Rwanda, 2000

May

I first, on behalf of our Minister for Foreign Affairs,

who could not be here, on behalf of my delegation and

on my own behalf, join previous speakers in extending

to the President our heartfelt congratulations on his

election to preside over the fifty-fifth session.

In addition, I congratulate his eminent

predecessor, Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, and the Secretary-

General, Mr. Kofi Annan, on the quality and great

quantity of activities carried out during the recent

Summit.

I also take this opportunity to congratulate and

welcome Tuvalu, the 189th Member of our

Organization. We hope that other potential Members,

such as Western Sahara in Africa, will soon be able to

join us.

The Millennium Summit — in which the Head of

State of Rwanda, Mr. Paul Kagame participated —

evaluated the twentieth century and formulated

recommendations for enhancing the work of the

Organization in the twenty-first century, now

beginning. As a number of speakers emphasized, the

twentieth century was the era both of great and

unprecedented technological triumphs and of crises as

great as the new means of destruction.

The distressing feature of the First and Second

World Wars was that they made use of the advanced

technologies of the late nineteenth century and the first

half of the twentieth century to cause enormous human

and material devastation. In 1918 and again in 1945 all

humanity was overwhelmed by the terrifying

consequences of a world war. “No more wars leading

to the loss of millions of human lives”; “No more

genocide”: these were the calls of the founding

countries of the United Nations when they met in San

Francisco in October 1945.

Today, as in the past, the international community

finds itself reliving horrors that it thought it had

banished for ever, horrors that include the genocide in

Rwanda in 1994. It certainly was not a lack of

theoretical principles of public morality or

international law that contributed to preventing or

stopping this genocide. These principles had even been

greatly strengthened in 1948 by the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights, and had been widely

diffused throughout the world by many organizations

that took up the banner of human rights.

2

The Brahimi report (A/55/305) was needed. We

welcome its conclusions and recommendations, and

take this occasion to warmly congratulate our

Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, on having

commissioned it and the two others that preceded it:

the Srebrenica report and the courageous Carlsson

report. Our Organization had its failures, but the

Brahimi report tells us that we can do better in the

future. To miss this unique opportunity to reflect on

what must be done, and how, would be to renounce our

responsibilities and the principles and values expressed

in the Charter of our Organization. Another Rwanda or

Srebrenica would disgrace us all.

Undoubtedly, we must look elsewhere for the true

source of the problem. It is surprising that even today

countries that claim to embrace human rights are

delaying and using pretexts to block prosecution of the

authors of the genocide. There are even some who —

afraid to accept or think about what happened — refer

to this genocide as what happened in Rwanda in 1994,

being afraid even to think about it. To take just one

example, I refer to the observations of Minister Yerodia

Ndombasi on 16 September.

In sum, my delegation calls on the international

community to draw every possible lesson from the

genocide committed in our country, so that “Never

again such a human tragedy” ceases to be an empty

phrase. Much more urgent is the question of assistance

to Rwanda for rebuilding and making good the huge

material and moral damage caused by the 1994

genocide. Such assistance was recommended in the

reports of the Independent Inquiry set up by the United

Nations and of the Organization of African Unity's

international panel of eminent persons. All the

members of the international community represented

here can help Rwanda rebuild and develop. And each

time we wish to do more for the Organization and

humanity let the Brahimi report serve as a source of

inspiration.

I take this opportunity to salute the Security

Council discussions of 15 April, when the

recommendations of the Carlsson report were

considered and the Council was urged to use its

influence to ensure that they were effectively followed

up by other United Nations institutions and agencies,

including the United Nations Development Programme

(UNDP), from which we are awaiting special

assistance as part of the development assistance

programme for Rwanda. We venture to hope that the

reforms under way at UNDP will lead to the provision

of assistance based on a sincere and enthusiastic

partnership according to the British model eloquently

outlined by Prime Minister Tony Blair during the

Millennium Summit. It is a partnership steeped in

equality, justice and fraternal solidarity for all. We

invite all our partners to embrace this initiative, in their

relations not only with Rwanda, but with all the other

developing countries — especially the former colonies.

The reports that I have mentioned also justly call

on the international community — beyond contributing

to the task of overcoming the devastating effects of

genocide — to contribute vigorously to preventing this

crime against humanity, in particular by suppressing it.

Those who hide, protect and advocate for the criminals

responsible for the 1994 genocide should think twice

before persisting in this evil behaviour.

I now come to the Congolese crisis, certain

aspects of which can be seen as an extension of the

genocide committed in Rwanda in 1994. It is worth

recalling that after their defeat and withdrawal many

militia members and former Rwandan soldiers who

were authors of the genocide took refuge in what is

now the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Not only

were these former soldiers and militia members not

disarmed at the time, but they have benefited from new

military equipment and training, allowing them to

commit acts of genocide along the borders and prepare

for a repetition of the previous widespread genocide

campaign. Is this not sufficient reason to ask a

responsible Government to act to preserve the

sovereignty of its country and the security of its

people? The Assembly can well understand that this is

hardly a case of a security pretext, but, rather, of a

current reality.

