Latvia, 1995

Allow me to congratulate

Mr. Diogo Freitas do Amaral on his election as President

of the General Assembly. I wish all of us a productive

and fruitful session.

I also wish to thank His Excellency Mr. Amara

Essy, President of the Assembly at its forty-ninth session,

for his able leadership, and to give due recognition to the

Secretary-General for his achievements in restructuring

the United Nations on the eve of its golden

anniversary — an occasion for remembrance and

celebration, but also a time for reflection and appraisal.

The Baltic States have participated in the work of

the United Nations only since 1991. Nevertheless, during

the long years of occupation the United Nations was

perceived in Latvia as a unique global international

Organization embodying humanity’s ideas about freedom,

human rights, sovereign equality and respect for the

principles of international law.

I shall not join in detracting and criticizing the

United Nations, for it is not an entity existing on its own.

12

General Assembly 21st plenary meeting

Rather, the effectiveness of the Organization is a function

of the political will of its Member States and their resolve

to find common ground. In criticizing the United Nations,

we should keep in mind the amount of criticism that must

be directed against ourselves.

It is to be hoped that the end of the cold war has put

an end to balance-of-power politics. Still, the situation in

the world today evokes historical analogies — about

collective security, aggressors and their appeasement. A

generation of Latvians still alive remembers the results of

appeasement in 1939. It is often stated that today’s leaders

must try not to repeat the mistakes of the past. The notion

that they have succeeded is belied by the recent

establishment of international ad hoc tribunals regarding the

territory of the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and by the

pressing need for an international criminal court.

Conflict-prevention mechanisms, including preventive

diplomacy and preventive deployment, as well as other

confidence-building measures, have become increasingly

important. The establishment of political dialogue between

parties and early action by the international community are

a key to heading off potential conflicts.

The status of the United Nations as a centre for

conflict resolution may be enhanced by promoting the

universality of the Organization. We support the statement

of the Secretary-General that the process of arms control

and disarmament needs to be globalized and that it is vital

that all States be engaged in the disarmament process in

practice as well as in declared intent. Latvia supported the

unconditional and indefinite extension of the Treaty on the

Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. We hope that

another historic step will be taken next year with the

conclusion of a comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty.

The dramatic rise in the number and complexity of

peace-keeping operations in recent years, as well as the

distinctive nature and experience of each operation, requires

new approaches to peace-keeping. Humanitarian assistance,

human rights and economic and political questions are now

integral components of peace-keeping. Experience shows

that it is necessary to detach peace-keeping from

enforcement action. In Somalia, as well as in the territory

of the former Yugoslavia, peace-keepers have been

perceived as enemies. In such cases the most suitable

solution is for the United Nations to grant clearly defined

authority to international organizations or groups of States

that have the desire and the capacity to establish peace.

Recognizing that each State has a duty to contribute

to the maintenance of international peace and security,

Latvia is ready to participate, within the Danish battalion,

in bringing peace to the territory of the former

Yugoslavia. For the purposes of peace-keeping, the Baltic

States have established a Baltic battalion (BALTBAT),

which is currently undergoing intensive training in

preparation for a future role in peace-keeping missions. I

take this opportunity to thank all countries that have

supported the establishment and training of BALTBAT —

in particular, the United States, the Nordic countries, the

United Kingdom and Germany.

Latvia strongly supports efforts to strengthen and

reform the United Nations system so that it may better

serve the peoples of the Earth. It recognizes that it is still

too early to clearly perceive the shape of the post-cold-

war world, which must be the final determinant of the

nature of the necessary reforms.

In these circumstances there is a need to view

reforms of the United Nations system as a long-term,

ongoing process that must protect the stability of the

United Nations system at all times. At the same time,

there is an opportunity for progress in regard to reforms

which can be made without making permanent

commitments to new fundamental system structures and

procedures.

In the light of these general considerations, I should

now like to address Security Council reforms and United

Nations system financing issues.

The operation of the Security Council must continue

to become more transparent and open, while preserving

the Council’s effectiveness. Its expansion must strengthen

the role played by small countries in global

decision-making, while respecting equitable geographic

distribution and the new geopolitical realities of the

post-cold-war era.

Since there is general agreement about the need for

a modest expansion of the Security Council, the General

Assembly could immediately decide to carry it out, if the

decision would not force Member States to make

permanent commitments on the two controversial

issues — the composition of the Council and the use of

the veto. Latvia intends to make proposals in this regard

to the relevant Working Group of the General Assembly.

The current system of financing the activities of the

United Nations depends largely on assessed and voluntary

13

General Assembly 21st plenary meeting

contributions of Member States. The unprecedented

difficulties of financing the recent growth in international

activities have exposed the limitations of the current

system, in which international activities have to compete for

funds against national activities that have stronger

constituencies.

