France, 2010

I

come to this rostrum on behalf of France to express my

sincere and fervent faith in the United Nations.

France’s ambition is to be a major actor in building a

system of global governance that is more just, more

cohesive, more social, and a global order that is

organized and regulated around a stronger, more

representative and more effective United Nations — a

United Nations capable of meeting the great challenges

of our century.

I look out upon the Assembly. I know many of

those present here today. For 25 years now — even

more — I have been going up and down the corridors

of the United Nations because I like the United

Nations, because I believe in the United Nations, and

because I know it to be indispensable.

I would like to speak to the Assembly candidly. I

am going to talk about men and women, suffering and

hope. I am going to talk about responsibility, because

we have responsibilities as citizens, diplomats and

political leaders to meet these sufferings, hopes and

expectations.

Of course, all of us would have an infinite

number of reasons to present a litany of generous

intentions, only to go home, our conscience clear, for

what we had said a little while before to the Assembly

and then go back to our day-to-day problems at home.

Of course, after the terrible economic crisis from which

we have barely emerged, we have to live with reduced

budgets and tense socio-economic situations. The times

are difficult and our fellow citizens are worried. The

temptation to retreat exists. Of course, to correct the

large imbalances and injustices that undermine our

society and to fight for the planet’s security and

development, we can always count on others. But

which others? There are no “others”. We are all here,

the nations of the world, represented in the General

Assembly, and we only have to decide together to act.

Not acting today would be to resign ourselves to

disorder, injustice and chaos. That choice will never be

France’s because it is not in keeping with our history,

or our values, or our interests. Faced with disorder in

the world, the greatest risk today would be to lapse into

routine. Please do not tell me that we cannot move

forward, that the situation is at an impasse. No, in the

past, we have been able together, collectively, to be

revolutionary on fundamental subjects, even at the

expense of the national sovereignties which we all

represent here.

Recall our boldness here in 1988, General

Assembly resolution 43/131, and then two years later,

resolution 45/100, on humanitarian assistance to

victims of natural disasters and similar emergency

situations. These resolutions allowed us for the first

time to guarantee free access of humanitarian workers

to the affected regions. Then there was Security

Council 688 (1991) (5 April 1991) on the situation in

Kurdistan, where, for the first time, the door was

opened to a military operation to protect civilian

populations against an oppressor State.

These were two historic moments which laid the

first markers of the right to intervene. This became the

responsibility to protect, which this Assembly adopted

by consensus at the 2005 World Summit (see resolution

60/1). Who could have imagined that such an upending

of international law would be possible? The fight was

long and difficult; it is not over — far from it. To speak

candidly to the Assembly, the results are not

completely what I had expected. But we must note that,

together, we were able to overcome some obstacles

which were supposed to be insurmountable. Let

nothing stop us from taking up subjects which we

decide on together.

Our first shared responsibility is development —

to make sure that all men and women, including the

most impoverished, have decent living conditions. The

widening gap of inequalities is not only morally

unacceptable, it is politically dangerous. Of course, it

is costly to act, but the cost of inaction is even greater.

The conclusions of the High-level Meeting on the

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that we just

held place our responsibilities squarely before us. This

37 10-55122

is an urgent matter. We can no longer ask suffering

populations to continue to wait.

The President of the French Republic, Nicolas

Sarkozy, reminded the Assembly of this fact, that France

is the second largest global donor of official

development assistance — €9 billion per annum —

targeted to education, health, food security, sanitation

and infrastructure. France’s commitment to development

will not slacken, but figures do not make a policy. Our

assistance must be judged according to its results. We

need to go further and move faster for children dying of

malaria — one every 30 seconds — for entire families

stricken by AIDS, and for all those who are hungry or

cannot go to school.

I ask the Assembly: what planet do we wish to

leave as a legacy to our children? Will we be able to

make an ambitious decision to combat climate change

and preserve our environment? This is a subject that

concerns us all and requires a global partnership, one

where we aspire to find an agreement on both reducing

emissions and measures to be taken in order to adapt.

And we must, first and foremost, ensure that the

commitments undertaken will be implemented and that

follow-up mechanisms and effective institutions will be

put in place.

For all of this, we must find a great deal of

money — several tens of billions of dollars per year —

for us and our planet. Let us provide the means to

realize our ambitions. The solutions are here, within

reach; they have proved to be effective and await only

our political will and our courage. They are called

innovative financing. The tax on airline tickets was a

step forward, a long time in coming. Today we should

go farther by adopting an international tax on financial

transactions which would permanently change matters

for development. It is an idea that I have been

defending for more than 20 years. It is a priority for

France now. The President alluded to it here a few days

ago.

