Russia, 2006

Traditionally, the General Assembly session

provides an opportunity to conduct a review of the

current situation in the world, identify major

international issues and determine the role that the

United Nations could play in resolving them.

I believe that we have every reason to conclude

that there is a prevailing trend of growing awareness of

the need to strengthen the collective foundations of

international politics, as well as of the fact that there is

no alternative to tackling problems through multilateral

diplomacy. That trend is based on objective facts, for it

reflects the realities of an emerging multipolar

architecture of international relations. It is logical,

because answers to global challenges and threats can

only be found collectively. Finally, it is a manifestation

of historical continuity, because we are revisiting the

same objective as the founding fathers of the United

Nations were determined to pursue by enshrining in the

Charter the principles for a system of collective

security.

It is precisely such an approach, firmly grounded

in international law, that can ensure the world’s

sustainable development in this era of globalization.

That requires a strengthened central role for the

universal Organization in every area of international

life.

We must of course continue to adapt the

mechanisms and methods of the United Nations to the

new environment. Much has been done as follow-up to

the decisions of the 2005 World Summit: The

Peacebuilding Commission and the Human Rights

Council have been established, and the reform process

has been extended to management.

It is important that all our further work be based

upon the fundamental principle of the universality of

the United Nations. Patterns contrary to the Charter of

the United Nations that exclude individual States or

groups of States from participating meaningfully in the

activities of the Organization or that introduce a single

system of values into the work of the Secretariat are

unsustainable. Let us not forget that the United Nations

belongs to us all. Moreover, administrative reform

should not lead to the bureaucracy taking over the

management of the Organization, thereby jeopardizing

the intergovernmental nature of the United Nations.

A trend towards collective action has also spread

beyond the structures of the United Nations. During

Russia’s presidency of the Group of Eight (G-8), there

was greater interaction between the G-8 and other

leading countries and international organizations. Over

06-53005 28

the past 12 months our dialogue partners have actively

contributed to Saint Petersburg summit documents on

every main agenda item, including global energy

security, education and controlling infectious diseases.

A new and genuinely collaborative type of

interaction between the G-8 and Africa is now

emerging in this era of globalization, as the needs of

the continent are reflected in the mainstream of world

development rather than being viewed as issues

divorced from overall trends.

The G-8 does not have a monopoly over the

decisions taken at Saint Petersburg. All States are

invited to participate in their implementation.

Regional organizations and cooperation and

coordination between those organizations and the

United Nations have also strengthened in maintaining

international peace and security. Issues pertaining to

that were discussed yesterday at the special ministerial

meeting of the Security Council (see S/PV.5529). Once

again, we are dealing here with an important dimension

of collective action by the international community.

The Commonwealth of Independent States has

made a significant contribution to such interaction. To

address common problems, specific actions have been

taken within the Commonwealth area, primarily within

the Eurasian Economic Community and the Collective

Security Treaty Organization. Further substantive and

resolute efforts are being made in the context of the

Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which developed

and launched and initiative to establish a partnership

network for multilateral organizations in the Asia-

Pacific region. Development patterns in that region

will largely determine the future contours of our planet.

Multilateral institutions in Latin America have

also become stronger, and the development of the

African Union is gaining momentum.

At their recent Summit in Havana, heads of State

of the countries of the Non-Aligned Movement

expressed their support for a collective search —

within the context of the central role of the United

Nations — for agreed solutions to problems

confronting the world community.

Europe, of course, is not outside the common

trend towards collective examination and resolution of

common problems. In that connection, we also see

growing awareness of the fact that security and

prosperity are indivisible. We expect NATO to

transform itself from a defence alliance into something

more contemporary that would be in line with

principles of transparency and collective response and

based upon a universal legal foundation.

We have been watching with keen interest the

emerging foreign policy and security mechanisms of

the European Union. Russia is prepared to cooperate

with multilateral structures in the Euro-Atlantic space

and other regions of the world. In fact, we already have

effective common mechanisms with many of them.

Collective efforts are also needed to further

develop international law, primarily within the context

of countering new threats. The United Nations Global

Counter-terrorism Strategy (resolution 60/288), which

was recently adopted by consensus, is an important

contribution in terms of strengthening the legal basis

for the anti-terrorist coalition and ensuring a

comprehensive approach to counter-terrorism. It is not

only about countering all terrorist manifestations and

ideologies, it is also about eliminating the problems

that give rise to terrorism. The next step will be to

agree upon a comprehensive anti-terrorism convention.

