Russia, 1994

At the

very outset I would like to congratulate you, Mr. Amara

Essy, on your election to the high post of President of the

General Assembly at its current session. I view this as a

sign of recognition of your country’s authority in the

international community.

The United Nations is approaching its fiftieth

anniversary, and the entire world has grown older along

with it. What is the world like nowadays? Has it become

better? Has it become wiser? And, most important, what

will the present generation leave behind to its successors?

No State, no people can be indifferent to these

questions. Here in the United Nations we must find

answers to them. This is particularly important for

Russia. We are trying to understand what kind of world

we want to live in, and exactly what kind of world we

should spare no effort to build.

The new Russia was born in 1991 as a democratic

State. Its birth was witnessed by the entire world.

For several years now we have been engaged in a

tremendous, and painstaking task, the essence of which is

to remove the legacy of totalitarianism and the cold war.

Freedom has come to Russia. The people have

obtained fundamental civil rights long denied them.

Profound economic reform is in progress in Russia. A

free market economy is being put into effect. Thus, each

of our new success stories reinforces Russian democracy.

Russia has decisively drawn a final line under the

Second World War. Our forces have been withdrawn

from Germany, Central Europe and the Baltic States. Of

its own accord, and at great effort, Russia has removed

any threat to the security of other States.

Furthermore, our country, through its own efforts,

has promoted the end of confrontation in Europe, setting

up new security structures there, not only for a select

number, the chosen but for all. The Conference on

Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) should

become a powerful driving force in that process.

1

We expect there to be more understanding on the part

of our partners with regard to the problems of security in

Russia. We count on their ability to overcome the old

suspicion inherent in a world divided into blocs, suspicion

that is now unjustified.

Russia is undergoing changes and regaining its

identity, but in every respect it remains a great Power.

Russia is ready for equal cooperation within the framework

of the international community, which should in turn accept

an active, open Russia.

We would like nuclear weapons and other kinds of

weapons of mass destruction to cease to exist. Efficient

control over the non-proliferation of the technologies for

their production is imperative.

Russia needs a world without wars and armed conflicts

and without environmental calamities. We favour the

development of international economic ties without

discrimination. Russia stands for a world capable of

combating terrorism, drug-trafficking and other types of

international crime.

To make such gigantic changes possible, efforts by all

the Members of the United Nations will be required. There

is no room for either soloists or supernumeraries.

Naturally, we cannot do without new relations between

the two major nuclear Powers. I am convinced that the

entire world has a vital stake in the establishment of a

strategic partnership between Russia and the United States.

I am ready for a serious and fruitful dialogue with President

Bill Clinton, who today gave an optimistic forecast of our

interaction.

Russia’s economic and foreign-policy priorities lie in

the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States

(CIS), the former Republics of the Soviet Union. Russia’s

ties with them are closer than the traditional relations of

good-neighbourliness; we have, rather, an extraordinary

blood relationship. In virtually all the CIS countries today

there is a growing desire for closer cooperation and a

genuine, rather than merely proclaimed, integration. Its

foundation will be good will and mutual benefit.

Attempts to use the contradictions between the CIS

States for selfish ends are extremely short-sighted.

Conflicts in a number of CIS countries threaten not only

the security of our State, but also security at the regional

and global levels.

We are acutely interested in the active participation

of the world community in settling these difficult

problems. However, the main peace-keeping burden in

the territory of the former Soviet Union sits is being

borne by the Russian Federation.

Our efforts have not been fruitless. A solid truce

has already been established in Moldova. The peace

process in Georgia is developing; hope of stopping the

bloodshed in Nagorny Karabakh is already emerging and

initial agreements on Tajikistan have also been reached.

Everybody knows how difficult life is for millions of

Russians in newly independent States; it is not a time for

complacency. Once they were in their own home, but

now they are guests - and not always welcome ones.

We cannot remain indifferent to the fate of our

countrymen. I an not referring to special rights or

privileges. But the people in Russia will not understand

if I do not state here and now that the democratic States

have to prove through their actions that guaranteeing

human rights is indeed the cornerstone of their foreign

policy. And in this area neither a selective approach nor

double standards are permissible.

Two years ago the General Assembly adopted the

Declaration on the rights of national minorities. At this

session we propose to come to an agreement on the

principles of that Declaration being embodied in the

legislation of all United Nations Member States.

Russia makes no distinction between settling its

problems and the problems of others. That is why we

particularly highly value what is done within the United

Nations.

The world is now at a crossroads. The tragedy of

the struggle of two opposing blocs is finally over. The

delicate balance based on power, fear and mutual

intimidation has disappeared for ever.

But the world is still not stable. The changes that

are taking place entail not only hopes for a better future,

but also profound anxieties.

It is not only Russia that is trying to respond to the

emerging challenges. To a certain degree, the united

Germany, Japan, the United States and other countries of

the West face the same problem. The same applies

equally to many countries in Asia, Africa and Latin

America.

