Philippines, 2005

I convey my

delegation’s felicitations on your election,

Mr. President, on leading this historic session. I also

wish to express our deep appreciation to Ambassador

Jean Ping, whose leadership and wisdom proved to be

the key to the successful negotiation and adoption of

our outcome document.

Sixty years ago, enduring peace was foremost in

the minds of the founders of our Organization. Scarred

from war and stunned by mankind’s capacity for death

and destruction, they did not consider failure an option.

Our common humanity demanded that we build a

better and peaceful world. To do that, representatives

from 50 nations gathered in San Francisco, in a

building dedicated to those who defended and fought

for freedom, to draft a charter that would unite the

nations of the world for peace. General Carlos P.

Romulo, the head of the Philippine delegation,

articulating the hopes of mankind, said then at the

United Nations: “Let us make this floor the last

battlefield.”

Mr. Zarif (Islamic Republic of Iran), Vice-

President, took the Chair.

The leading lights attending the founding of the

United Nations are still familiar to us — Joseph Paul

Boncour of France, Wellington Koo of China, Andrei

Gromyko of Russia, Lord Halifax of the United

Kingdom, Edward Stettinius of the United States, His

Royal Highness Faisal ibn Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia,

Sir Ramaswami Mudaliar of India, Jan Smuts of the

Union of South Africa, Jan Masaryk of

Czechoslovakia, Herbert Evatt of Australia, Exequiel

Padilla of Mexico, and many others. Those visionaries

led the historic and daunting task of writing the United

Nations Charter.

A third of mankind was still under colonial

domination. Only three Asian nations were in

attendance. Most of Africa were not yet independent

nations. In a forum dominated by colonial Powers, the

Philippines fought to ensure the notion that the goal of

the Trusteeship Council should not only be self-

government but independence.

When the United Nations emblem was being

drawn, General Romulo asked that the Philippines,

although still a commonwealth, be included. He was

told that the Philippines would only be a small dot on

that now familiar map. He demanded nevertheless that

the dot be placed on the map.

The Philippines insistence on its place on the

world map, albeit just a dot, symbolized for many

soon-to-be independent and developing nations the

challenge facing the United Nations. The clear

challenge facing the United Nations at its inception,

and particularly developing nations, was to ensure that

freedom from want, freedom from fear and freedom to

pursue human dignity would be at the heart of the

political independence of the States.

Sixty years after San Francisco, we continue to

face the challenge of freeing all our peoples from want

and from fear and allowing them the true dignity that

they deserve as independent nations. The fight for the

political and legal independence of States is over, but

the fight to win for all peoples their freedom from fear

and want and to pursue human dignity continues.

For the Philippines, as a developing country,

freedom from want is of utmost concern. Poverty, the

energy crisis and insufficient financial resources,

compounded by debt, are the pressing challenges

5

facing my country and its people. We also face serious

security threats, particularly from terrorism — with

many of our citizens victimized by terrorist attacks. We

recognize the economic and social underpinnings of

such acts.

In the not too distant past, my country also had to

confront the threat of the severe acute respiratory

syndrome (SARS). Our national experience prompts us

to agree with the Secretary-General that these global

threats are all interrelated, and our different

perceptions of the imminence of the threats facing us

should not deter us from cooperating to address them.

This brings me to my central theme — that we

should let the bond of our broad vision of our common

humanity inspire us all to work towards a stronger

United Nations for a better world.

We agree with the Secretary-General that no

nation can defend itself against threats entirely on its

own. We agree that development, freedom from fear

and human rights concerns are interrelated and should

be equally considered in designing the solutions to the

threats we face. We believe that because of this

interrelation, these concerns should be addressed in a

comprehensive and integrated manner.

The world is facing the problem of unbridled

spiralling of oil prices. International cooperation on

energy is increasingly becoming an imperative as the

capacity and capability of countries, particularly non-

oil producing developing countries, to meet their

development objectives, including the Millennium

Development Goals (MDGs), are affected. This

unavoidably impacts on security.

The Philippines welcomes the 100 per cent debt

cancellation for the 38 heavily indebted poor countries.

However, the debt situation is expected to worsen, as

middle-income countries go deeper in debt with the

threat of rising world oil prices. Once more, the need

for other innovative and creative means of international

cooperation for debt relief also becomes imperative.

The Philippines has proposed the consideration of

the adoption of a debt conversion scheme

including “debt-for-equity” or “debt-for-Millennium

Development Goal projects”. The scheme calls for the

conversion of 50 per cent of the debt service into

equity for MDG projects of at least equal value with an

income earning potential.

Debt for development projects can focus on areas

that would achieve MDG benchmarks such as hospitals

and health care, schools, classrooms, information

technology, clean water, electricity, reforestation, eco-

tourism and many others that should help us achieve

our MDGs by 2015.

The nexus between development and

international migration cannot be overlooked.

Migration brings challenges and opportunities to

countries of origin, destination and transit. This is

another multifaceted issue that requires international

cooperation to be addressed in a coordinated and

coherent manner. A comprehensive and effective

international mechanism for cooperation should be

drawn up to address its politico-security, social,

cultural and economic development dimensions.

As one of the major sending States, the

Philippines stands ready to cooperate with all countries

in contributing towards the formulation of effective

mechanisms that would help ensure a smooth

management of the migration phenomenon.

