is when a new world

order — a more fair, more efficient world order — will

be established, one that each of us will be comfortable

with.