It is necessary to secure the achievements that

have been made by taking practical steps. In the course

of Russia’s presidency of the G-8, the Second

Ministerial Conference on Drug Trafficking Routes

From Afghanistan was held, where additional measures

were approved aimed at mobilizing the international

community to counter the terrorism-related drug threat

originating from Afghanistan. Another international

meeting will be held in Moscow next November to

focus on developing modalities for government-

business partnerships in countering terrorism.

What is needed today are more proactive

measures to prevent lethal weapons from falling into

the hands of non-State actors, as well as the consistent

implementation of Security Council resolution 1540

(2004) and other counter-terrorism resolutions of the

Council. The Russia-United States global initiative to

combat nuclear terrorism, which was launched at Saint

Petersburg by Presidents Vladimir V. Putin and George

W. Bush last July, should be an important tool in

preventing a linkage between weapons of mass

destruction and terrorism. That initiative invites

interested States to act collectively.

The ever-growing demand for the unique

peacekeeping capabilities of the United Nations also

calls for a collective effort. Not all of those capabilities

29 06-53005

have been utilized to the fullest. Utilizing the

capabilities of the Military Staff Committee, as well as

those of regional organizations, on the basis of the

relevant provisions of the United Nations Charter

would be helpful.

It is encouraging to see a more active role being

played by Africans themselves in peacemaking

operations in Africa — an undertaking spearheaded by

the African Union and supported by the United

Nations.

In a number of crisis situations conditions are

gradually emerging for a transition to post-conflict

reconstruction. It is our hope that the Declaration on

Cooperation and Future Action in Stabilization and

Reconstruction adopted at the Saint Petersburg G-8

Summit will help us complement the efforts of the

United Nations and regional organizations at this

critically important period of transition to

peacebuilding.

A comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli

conflict remains a central task for the world

community. Many of today’s threats have come

together in that region, and the key to resolving them is

most often to be found there. In that connection, I

should first like to mention the truly global challenge

posed by the need to prevent a schism between

civilizations.

We welcome the emerging prospects for a

national agreement in the Palestinian territories, as

well as for the resumption of the Palestinian-Israeli

talks. It is important to continue to encourage the

parties to meet their respective obligations, with the

clear understanding that any progress towards the

objectives set out by the international community will

inevitably be gradual and that any attempt to act in an

all-or-nothing spirit will be counterproductive and

could once again plunge the region into confrontation.

The recent war in Lebanon demonstrated the

great fragility of the situation in the Middle East and

the acute need for a comprehensive approach along all

tracks. That presupposes the involvement of all

countries and parties. Without their participation it will

be impossible to reach any viable negotiated solution.

It is also clear that the road to comprehensive peace

will not be an easy one, but now is the time. The

initiative of the League of Arab States to convene an

international conference should contribute to finding

the proper framework for that undertaking. The Quartet

of international mediators should also make a key

contribution to the process.

A breakthrough on a Middle East settlement

could provide the positive momentum so wanting in

the region. It could also facilitate the solution of other

burning problems in the region and in neighbouring

countries. That is particularly true as regards efforts

aimed at stabilizing the situation in Iraq, where

attempts to contain wanton violence and chaos have

thus far proved unsuccessful. Dozens of people, mainly

civilians, continue to die in Iraq every day. Five

officials of the Russian embassy in Baghdad have also

fallen victim to that barbarous massacre. A resolution

in Iraq will be possible only through concerted efforts.

That requires the involvement in the political process

of all major Iraqi interests and the implementation of

the plans of that country’s Government to reach

genuine national accord, with the concerted support of

the international community, including all of Iraq’s

neighbours.

We are, unfortunately, now witnessing growing

significance of the use of force in world affairs; that

undermines non-proliferation regimes. The feeling of a

lack of predictability and stability in the area of

security is becoming ever more pronounced. Against

that background, the growing interest of many States in

nuclear energy may give rise to concerns, given the

trend towards the global proliferation of sensitive

technologies.