A recent report, commissioned by the Independent

Commission for Population and Quality of Life, on

innovative financing mechanisms for internationally agreed

programmes, has made a number of recommendations to

study and compile information relevant to such

mechanisms. Latvia would support a decision by the

General Assembly at this fiftieth session to prepare a

compilation of information relevant to, and appropriate

studies of, innovative financing mechanisms.

Innovative financing mechanisms are a matter for the

future. Even then, they should not supplant the current

system, which, however, needs to be improved.

Governments have a long-range interest in strengthening the

United Nations by completing the reform of the current,

highly inequitable scale of assessments for the regular

budget. The reformed scale must obey the equitable

principle that Member States with equal average per capita

incomes should bear assessments that are broadly at the

same per capita level.

The current inequitable scale is one cause of the

current financial crisis of the United Nations, in that the

over-assessed States are responsible for relatively high

amounts of outstanding contributions, including arrears

from preceding years.

This observation is illustrated by the case of the 15

Member States, including Latvia, that were over-assessed

by a General Assembly decision, adopted by vote, in 1992.

A second decision in 1994 improved the situation

somewhat, by initiating a gradual decline in the excessive

assessment, which in 1997 will still be two times higher

than the assessment based on the principle of capacity-

to-pay.

While Latvia recognizes and tries to discharge its

obligation, derived from the principle of sovereign equality,

to pay in full and on time, it also believes that a second

component of the principle of sovereign equality — the

equal rights of all Member States — is not respected by the

present assessment. The resulting over-assessment is a

reason that has led, in spite of Latvia’s best efforts under

difficult financial conditions and in the face of many

pressing social, economic and humanitarian needs, to a

build-up of arrears which now threaten the application of

Article 19 of the Charter, beginning January 1996. It will

force Latvia to seek relief from the General Assembly.

In discussing the work of the United Nations in the

economic and social sphere, it is useful to do so from the

perspective of the individual. Is he or she secure? Has he

or she enough food? Does he or she have adequate living

conditions and opportunities for developing his or her

potential?

In the world today, enormous differences in levels of

development persist among countries. The United Nations

has accomplished a great deal in its work to eradicate

poverty and disease and to provide humanitarian relief. It

would be possible to further improve this work by

improving coordination between relief agencies and

programmes and by eliminating redundancies. Relief must

address needs; the United Nations has a significant role to

play in needs assessment.

In the past Member States of the United Nations

have met in a number of global forums to highlight the

issues surrounding people-centred development. World

conferences in Rio de Janeiro, Vienna, Cairo, Copenhagen

and, most recently, Beijing have drafted platforms for

action. Such large gatherings are sometimes criticized as

being expensive and resulting in few tangible outputs.

Such criticism could be avoided if Member States were

to implement their commitments fully. However

implementation is greatly constrained by the financial

realities of each State.

Nevertheless, Latvia has implemented a

recommendation of the 1993 World Conference on

Human Rights by establishing a national Human Rights

Office, which commenced operations earlier this year.

The Latvian Human Rights Office is an independent

institution for the protection and promotion of human

rights.

The international community has agreed that human

rights are inviolable and are the cornerstone of democratic

societies. We intend to continue to implement the

recommendations of the Vienna Declaration and

Programme of Action, and urge other States to do the

same. Further, we believe that the question of the

adequate financing of the Office of the High

Commissioner for Human Rights must be resolved.

The environment is an area that, along with human

rights, demands Latvia’s attention during the present

14

General Assembly 21st plenary meeting

period of remedying the many consequences of Latvia’s

occupation. In this connection, Latvia is making efforts to

hold an international conference on disarmament and its

relationship to environment and development.

Latvia’s development, particularly in the social sector,

has been greatly assisted by the work of the Office of the

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),

established in Riga in 1992. The Government of Latvia

fully cooperates with and supports the work of UNDP, and

is ready to increase the level of this cooperation.

Latvia attaches high priority to the economic and

social work of the United Nations and understands the

obligation of each Member State to contribute to this work.

We value and support the efforts to reform the Economic

and Social Council and, in the spirit of sustaining and

furthering its work, have presented our candidature for

membership in the Economic and Social Council for the

period 1997-1999.

In pondering the future of the United Nations during

its fiftieth anniversary, allow me to quote Mr. Henry Cabot

Lodge, Jr., a former United States representative to the

United Nations:

“This Organization is created to prevent you from

going to hell. It isn’t created to take you to heaven.”

Let us remember these words as we look to the future of

the United Nations. Let us make the necessary changes to

our Organization and, moreover, concentrate our political

will so that we may ensure that humanity will always

remain firmly anchored between heaven and hell, on the

planet Earth.