Luxembourg, 2007

Year after year the international community meets in

New York in September to debate the major issues of

concern to humankind. This traditional encounter is of

special importance in that it enables us to grasp very

directly and intensively, in all their complexity, the

challenges that confront us, but also to bolster our

determination to search for common solutions. That is

the very essence of the effective multilateralism that,

with great conviction, my country, Luxembourg, has

placed at the heart of its international action.

And what could be a stronger illustration of this

shared perception of what is at stake globally and this

resolve to seek viable solutions in the short, medium

and long, even very long, term than the high-level

event organized at the beginning of the week at the

initiative of the Secretary-General devoted to the

problems of climate change?

As already said on behalf of the European Union

by the Prime Minister of Portugal

whose statement I fully support, it is essential that

December's Bali negotiations on an effective and

viable post-Kyoto regime get off to a successful start.

That is our most basic responsibility vis-a-vis present

and future generations. For its part, as a member of the

European Union and a State party to the Kyoto

Protocol, Luxembourg, which has already undertaken

weighty individual commitments, is ready to engage

with great resolve in the quest for innovative and bold

solutions.

In order to address successfully the problems of

climate change, we must tackle them in all their

complexity. In this regard, it should be noted that in the

absence of concerted and energetic international action,

there is a great risk that countries and populations that

have contributed the least to the emergence of this

phenomenon are likely to be the ones to bear the

heaviest adverse consequences.

This, as I see it, is a political problem and, I

would say, a moral problem of the first order. More

than ever, the issue of development and hence of

sustainable development both in the North and in the

South must remain in the forefront of international

attention. Important decisions have already been taken.

Here, I would refer in particular to the decision taken

by the European Union in 2005 under the Luxembourg

presidency to attain the objective of 0.7 per cent of

gross national income for official development

assistance (ODA) by 2015. Faced with the risk of

stagnation in ODA, we must redouble our efforts to

meet our commitments.

A member of this all-too select Group

with ODA that in 2007 reached close to 0.9 per cent of

gross national income, and looking forward to

achieving the objective of 1 per cent that we have set

for ourselves Luxembourg can only look forward to

the expansion of this club.

The year that lies ahead is crucial from the

standpoint of development. There will be a need to

undertake resolutely, and in a way that seeks a

convergence, the World Trade Organization trade

negotiations, the follow-up to Monterrey in the area of

financing for development, and the implementation of

the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. Only if we

adopt generous and courageous policies will we be able

to build on these advances and reduce the delays that

unfortunately persist, particularly in a number of

sub-Saharan African countries, with regard to the

achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.

The convening in 2008 of a high-level meeting on

mid-term implementation of the Millennium

Development Goals would undoubtedly be a good

opportunity to take stock and relaunch our efforts. Here

I would also applaud the recent establishment at the

initiative of the Secretary-General of the Millennium

Development Goals Africa Steering Group. I am

convinced that this will make a significant contribution

in terms of coordination and intensification of efforts

vis-à-vis a continent with which Luxembourg

maintains relations of intense and multifaceted

cooperation.

The problems associated with climate change and

sustainable development bring me to another subject

that is dear to my heart and is at the core of the

international activities of the Luxembourg Government:

humanitarian action. When it first discussed the

question of climate change (see S/PV.5663), the

Security Council highlighted the numerous complex

interactions that could exist among natural disasters,

the stepping up of violent conflicts within and among

States and humanitarian disasters in various parts of

the world. We must tackle these emergency situations

on the operational level, seeking to make our action as

efficient and prompt as possible. But there is also a

need increasingly to place these emergency situations

in their political, socio-economic and cultural context

in order to try to mitigate their effects and, as far as

possible, to prevent recurrence.

It is from this standpoint that a new Luxembourg

Government strategy in the area of humanitarian crisis

management has recently been presented. The strategy

that rests on three pillars: emergency relief;

rehabilitation and reconstruction in the transitional

phase; and prevention.

On the basis of the United Nations finding that

one euro invested in prevention may make it possible

to save eight euros in crisis response and resolution,

nearly 5 per cent of the Luxembourg humanitarian

budget will henceforth be devoted to a proactive,

preventive approach.

The 2005 World Summit Outcome, which is more

than ever the road map for international action,

stressed the fundamental finding according to which,

“development, peace and security and human rights are

interlinked and mutually reinforcing. For my part, I believe that this is a cardinal

principle that should guide and inspire all action by the

United Nations and its Member States from an overall

standpoint of coherence in addressing the great

problems of the time: conflicts in Africa and I am

thinking particularly of the situations with tragic

humanitarian consequences currently prevailing in the

Sudan, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the

Congo, and, to be sure, Zimbabwe; the Middle East,

where it is important to support fully ongoing Israeli

and Palestinian efforts and to progress ultimately

towards a negotiated solution of two States living side

by side in peace and security, and also towards a

lasting solution for the whole region; and Afghanistan,

Burma/Myanmar and other hotbeds of violence and

instability. There is no denying that we must take into

account simultaneously the dimensions of peace and

security, human rights, States rights, the rule of law

and socio-economic development.

I would like now to speak of the courage of the

Burmese monks and other citizens who for weeks have

been peacefully expressing their aspiration to

democracy and respect for human rights. I condemn

most energetically the violence of the Burmese security

forces against these peaceful demonstrators and call the

authorities to put an end to it.

The imperative that I mentioned a moment ago

can also be seen very clearly in the work of a new and

innovative organ, of which Luxembourg has been a

member since the beginning of the year: the

Peacebuilding Commission. The integrated

peacebuilding strategies for each of the countries

concerned should take into account all the factors

involved in order once and for all to break the cycles of

violence and place those countries on a stable track

towards development. I would like also to mention in

this context the essential dimension of reconciliation

and combating impunity and to applauding in

particular the activities of the various international

courts, in particular the International Criminal Court.

