Malaysia, 2012

At the outset, allow me to

congratulate Mr. Jeremić on his election as President

of the General Assembly at its sixty-seventh session.

I am confident that he will successfully steer the

proceedings of this session in an efficient and effective

manner. I assure him of Malaysia’s full cooperation and

support throughout his presidency. I would also like to

take this opportunity to thank the previous President,

His Excellency Mr. Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser, for

his leadership and guidance throughout the sixty-sixth

session.

The release of the distasteful and insulting film

Innocence of Muslims caused a wave of widespread

protests across the Muslim world. The problem was

compounded by the publication of offensive caricatures,

which further angered Muslims. It is hard to understand

how those responsible could resort to such actions,

knowing that they would offend and provoke 2 billion

Muslims, as anything other than blatant and malicious

intent and purpose.

It is our obligation as peace-loving people and

responsible Governments to prevent a small minority of

bigots from sowing the seed of hatred between Muslims

and the Western world. We categorize those people as

extremists. They insult Islam and advocate religious

hatred. Such extremists have shown absolutely no

regard for the implications of their actions. While

we condemn the irresponsible actions of those who

intentionally incite hatred, we are equally saddened by

the violent reaction that ensued.

Expressing anger by resorting to violence, killing

and destruction does not offer any solution to the

problem and only results in further division and

possibly more damage and loss of innocent lives.

We condemn those responsible for the death of

Ambassador Christopher Stevens and his colleagues

in Benghazi. We are equally saddened by the loss of

innocent lives, including those of women and children,

during emotionally charged demonstrations. A life

lost is one too many. Those who made the video and

drew the caricatures, as well as those who resorted to

killing, are equally guilty of extremism and must be

held accountable and brought to justice.

I believe that it is time to look deeper into the heart

of the problem and dwell on the real debate — the

relationship between freedom of expression and social

responsibilities, duties and obligations. The events we

have witnessed cannot be defended under the pretext of human rights, freedoms and liberties. A line should be

drawn when the prejudicial effect outweighs everything

else. Malaysia has always maintained that freedom,

including the freedom of expression, comes with

responsibility. The drafters of the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights, I am sure, did not have denigration in

mind when they cited the need to promote and protect

the freedom of expression.

Human rights need to be guaranteed by taking

into account the cultural and historical sensitivities

of a society. Nevertheless, they should also be

applied without selectivity or discrimination. When

we discriminate against women, it is called sexism;

when African-Americans are criticized and vilified, it

is called racism; when the same is done to the Jews,

people call it anti-Semitism; and laws are legislated

to persecute the perpetrators. But why is it that when

Muslims are stigmatized and defamed, it is defended as

freedom of expression?

In his statement during the International Day of

Peace on 21 September, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

rightly said: “We cannot let the voices of extremists

dominate the debate and inflame tensions. We need

voices of moderation and solidarity” (SG/SM/14522).

The Prime Minister of Malaysia, two years ago in the

Assembly, advocated a global movement of moderates

and called for all people of the world to join the chorus

of moderates so as to drown out the voices of extremists.

Embracing moderation is an important value that

should be ingrained in every society. Moderation

comes with a high degree of tolerance, trust and mutual

understanding. It uses dialogue as an important tool to

resolve disputes. With relative political peace comes

economic stability and socioeconomic development

in the given country. It is therefore important that we

continue to practice moderation as we face the rising

tide of extremism. Moderation is the best response to

extremism.

The first international conference of the Global

Movement of Moderates held in Kuala Lumpur in

January this year was well attended by over 500

participants from all over the world. It affirmed

the importance of moderation in the context of its

application to global issues and situations, especially

to matters that relate to social, financial, religious

and international politics. The Global Movement of

Moderates has gained the recognition and support

of the Commonwealth of Nations, the Non-Aligned

Movement and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. We believe that the Global Movement of

Moderates provides an effective platform for the global

response to extremism.

The theme of the sixty-seventh session of the

General Assembly, “Bringing about adjustment or

settlement of international disputes or situations by

peaceful means,” is timely because it reiterates the core

principles and values of the United Nations in facing

continuing conflicts and situations around the world.

We continue to have serious concerns regarding the

situation in the Syrian Arab Republic. We condemn the

violence and senseless killing that have taken place and

that continue to take place. As we contemplate the next

step forward, we have to bear in mind that any measure

we take must be in the interests of the Syrian people. It

is not about who is wrong or right; it is about putting an

end to the bloodshed and suffering, bringing a peaceful

and inclusive resolution to the conflict.

The unabated violence and killing must stop

immediately. The parties involved have an equal

responsibility for ensuring the end to the appalling

atrocities. Military aggression and armed confrontation

will serve only to exacerbate the problem and can never

be a solution to the crisis; instead, they diminish any

little hope there is for peaceful settlement. We earnestly

hope that with the appointment of Mr. Lakhdar Brahimi

as the new Joint Special Representative of the United

Nations and the League of Arab States for Syria, a

peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis will be found.

Towards that end, the support of all parties, including

the involvement of the United Nations, is very crucial.