Apart from current resolute steps to find

negotiated solutions to individual problems — such as

the Iranian nuclear programme and the problem of the

Korean peninsula — there is a need for an urgent effort

by the entire international community to systematically

strengthen non-proliferation regimes on a generally

acceptable basis, while ensuring that the benefits of

peaceful atomic energy are legitimately accessible to

all States.

President Vladimir V. Putin’s initiative to

establish multilateral centres for nuclear fuel-cycle

services, along with similar ideas proposed by the

leadership of the International Atomic Energy Agency

(IAEA) and proposals put forth by United States

President George W. Bush, have found support among

G-8 leaders. We are confident that the development and

practical implementation of such approaches — in

cooperation with all countries with an interest in

modern and safe nuclear energy — will make it

06-53005 30

possible to resolve non-proliferation issues in a non-

confrontational manner.

As in other areas, the obsession with sanctions —

applied without calculating their consequences —

might produce unpredictable results. It is absolutely

necessary to eliminate the loopholes in the non-

proliferation regimes, but that should be done through

clear and non-discriminatory approaches, without

creating grounds for suspicion regarding the existence

of some hidden agenda.

Stagnation in the international disarmament

process does not help to resolve non-proliferation

problems. Here again, we need concerted action, for

this is a matter of collective security.

In the area of strategic arms, the United States-

Russian agreements play an enormously important role.

Their significance goes far beyond the framework of

bilateral relations, considering that virtually all

members of the international community benefit from

strategic stability. We support the consistent

development of the United States-Russian bilateral

disarmament process, as was stated by our Presidents

in Saint Petersburg in July.

Closely related to that are issues related to anti-

ballistic missiles, in particular within the context of the

existing plans of the United States. In that context,

there is a need for complete transparency and for an

analysis of the consequences for strategic stability.

The situation surrounding the Treaty on

Conventional Armed Forces in Europe continues to

cause grave concern. The old Treaty, based on the

realities of confrontation between military blocs, has

lost its relevance, while NATO is blocking the entry

into force of the Agreement on its adaptation.

At the same time, reconfiguration of the military

architecture on the European continent is under way. At

its heart is an expanding military alliance. Such virtual

arms control becomes meaningless as it turns into a

one-way street.

It is also necessary to revitalize multilateral

disarmament approaches. That agenda should include

the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-

Test-Ban Treaty, non-deployment of weapons in outer

space, conclusion of a fissile material cut-off treaty and

ensuring information security. Nuclear-weapon-free

zones play an important role, and we welcome the

creation of such a zone in Central Asia.

The overall task is to reinvigorate the efforts of

the international community in the area of disarmament

and arms control, within the framework of the

Conference on Disarmament and other relevant United

Nations bodies.

The 2005 World Summit unanimously reaffirmed

that peace, security and development are inseparable.

With that in mind, we are prepared to engage in

collective discussions and support further joint

pragmatic steps with a view to improving the

efficiency of the social and economic activities of the

entire United Nations system.

The Russian Federation realizes its responsibility

as one of the fastest growing economies of the world,

and is devoting increasing attention to development

assistance. Thus far, Russia has written off or has

undertaken to write off $11.3 billion of the debt of

African countries, including more than $2.2 billion

within the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt

Initiative. New steps are planned in that area. Russia

now ranks third in absolute figures of debt relief and

first in terms of the ratio of debt relief to gross

domestic product. We have also increased our

contributions to other international development

assistance mechanisms, including through United

Nations institutions and funds and the Bretton Woods

institutions.

Today, I cannot fail to express my sincere

appreciation and praise to the Secretary-General Kofi

Annan. For many years, during the most difficult times

for world politics, he has carried out his duties with

dignity. Thanks largely to the efforts of Kofi Annan

and to his ability to take the lead while remaining a

realist in the face of severe challenges, we have

managed to make progress in strengthening the United

Nations.

Today the United Nations is relevant as never

before. We do not have to create it anew. In the course

of reforming the United Nations in accordance with the

dictates of the time, it is incumbent upon us all to

reaffirm by action our commitment to the world

Organization, which draws its strength from our trust

in it and in its unique legitimacy. Without the United

Nations and its Charter to rely upon, it would prove

impossible to ensure a more reliable and democratic

system of collective security that would respond to the

dictates of our time.