2

The fundamental changes in international relations are

accompanied by the emergence of new problems. More

and more countries see strengthening the effectiveness of

inter-State structures as the solution. At the same time, this

does not always prevent an increase in the activity of those

who hold separatist and nationalist aspirations.

A veritable floodgate of regional and local conflicts,

national, tribal and religious enmity and economic, social

and political confrontations has been opened wide. The

bleeding wound in Bosnia has not healed. It is a tragic

paradox that in the wake of the cold war in Europe hotbeds

of war have flared up there anew.

The unprecedented tragedy in Rwanda resounds

painfully in the hearts of all people. This has proved to be

a defeat for us all.

But let us look around. Are there not other parts of

the world where more refined and civilized unlawful actions

are being taken against national and cultural minorities?

Are their rights and their security not threatened? Have

racism and anti-Semitism disappeared? Is there no longer

any discrimination against those who are categorized as

non-indigenous?

When aggressive nationalism is made into State policy

it is a grave danger for all mankind.

These problems are all the more urgent today because

the threat of local conflicts has not waned.

Each of these conflicts could cause a veritable

avalanche of geopolitical changes all over the world.

The cold war is over, but its material infrastructure -

the mountains of arms and the military-industrial complexes

of the developed countries - still remain. The spread of

nuclear weapons could make them into instruments of

terror. Huge amounts of weapons have been dumped onto

international markets. Unfortunately, vested interests

frequently prevail over the awareness of the danger implicit

in this process. In fact, this is nothing but an arms race

that has simply been transferred to the developing countries

through the market.

The worsening ecological crisis and the proliferation

of AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) and other

dangerous diseases are also realities at the close of this

twentieth century.

The lessons of history can be learned only with great

difficulty. Obsession with the idea of supremacy is

extremely dangerous. The pathological failure to accept

something different has time and again resulted in

numerous ethnic and religious problems and conflicts.

The fear of open political territory wind up once again

with a "cordon sanitaire" or "iron curtain".

Let us be honest: equality, partnership, mutual

benefit and cooperation still remain, to a large extent,

words used to cover State egotism. Such a situation

indicates an urgent need to develop a solid system of

security on the basis of principles and mechanisms of

cooperation on the part of everyone, and a need for the

reform of international institutions. Such a system should

be in keeping with the new conditions that now prevail

and should function under the auspices of the United

Nations.

As a specific contribution towards the establishment

of such a system, I would propose the following

measures.

First, we must speed up the negotiations on the

conclusion of a comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty.

Russia advocates the signing of this treaty next year,

when we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the United

Nations. We should also give thought to further steps to

limit Russian and American strategic nuclear weapons in

order to make it possible eventually to renounce the

inherited "balance of terror" based on mutual nuclear

deterrence.

Secondly, we must extend non-proliferation measures

to cover weapons of mass destruction. Next spring, when

the Conference of the States Parties to the Treaty on the

Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons takes place, it is

essential to adopt a decision to the effect that the treaty

should be open-ended and of unlimited duration. No one

has the right to deny this. In this context, we believe that

the non-nuclear-weapon States will need to be given

additional and more precise security assurances. We

propose the holding in the near future of a special

meeting of the Security Council, at the Foreign Minister

level, to coordinate and adopt a new resolution on

so-called "positive" security assurances.

Thirdly, we should launch a multilateral debate on

the issues with regard to the regulation of the

international traffic in weaponry and military equipment.

Moreover, there is an urgent need for all nuclear-weapon

States to participate in the process of the control and

3

limitation of nuclear weapons. We propose that a treaty on

nuclear security and strategic stability be elaborated by the

five nuclear-weapon States. Such a treaty could provide for

cessation of the production of fissionable materials for

military purposes, for prohibition of the recycling of

fissionable materials for weapons purposes and for further

elimination of nuclear weapons and the reduction of their

means of delivery.

Fourthly, it would be advisable to open discussions on

regional programmes to strengthen peace and security.

Regional security systems are being formed even now: I

am thinking particularly of the treaty on collective security

between the members of the Commonwealth of Independent

States (CIS) of the former Soviet Union. We believe that

at the present stage that the United Nations could direct its

efforts towards coordinating the process of building up

regional security systems.

Finally, the experience of recent years demonstrates

that the renunciation of the arms race is a complicated and

highly expensive process. Conversion of the military

industry gives rise to extremely difficult economic and

social problems that have to be dealt with, particularly as

they relate to the elimination of chemical and

bacteriological weapons. In this context, it is important to

pool the efforts of the international community. Such

cooperation among States would help to enhance the level

of mutual trust. In 1996, it might be possible to hold a

conference, under the auspices of the United Nations, on

international cooperation in the field of conversion.

Implementation of these measures will enable us to

substantially stabilize the situation in the world. However,

from the long-term point of view, these measures will not

be sufficient.

The former purely military understanding of the

concept of "security" has today become obsolete. The

range of problems faced by mankind is much wider than it

was. The modern definition of security is inseparable from

the notion of stable development.

The world is urgently in need of a strategy for the

twenty-first century - a strategy of mutual responsibility.