The plan for a massive invasion by the genocidal

forces was thwarted in November 1996 — thank

God — by the forces of the Rwandan Patriotic Army.

But from May 1997 to August 1998 it was necessary to

once again repel infiltrations from the Congo and to

resist other acts of genocide committed in the north-

western part of our country. The horrors of this

rebellion have been the source of a number of

resolutions, but the world seems to have rapidly

forgotten them.

It is in this context that our country now has a

military presence in the Congo — a presence whose

only purpose is to prevent a recurrence of genocide in

3

Rwanda by the same Interahamwe militia and soldiers

of the previous regime. We have more or less

succeeded in achieving our objectives. Since 1998 we

have captured many soldiers of the previous regime

and Interahamwe militia, contrary to what Minister

Yerodia Ndombasi told the Assembly on 16 September.

Most of these soldiers — there are many of them —

have rejoined the army. We are continuing to hold 135

of them while they await a decision.

We have also succeeded in saving some of the

Interahamwe and the soldiers of the former regimes, as

well as innocent civilians who had been held hostage

during all this time for purely military and political

purposes. In the category of liberated hostages, 12,000

were repatriated since August 1998, and the process

continues. We have established centres to receive them

on our borders with the Democratic Republic of the

Congo, and several humanitarian organizations,

including the Office of the United Nations High

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), have also been

involved. This is a secret to no one, and it has been

documented by the UNHCR at Goma and Gisenyi.

Those who are against our successes say that these

people are Congolese citizens that we have forced into

exile in Rwanda, because their departure has created a

vacuum in the operations of the allies of these forces of

genocide. They are our citizens, and no one can claim

to love them as much as we do. They are at home,

awaiting the others with open arms.

My Government welcomed the signing of the

Lusaka agreements in July 1999 and still upholds them.

Their main principles are, first, that the inter-

Congolese political negotiations should lead to a new

political order in the Democratic Republic of the

Congo; and, secondly, that the armed groups should be

pursued and disarmed, including former Rwanda

military and the Interahamwe authors of the 1994

genocide, who are still attempting to continue their

misdeeds, encouraged by certain of our Congolese

brothers who go so far as to deny their presence on

Congolese territory with the sole purpose of vilifying

us, to judge by the statement by Minister Yerodia

Ndombasi last Saturday.

The Rwanda delegation deplores the Kinshasa

Government's recently calling into question these same

agreements, despite the fact that they are upheld by all

the countries concerned of the subregion, the

Organization of African Unity and the Security

Council. Just before that, the Congolese Government

had created controversy by refusing to authorize the

free movement of United Nations military observers;

and that free movement would not be possible outside

those agreements, to which that country is a party.

As far as Rwanda is concerned, we believe that,

at this time, the Lusaka agreements constitute the only

framework that will guarantee a lasting peace in the

Democratic Republic of the Congo and in the

subregion. Any other approach in this matter would run

the risk of dangerously jeopardizing the peace process

now under way.

Furthermore, the slowness and hesitations

observed in our Organization regarding the deployment

of the forces of the United Nations Mission in the

Congo must be reviewed, and advantage must be taken

of the current offers to strengthen the presence of the

United Nations in the zones evacuated by the signatory

parties of the Lusaka agreements. Any attempt to

reduce the force would only lead to the kind of

catastrophe from which the Brahimi report tries to

spare us.

I should like to take this opportunity to commend

the growing role of regional and subregional

organizations in resolving conflicts. As is well known,

such a positive involvement has already led to

considerable results in various parts of the world,

including in South-East Asia and Western Africa. It is

our hope that the United Nations will adopt a similar

approach to regional contributions to its machinery for

conflict resolution.

If the question of conflicts in the world continues

to be one of the major preoccupations of our

Organization, it would no doubt be a good idea to pay

special attention to their prevention. This requires

being attentive to the efforts made to eradicate, or at

least attenuate, the root causes of conflicts, both

domestic and external.

With respect to Rwanda, the halting of the 1994

genocide was followed by courageous policies inspired

by the tragic lessons of our recent history. These

policies were translated into the following actions for

and factors of national reconciliation, as follows:

In July 1994, a Government of National Unity

and a Parliament were established including all the

components of the Rwanda population and all the

political circles of the country. This was an integrative

approach such as had never before been known in

4

independent Rwanda, despite the linguistic, socio-

cultural and historical advantages that militate in its

favour.

The policy of exclusion, which lasted more than

30 years in all sectors of national life, from education

to employment, was eliminated. We are pleased to have

abolished, 60 years after its introduction, the

identification card, which categorized people according

to their ethnic origin and their place of origin and on

the basis of which decisions were taken to kill people

or to spare their lives.