The situation in the occupied Palestinian territories

remains bleak. For more than six decades, day after

day, month after month, the people of Palestine have

continued to see their lands confiscated to make way

for illegal settlements. They have continued to see their

families, including their children, displaced and forced

from their homes. Elsewhere, we are quick in calling

for action against those who force others to live under

oppression and without freedom and dignity. But we are

unashamed in not taking strong and decisive action to

ensure that the long-deprived Palestinians can exercise

their right to their homeland and regain their dignity

within the community of nations.

Surely, the international community, especially the

more powerful and inf luential nations, could do more

to bring Israel to the negotiating table for a two-State

solution, whereby the State of Israel and the State of Palestine could exist side by side in peace and security.

How can we continue to live in the face of that glaring

injustice without feeling an iota of guilt for not doing

enough to bring to an end this long-standing issue?

Like others in this Hall, Malaysia welcomes the

convening of the inaugural High-level Meeting on the

Rule of Law held earlier this week. At that meeting,

we adopted a solemn Declaration that the rule of law

shall apply to all States equally (resolution 67/1). We

rededicated ourselves to resolving disputes by peaceful

means and in conformity with the principles of justice

and international law. We also committed ourselves to

upholding the right to self-determination of peoples

who remain under foreign occupation, and to end

impunity for violations of international humanitarian

and human rights law. With that declaration, it is time

for the international community to put pressure on

Israel to fulfil its international obligations.

At the same time, Israel must stop all illegal

settlement activities in the West Bank as well as in East

Jerusalem. We are particularly concerned by the threats

to invade or divide the site of Al-Aqsa Mosque, which

would be a breach of Israel’s obligations as an occupying

Power. It is a holy site for Muslims and Christians alike.

Furthermore, Israel must lift the illegal blockade over

Gaza that has caused too much hardship for the people. It

must also protect the people under its occupation, fulfil

its international obligations and respect international

law. Most importantly, it ought to have direct talks

with the Palestinian Authority in conditions that clearly

demonstrate its goodwill and sincerity. A peaceful two-

State solution, accompanied by sustainable peace in the

region, should be the ultimate goal for all concerned.

Recognizing Palestine and welcoming it into

the community of nations has become a contentious

issue. Palestine is punished for wanting to become a

rightful Member of the United Nations. The feasibility

of a two-State solution is being questioned. However,

what choice does Palestine have? Furthermore, how

would becoming a Member of the United Nations harm

Palestine’s sincere efforts for independence?

The issue of Palestine’s membership of the United

Nations is tied to another bigger issue that is of

particular concern to Malaysia. Allow me to elaborate.

One hundred and thirty-two countries recognize the

State of Palestine. That number reflects more than two

thirds of the membership of the United Nations. Yet, the

Security Council — or more accurately, those members on which veto power has been conferred — are given

the authority to determine the fate of Palestine’s

membership, irrespective of the opinions of the

majority.

That is just one of a host of reasons that the United

Nations, especially the Security Council, needs to be

reformed. The Security Council will need to be able

to cope with the many challenges that the international

community faces.

There are so many instances when it has failed

to take action when action was needed most. It has

failed to do so because of the veto power that has been

conferred on the five permanent members. Thus, time

and again, it has become the victim of its own creation.

The composition of the Security Council should also

reflect current global realities. It should be democratic

and accountable so as to be able to fulfil its mandate to

effectively maintain international peace and security.

It is ironic that the very institution that was formed

in 1945 to promote and defend democracy among its

Member States should itself be undemocratic.

Virtually every aspect of reform has been argued

one way or another. There have been many proposals on

the table, but none has made any headway. Therefore,

despite the many years that the issue of Security Council

reform has been on the agenda of the United Nations,

we are no closer to actual reform than when we first

started. We call on all Member States to be realistic

and to find workable solutions to reform. There is a

need to approach reform with renewed political will if

we genuinely want to see progress towards achieving a

more efficient and effective United Nations. How long

can we go on like this? How long can we avoid the need

to reform the Security Council as well as the United

Nations as a whole?

It would be remiss of me not to mention the

meeting that many consider the most important one

to have taken place this year — namely, the United

Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held

in Brazil last June. Although the summit is over, much

work remains. The actions mandated in the outcome

document need our close follow-up, monitoring and

participation for their successful implementation.

Strengthening sustainable development and

environmental institutions, formulating a financial

strategy and developing the mechanisms for facilitating

technology transfer are among the important areas on

which we need to act in the year ahead. Accordingly, we need to launch a process to determine sustainable

development goals. The goals should be supported by

concrete action plans, with details on the various areas

mentioned in order to implement them. Malaysia looks

forward to working constructively and contributing to

that process.

I believe that we share similar concerns on all the

issues I have raised today. Bringing about adjustment

or settlement of disputes or situations does not concern

only the parties involved in a dispute or situation, but

is the joint collective responsibility of the international

community. In line with this year’s theme, we assure

the Assembly of our commitment to ensuring lasting

global peace and security through peaceful means by

embracing the principles of moderation.