The most important points of reference for such a strategy

could be defined as follows:

- Stable economic and social development, not

only for individual regions and States but,

indeed, for the entire planet as a single entity.

People themselves must assume the

responsibility of carrying out this immense task;

- The renunciation of diktat by the powerful

vis-à-vis the weak. Any country, whether large

or small, should be aware of its responsibility

for the maintenance of order based on law and

morality;

- The unconditional recognition of human rights,

including the rights of national minorities. In

view of the great diversity of cultures,

traditions and the historical experience of

countries and peoples, fundamental human

rights are a universal value and we cannot

permit them to be devalued;

- Strengthening the ecological security of

mankind. The world is now facing a most

serious crisis because of the deficit of

resources, deterioration of the natural

environment, and many other negative trends.

Common sense and the instinct for survival tell

us to stop exploiting our depleting resources to

the detriment of nature, society and mankind.

Russia supports the programme on Global

education and observation to preserve the

environment. Moreover, this programme is

entirely consistent with the strategy of shared

responsibility. We intend to participate

actively in its implementation.

At the same time, I should like to emphasize that

only a profound understanding, on the part of each

participant in international cooperation, of his or her

individual responsibility can engender a common sense of

responsibility for the world situation.

To paraphrase a well known expression we could

say that the United Nations is a good idea whose time has

finally come. I should like in particular to note the great

personal contribution of the United Nations Secretary-

General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, to the cause of

advocating peace and settling regional conflicts.

If the United Nations is to achieve maximum

effectiveness in the twenty-first century, it must undergo

a well-thought-out reform.

Obviously, changes will be required both at

Headquarters and in the functioning of the specialized

agencies. Also, it will be impossible to avoid changes in

4

the Security Council, which should remain sufficiently

compact and an effective functioning body. This is

especially important because, according to the Charter, the

Security Council bears primary responsibility for supporting

and maintaining world peace and security.

We have to strike a new balance of law, morality and

force in world politics. The United Nations could play a

decisive role in these efforts in accordance with the Charter.

Russia stands ready, as provided in Article 43 of the

Charter, to enter into an agreement with the Security

Council to make available national military contingents for

United Nations operations. If a sufficient number of other

States follows this lead, then it could be possible to go

ahead with the realization of the concept of United Nations

stand-by forces.

The Military Staff Committee has already been

formally in existence for several decades. According to the

Charter its function is "to advise and assist the Security

Council on all questions relating to the Security Council’s

military requirements". Let them finally do just that.

The pertinent task now will be to work out a strategy

of peace-keeping, conflict and crisis prevention and, if

necessary, operations on peace enforcement.

Through specific actions, Russia has shown support

for United Nations efforts aimed at setting up efficient

mechanisms of response to humanitarian emergencies. We

stand ready to cooperate with all countries anxious to

reinforce the capability of the world community to produce

a rapid humanitarian response.

Because the problems we are increasingly

encountering are multifaceted, they require adequate

solutions. The question is not about who should enjoy

more rights - the United Nations, the regional structures or

States. The future world system can be truly durable only

if it is possible to find efficient and effective mechanisms

to address problems at all levels - national, regional and

global. Sharing responsibility will make it possible for the

United Nations to remain flexible and a pragmatic and

effective structure and enable it to focus its efforts on the

solution of the genuinely key problems faced by mankind.

Russia believes that these are all fundamental issues

that have a direct bearing on the fate of the world

community. Both the authority of the United Nations and

the future of world politics as a whole will depend on the

way these issues are dealt with.

People have always sought stability, happiness and

prosperity. But history provides evidence of the fact that

these goals cannot be achieved with the help of brute

force alone. Once again we become acutely aware of this

fact now that we are approaching a sacred date for

mankind: the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the

Second World War and the restoration of peace.

Let us remember with gratitude those who gave their

lives for this great victory. Let 1995 become the

universal year of commemoration of the victims of the

Second World War.

For the sake of those living and those who have not

yet been born, we must preserve peace and establish

stability on our planet. Mankind should finally feel that

it is at home, a home which is both kind and reliable.

Our civilization has always been varied. It is

precisely in the variety of cultures, traditions and values

that the possibility of development is basically found.

At this time, we have reached a stage when different

interests and aspirations of peoples can be achieved only

through cooperation among them.

The world community should make every possible

effort to ensure that its policies are embodied in the new

thinking about the influence of States, national pride and

patriotism.

The United Nations is a child of the world. Fifty

years ago when the Second World War was in progress,

it became abundantly clear that the future of mankind is

to be found in the realm of cooperation and tolerance

rather than aggression and hatred.

Cooperation and tolerance are prerequisites for the

next century.

This is the most important condition for there to be

a worthy future for our planet.

This is a unique opportunity that has been given to

the human race.

I believe that the United Nations, in fulfilment of its

general responsibility, will not allow us to pass it up, and

I hope that the great dream of peace to which all peoples

and States aspire to will take its due place in the life of

our planet.