Bear in mind that a minute tax of 0.005 per cent,

that is five cents on a transaction of €1,000, could raise

€30 billion to €40 billion per year, almost one quarter

of official development assistance. Who could deny

that this is a stable and predictable way of raising a

massive amount for development? Even with half of

that amount, it would be possible to send every child to

school in the low-income countries. Everyone agrees

today that it is technically and economically feasible to

establish such a mechanism.

And, make no mistake; we are not talking about

diminishing official development assistance or dodging

our responsibilities. No, on the contrary, this amount

would come as an addition. And so we must not waste

time, we are together, this is what we established this

institution for, this institution, unparalleled in history,

called the United Nations.

It is now a universally recognized principle that

development cannot occur without peace and security,

which are the basic raison d’être of the United Nations.

Here, the challenges remain considerable. Afghanistan,

Somalia, the Sudan, the Middle East — so many

conflicts continue to feed chaos throughout the world.

How many missed opportunities, how many

dashed hopes, how many misunderstandings have for

more than 60 years — I repeat, 60 years — marked this

process, peaceful in name only, in the Middle East?

The Arab-Israeli conflict concerns us all. I say Arab-

Israeli because, besides the Palestinian track, France

considers it just as important to work on the Lebanese

and Syrian tracks. Today we have before us a historic

opportunity. We cannot let it slip.

The process almost stopped yesterday evening. I

am not sure that it will continue in an orderly way and

with unanimous support. I hope it will. We have

limited time remaining. Palestine, the new State

Member of the United Nations which many of us have

been calling for, will be, I hope, the best guarantee of

security for Israel.

All States in the region have a critical role to

play. All of that is important, but what is necessary is

that the Israelis and Palestinians make a strategic

decision to put an end to this conflict in their own

interests. I would therefore call on the sense of

responsibility of President Abbas and Prime Minister

Netanyahu; together they must make the painful

compromises on the road to peace.

I have said that I have faith in the United Nations.

I served the United Nations, as perhaps you know, in

Kosovo and in a number of other places. I know,

respect and deeply love the men and women who give

life to the United Nations. From this rostrum, I wish to

pay tribute with emotion, affection and respect, to all

those who, in serving the United Nations, take risks

every day for our shared ideal of peace and

10-55122 38

development. I think of all the friends we have lost —

and the friends we may still lose — year after year,

and, of course, of those who take their place.

The fight is noble. Respect for the values and

universal principles of human rights constitutes the

indispensable foundation on which United Nations

action must be built. The ambition to build a world

order founded on universal respect for human dignity

has been and will always be at the heart of French

diplomacy.

Have we collectively progressed in our service of

these values? Not enough. How long will we continue

to accept — now that we live in a so-called

information society, a world where people can know

what is happening in other places — that, in terms of

human rights, there are so many blind spots, so many

forgotten tragedies and so much suffering that remain

hidden? As I asked at the beginning, what has become

of the responsibility to protect?

Today the success of the United Nations must

first of all be assessed in terms of its contribution to

the protection of civilians. That is the first area in

which our requirements should be upheld. Every day

massacres and rapes are committed throughout the

world, in Somalia, in Darfur and in the Democratic

Republic of the Congo, including in regions where

peacekeeping operations are deployed.

We can no longer simply count the victims when

mass crimes are committed. Our courage must not be

less than that of those who die from risks that we no

longer know how to take.

France believes that the International Criminal

Court is one of the most important advances made in

the history of a humankind conscious of the dangers to

which it is exposed by its own demons. France

understands the criticism of those that believe that the

Court is too slow or that it goes too far. Let us be clear,

France will always support the idea of international

criminal justice that is impartial and universal, for it is

the only way of fulfilling the imperative dictated by

our history, namely, combating impunity. To all who

are shocked by the boldness of some of the Court’s

prosecutions, I say that, on the contrary, it would be

appalling if the victims were deprived of their right to

justice.

Human rights, the protection of civilians,

international justice — these are not hollow concepts

or empty principles for us. For France, they are first

and foremost principles of action, and the only valid

criterion for judgement is the impact of our actions on

the actual situation.

In Guinea, after the killings in the Conakry

stadium, on 28 September 2009, we came together to

denounce the human rights violations and to assist the

victims of the atrocities committed. The Secretary-

General dispatched an International Commission of

Inquiry to the field one month after the fact, and I

would like to once again thank him sincerely for that.

The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court

instituted proceedings. That pressure enabled Guinean

civil society in the field to make the difference. Today

the junta has been replaced by a transitional executive.

Nothing has been won. There will be a second round of

elections in two weeks. But I wanted to recall this

success of the United Nations since at the beginning I

said that the responsibility to protect was threatened. I

think we can all agree that there is a movement

forming in civil society throughout the world and that

we can still take action.