The protection and promotion of human rights is

one of the key focuses of Luxembourg’s foreign policy.

I continue to place great hope in the new Human

Rights Council, which has just finished setting up its

institutional structures, including, in particular, the

universal periodic review mechanism, which is a

significant innovation.

Faithful to its convictions and commitments, my

country fully associates itself with the initiatives

announced by a group of States from all parts of the

world aimed at making progress in the international

debate on the question of abolishing the death penalty.

In this rapid overview of the international

situation in the area of peace and security, allow me to

linger for a moment on an important issue that is of

such concern to both the United Nations and the

European Union, namely Kosovo. The last act of the

Yugoslav tragedy, an urgent solution for the Kosovo

issue must be found. The Special Envoy of the

Secretary-General, President Ahtisaari, has been

working energetically to establish, in keeping with the

established guidelines, the basis of the future status of

Kosovo. The Troika of representatives from the

European Union, the United States and Russia is also

committed to a final attempt to bring the two parties

together. These efforts have been continued in recent

days in New York. As members know, the parties are

even now meeting in this building; I have high hopes

that dialogue will ensue. The Troika has agreed to

submit its report to the Secretary-General by

10 December. I reiterate that the European Union is

ready to fully assume its responsibilities in the region,

for which a European future lies ahead.

I turn my attention to another issue that is of

concern to international public opinion and whose

potential impact on peace and security is very

worrisome: the area of disarmament and nuclear

non-proliferation. A few days ago, I had the

opportunity to state the views of the Luxembourg

Government at the General Conference of the

International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. Here at

the General Assembly I advocate once again for

continued efforts in the area of nuclear disarmament

and a strengthening of the non-proliferation regime, of

which the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear

Weapons is and should remain the keystone.

I would also like to speak briefly about other

types of arms with destabilizing effects or unacceptable

consequences for civilians; small arms and light

weapons and sub-munitions. I hope that significant

advances may soon be made, on those two categories

of weapons in particular. The Luxembourg Government

for its part intends to participate actively in this debate

and is currently preparing a bill forbidding the

manufacture, storage, utilization and trade in weapons

employing sub-munitions.

The quest for international disarmament and the

strengthening of international regimes on weapons of

mass destruction consistently remain objectives of the

Luxembourg Government, because of the serious

concern we feel as we observe certain current

developments with regard to respect for existing

international norms, in particular with reference to the

Iranian issue.

While the agreement that has just been concluded

between the secretariat of the International Atomic

Energy Agency specifically Mr. ElBaradei and

the Islamic Republic of Iran goes in the right direction,

we note with concern that Iran has not yet taken the

necessary measures to bring itself into conformity with

the three relevant resolutions of the Security Council. I

appeal to Iran finally to take that action and to suspend

all activities linked to enrichment.

On the set of issues that I have just mentioned,

the Charter has entrusted a central role to the Security

Council. It is essential for the Council to adapt to the

political realities of the beginning of the twenty-first

century by enlarging its membership in the categories

of permanent and non-permanent members,

guaranteeing an appropriate place for the small States

that represent the vast majority of States Members of

the Organization. It is important also to modernize the

Council’s functioning for the sake of enhanced

effectiveness and transparency, with broader

involvement for the entire membership. On the basis of

the consensus decision that was adopted at the end of

the sixty-first session of the General Assembly (see

A/61/PV.109), I venture to hope that significant

progress will be achieved in the area of Security

Council reform in months to come. My country is

eager to make its contribution to the achievement of

the purposes of the Charter and to shoulder its share of

responsibility in international peace and security, and

thus wishes to become for the first time since it

placed its signature on the San Francisco Charter in

1945 a non-permanent member of the Security

Council for 2013 and 2014.

Security Council reform is an important portion

of the United Nations reform agenda outlined at the

2005 Summit. If recourse to a multilateral machinery,

with the United Nations at its core, is to be credible,

then the tool made available to the international

community must be commensurate with the

developments of our time and capable of responding

adequately to the expectations of efficiency and

effectiveness harboured by States and peoples

worldwide.

The reform effort should be pursued and

supported with conviction by a revitalized General

Assembly, exercising its prerogatives with energy and

discernment and achieving its priority objectives.

Reform, and thus the modernization of multilateralism,

can succeed only if it rests on the common will of all

Member States.

That applies in particular to the field of system-

wide coherence in operational activities. To overcome

the fragmentation that has developed over more than

60 years of United Nations history, to restore to the

system and its actors a more effective capacity for

action, particularly at the level of the countries and

populations concerned, and to strengthen operational

coherence in the eight areas covered by the report of

the High-level Panel (A/61/583) are primary objectives

for the performance and thus the credibility of the

United Nations system. They are also decisions that

need to be taken courageously and proactively in the

appropriate forums.

While the success of reform would be reflected in

a win-win-win situation for donor countries, recipient

countries and the United Nations as a whole, as

Mr. Ban Ki-moon has rightly said, the failure of reform

would be likely to marginalize the entire system over

the long term. The choice is before us; we must

shoulder our political responsibilities.

More than ever, effective multilateralism is a

great hope of our populations aspiring to a more just,

more peaceful and more prosperous world, where the

great ecological balance is preserved and where every

man and every woman can live in dignity and in full

enjoyment of his or her human rights. Let us not

disappoint that expectation.

And let us remember this very wise saying from

the Roman philosopher Seneca: It is not because it is

difficult that we do not dare to do it; it is because we

do not dare to do it that it is difficult.