A skilled, professional national army was

established, including the forces of the Rwandan

Patriotic Army, which liberated the country, as well as

a portion of the forces of the former regime that had

separated themselves from the perpetrators of

genocide. We welcome their bravery and their

discipline. The United Nations needs troops of this

type for difficult operations in Sierra Leone and

elsewhere.

In March 1999 the National Commission on

Human Rights and the Commission for Unity and

National Reconciliation were established.

The judicial system was rehabilitated, which

guarantees the independence of the magistrature. This

judicial system has been strengthened by a form of

justice called gachacha, which, while keeping to

international judicial norms, will benefit from major

inputs of the population at the early stages of a trial.

This will have the advantage of accelerating the

prosecution of those accused of genocide.

In two and a half years more than 3 million

refugees have been repatriated. This is all the more

striking since Rwanda's refugee problem, having lasted

for more than 30 years, is the most numerous and

longest-standing in Africa. At present the only ones

remaining outside the country are families of criminals

responsible for genocide and some refugees whom

Rwanda wants to repatriate, but who are still being

manipulated by those criminals. Our head of State

asked them to return in his inaugural statement at the

Supreme Court, and some of them have begun to come

back voluntarily to the country.

Democratic elections were held last year.

Following the upcoming local elections, they will be

completed in October. These are orientations that today

guide the policy of unity and national reconciliation,

the need for which became clear after the genocide of

1994.

Beyond the eradication of genocide, there are

many challenges that deserve the attention of the

international community at the beginning of the new

millennium. These relate to the gaps between

developing countries and prosperous countries in the

context of globalization, the reform of the United

Nations system and many other current problems, such

as the spread of AIDS.

With respect to the gap between developing

countries and prosperous countries, the nineteenth and

twentieth centuries saw gaps between industrialized

countries and poor countries grow even wider. This

resulted from technology as well as from political and

commercial inequalities left over from the colonial era.

After independence many development proposals were

made, such as the provision of 0.7 per cent of gross

national product for development assistance,

technology transfers, a new international economic

order favouring fair remuneration for commodities, and

so on.

All these strategies have been the subject of a

number of international conferences. None of them has

been implemented sustainably or consistently. Some of

them have remained theoretical and have not even

begun to be implemented as programmes. But it is

never too late.

For some time now, we have been in an age of

globalization of economies in the context of structural

gaps that have not changed much since the sixties. My

delegation would like to emphasize the urgent need for

the preliminary adoption of certain measures to

facilitate the establishment of machinery for efficient

globalization. Is there any need to recall that the

external debt of developing countries constitutes, in

and of itself, a real handicap to their economic

recovery? How can one talk about growth in a context

where external debt absorbs 60 per cent or more of the

export income of these same developing countries?

What will be the result of globalization in an

environment where the competition of market

economies reduces in advance the role of certain parts

of the world to that of eternal consumers, with the

monopoly on production elsewhere? These are all

questions that deserve urgent answers and solidarity on

the part of the international community.

5

My delegation believes more particularly that the

success of globalization requires courageous

accompanying measures, such as eliminating the debt

for poor countries and providing support for economic

integration policies, in particular in Africa. This

requires our world Organization to endow itself with

machinery that can help to guide globalization.

For some time now, the United Nations has

rightly been concerning itself, at the highest level, with

the reform of the functioning of its structures. This is

an urgent matter, as it affects what is at stake for the

future and even the survival of all of humankind, which

can no longer be managed in the same spirit and with

the same structures as 55 years ago. We should

remember that the number of Member States has

increased from 51 in 1954 to 189 today; that is an

irrefutable argument for democratization. In this same

context, Africa, which has 10 times as many Member

States in the United Nations as it did when the

Organization was founded, must occupy the place it

deserves in the major decision-making bodies of the

United Nations, such as the Security Council and

others. The Bretton Woods institutions must also

change their character and behaviour if globalization

and equity are to be real and consistent.

In conclusion, I would like to speak about that

other challenge for our times: the AIDS pandemic. This

disease is currently responsible for the loss of more

human lives that the most deadly wars. The people of

the poorest countries are the most vulnerable in the

face of this disease of the century. The delegation of

Rwanda would like, from this rostrum, to make an

urgent appeal to the international community to show

solidarity in the face of the threat of extinction of the

human race that AIDS represents. Put simply, taking

AIDS lightly trivializes the crime of genocide. Both are

exterminating people and should be combated with

vigour and determination.

More specifically, aid should be provided for

humanitarian — if for no other — reasons, so that the

least developed countries can benefit from the most up-

to-date medicines, at affordable prices, that can provide

relief from people suffering from AIDS and do all that

they can to contain this scourge.

Furthermore, my delegation is convinced that an

effort to mobilize the greatest possible financial

resources would enable scientific research to take place

to bring this disease, and others, such as malaria, which

are devastating a large part of the population, under

control.

We hope that the twenty-first century, which is

just beginning, will usher in a world of peace and

solidarity that will meet the greatest aspirations of

humanity.