Iceland, 2011

Let me start by

congratulating His Excellency Ambassador Nassir

Abdulaziz Al-Nasser on his election as President of the

sixty-sixth session of the General Assembly, and

assuring him that he will have the fullest cooperation

of the Icelandic delegation.

In recent weeks, we have witnessed the worst

hunger crisis of this century in the Horn of Africa. It is

a devastating reminder that fighting poverty and

hunger is still the most important and challenging

undertaking of our times. Our collective duty and

responsibility is to help our weakest brothers and

sisters. As wealthier nations, we must do better in

providing relief. We must act with more speed and

more generosity to help those who are deprived of the

basic necessities of life — food and water. I can say,

my friends, that in Iceland, we have indeed decided to

do so.

I am quite happy to be able to tell the Assembly

today that the Icelandic Parliament has unanimously

agreed to substantially increase our contribution to

developing nations in the coming financial year. It has

also accepted a plan to raise our aid to the goal of

0.7 per cent of our gross national income. That is our

pledge, as agreed by every political party in the

Icelandic Parliament.

The fight against hunger and poverty is the same

struggle as the one we wage to protect our planet from

the ravages caused by the greed of our own species. All

Members know that, next year, we will celebrate the

twentieth anniversary of the bright new vision

introduced at the historic Earth Summit in Rio. Over

these past 20 years, deep concern for the environment

has indeed moved to the forefront of the global agenda.

But the Assembly also knows the sobering truth, which

is that the ambitions of Rio are still a far cry from

being realized. Actions are still needed. If ever there

was a time to act boldly, that time is now.

The key theme of Rio next year will be the “green

economy”. I assure the Assembly that my country has

expertise to offer that can help to fuel a green

revolution. Renewable energy, marine health, the

sustainable use of land and, not least, gender equality,

which have always been at the core of the Icelandic

foreign policy, are the four issues that we shall bring to

Rio next year. What we really need is indeed a

revolution, a green revolution. We need a seismic shift

from fossil fuels to renewable energy. That is the only

way to turn the ship.

In Iceland, we have some cutting-edge

technology on geothermal energy that we want to

share. That splendid form of renewable energy is the

most undervalued and overlooked source of cheap

power in the world. Of course, geothermal is most

11-51390 4

certainly not a silver bullet, but it needs to be a part of

the portfolio that we must develop to solve emissions

problems. Many members know that Central and South

America, East Africa and South-East Asia are home to

vast areas literally brimming with geothermal potential.

Icelandic know-how, coupled with outside financing,

could go a long way in making those areas self-

sufficient in terms of green energy.

As one of the largest fishing nations, Iceland has

always been deeply protective of the health of the

oceans. Today, climate change threatens to place the

fisheries of the world under a new strain. As we speak,

the acidification of the oceans resulting from human

carbon emissions is affecting the health of the marine

environment. This is especially true in the Arctic and

its vicinity, which is my home. As a marine biologist, I

fear that, more likely sooner than later, this may affect

the world’s fishing stocks, which are a vital source of

protein for more than 1 billion people. This is just one

more argument why we so urgently need to conclude a

post-Kyoto agreement later this year on the reduction

of greenhouse gases.

Every day, the Arctic bears silent witness to the

impact of climate change. The snow that I experienced

as a child is today fast becoming a rare event for my

two teenage daughters. The sad truth is that the Arctic

glaciers and the Arctic sea ice are melting at a much

faster rate than anyone ever anticipated. It is of course

true that the disappearance of the sea ice will open up

new and shorter transport routes from the Pacific to the

North Atlantic via the Arctic Ocean. We most certainly

will also see huge areas open up for the exploitation of

oil and gas resources.

This will come at a price, however. Climatic

changes are forcing the peoples of the Arctic, such as

our neighbours in Greenland, to change their living

habits. These changes will also melt the tundra, which

acts as a carbon buffer against the climate system, and

thus further accelerate the warming of the planet. The

already-fragile ecosystem of the Arctic will become

even more brittle.

Let us remember what happened in the Gulf of

Mexico and let us be aware that oil breaks down very,

very slowly in the extreme cold of the Arctic. We

should not allow the exploitation of the Arctic without

applying the strictest rules. That must be the

precondition for every human move into Arctic

resources.

I am often asked whether a country like Iceland,

which is not geographically small but has, admittedly,

slightly fewer people than most, can have any say in

action on issues of global concern, be it in Rio or in

New York. Well, to lift a phrase from a famous

statesman who spoke from this very podium a few days

ago: “Yes, we can”.

Twenty years ago, in 1991, we in Iceland watched

a television broadcast of thousands of brave Latvians,

Lithuanians and Estonians taking their destiny into

their own hands. They reached out to the international

community, among them the people of Iceland, and

asked for help in breaking the ice that was impeding

their international recognition.

The great British statesman, Lord Palmerston,

once made a famous statement to the effect that there is

no such thing as eternal friendship between nations and

that only eternal interests could determine how nations

reacted towards each other. That well-known mantra is

still taught today in every bad school of political

science. My friends, if Palmerston’s words had

prevailed, Iceland would have turned a deaf ear to the

call of the freedom fighters in the Baltics. We did not.

In the historic year of 1991, Iceland became the first to

recognize the restored sovereignty of the Baltic States.

We did that out of respect for the principles that are so

vitally important to small nations: the right to choose

your own destiny, to carve out your own future — the

undeniable right of small nations to be independent.

Principles do matter in politics.

Based on the same principle that led Iceland to

recognize the Baltic States in 1991, today we support

the Palestinian struggle for statehood. Based on that

very same principle, Iceland feels that the international

community should welcome Palestine as a new

Member State in the United Nations, based on the

pre-1967 borders — exactly the same criteria as those

laid down by the European Union, the Quartet and

lately, also by President Barack Obama in his strong

speech in May.

I have been to Gaza. I have talked to the people:

the fishermen who no longer can ply their trade, the

young people who are unemployed, the families that

need a roof over their head. I have also been to the

West Bank. I have seen with my own eyes how the land

of the Palestinians has literally been cut to pieces by

horrible walls of separation. That is wrong. That is

5 11-51390

unjust. That is against every moral code that Iceland

has ever stood for as a guardian of human rights.

We must remember that Palestine today is really

doing just the same thing as Israel did in 1947, and

Iceland and so many other States at the time supported

Israel’s action. Israel took its case to the United

Nations and emerged with statehood. Palestine

deserves the same. And I think it is hypocrisy to

suggest otherwise. In the middle of the democratic

revolution brought on by the fresh breeze of the Arabic

Spring and inspired, not least, by women and young

people, it would be foolish to deny Palestine its right to

statehood. Such denial would act against reconciliation

in the region.

It will, perhaps, not come as any surprise to

Members here, but Iceland will therefore vote “yes”,

when a resolution on Palestinian statehood comes to a

vote in the General Assembly. Furthermore, the

Icelandic Government is determined to fully recognize

Palestine and will next week submit to the Parliament

of Iceland a resolution on the recognition of Palestine

as a sovereign and independent State.