The Philippines knows only too well the fear that

terrorism instils in the civilian population and the

anguish it brings to victims and close relatives. We

take cognizance of terrorism’s political, social and

economic underpinnings.

Our national experience has shown us the value

of dialogue in our approach to consider all those

factors. The Philippines wants to share this positive

value of dialogue and therefore has taken the lead in

drawing attention to the need for interfaith dialogue as

an integral part for the promotion of the culture of

peace. My President recently convened a successful

informal summit on interfaith dialogue and cooperation

here in the United Nations. The summit adopted a

declaration calling for greater interreligious,

intercultural and intercivilizational dialogue and

cooperation to ensure a lasting and durable peace and

understanding at the global, regional and national

levels. We invite all who agree with its principles to

consider endorsing the declaration.

We all acknowledge that the world has reached an

unprecedented stage when there are virtually no more

barriers, whether of space or time. Communication

technology has made possible the dissemination of

information instantaneously to practically all parts and

corners of the globe.

6

As the nineteenth century brought us the

industrial revolution, the twentieth century brought us

to the technology revolution ushered in by

computerization. The twenty-first century now offers

infinite possibilities to further advance the information

age. At no other time has the saying “no man is an

island” rang truer. As the Secretary-General has said,

what affects one affects all in this globalized world.

However, the information age is a two-edged

sword, as experience has shown us. While it opened

opportunities, it also brought challenges that we all

have to cope with. Our concern however is that just as

the limitless opportunities it offered could be used to

benefit humanity, it could also be used destructively.

Information technology enables companies to search

for lowest cost factors of production globally, operate

more efficiently and pass on the benefits to consumers.

However, this same technology also enables

disillusioned and desperate members of society to

become agents of terror and recruit adherents to their

way of thinking as well as to fund their destructive

activities. It is therefore in our common interest to

bring together our collective strengths to take

advantage of the opportunities before us as well as to

confront common threats.

For 60 years, the United Nations has provided us

the forum to draw up norms of conduct that take on

board all our concerns. From its inception with 51

Member States in 1945, the membership has almost

quadrupled to its present 191 States.

While the United Nations has, time and again,

adopted some reforms, at no other time has the

pressure for far-reaching change been starker than it is

now. The evolving global and regional security

environment, ongoing conflicts in many countries that

have multidimensional root causes and other

flashpoints have to be addressed. It is clear that in

pursuing our shared interest to preserve our common

humanity, the United Nations continues to serve as our

indispensable tool. It is therefore also our shared

interest to strengthen it.

Even before San Francisco, some key decisions

had already been reached among the major Powers,

primarily on the power of the veto, or what was

referred to then as the “unanimity rule”. Our

delegation, in concert with others, pressed for an

increased role of the General Assembly. We felt that

this was the balance necessary to safeguard the

effectiveness of the United Nations in maintaining

international peace and security. We also urged wider

and more equitable representation in the Security

Council — an aspiration that has yet to achieve

realization, and thus an advocacy that my country

carries to this day.

The outcome document of the High-level Plenary

Meeting provides the substance upon which to

strengthen the United Nations system. It should guide

us well in our discussions on institutional reform.

Six decades after San Francisco, our common

humanity remains at stake. We have today another

opportunity to make our United Nations succeed.

Whether the issue is United Nations reform or freedom

from want or fear, we must act now to ensure that the

principles committed to by our leaders at this year’s

summit be implemented effectively and efficiently.

Allow me therefore to present at this point some

practical strategies that may assist us in ensuring that

we achieve our goals.

Firstly, the agreed commitments should be broken

down into tangible steps. Concrete benchmarks and

pragmatic indicators of progress must be set.

Secondly, with concrete international

benchmarks, national strategies can be geared to

achieving them. All concerned national actors in

domestic procedures and actions should be involved.

This is necessary to put into effect and implement

multilateral commitments. Ideally, national actors

should be privy to developments in the negotiating

process and have the opportunity to provide their own

inputs with respect to the national position to be taken.

This is expected to ensure implementation and follow-

up to the commitments made by our leaders.

Thirdly, we must not lose sight of the need to

increase congruence among national, regional and

international plans of action. Keeping these in sight

contributes to a faster rate of achieving these goals.

National plans of action can be elevated to the regional

level, whenever feasible.

Fourthly, we must rethink our existing modes of

international cooperation. There will be value in

assessing how we have been collaborating bilaterally,

regionally and multilaterally. Let us assess the

effectiveness of our current modes of cooperation.

7

In adopting practical measures and in discovering

new opportunities and addressing new threats, we must

be mindful of the old hopes and enduring dreams that

led to the birth of our United Nations. As a child, I

listened with all innocence as my family closely

followed the work of the Philippine delegation in San

Francisco. I felt proud that my nation, the

Philippines — the Benjamin among the founders —

was part of this historic event.

We were rebuilding our shattered lives and

mourning our dead. Yet we held on to hope. We had

hope that no country would ever again crush us with

their bombs, trample us with their tanks or defile our

mothers, sisters and daughters. As a nation devastated

by war, we placed great hope in the United Nations. I

still remember the words that made us dare dream of a

better, more peaceful world — words heard by a child

through the crackle and static of an old radio, words

spoken by General Carlos P. Romulo in addressing the

delegates in San Francisco in 1945. He said:

“Words are more powerful than guns in the

defence of human dignity. Treaties are stronger

than armamented boundaries. The only

impregnable line is that of human

understanding.”