Holy See, 2005

The summit

marking the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations

is over, but to bring it to completion our work here

must build upon its outcome document (resolution

60/1) so as to fulfil the agreed package of reforms with

vision and determination. The Holy See, having

followed the outcome document's development closely,

welcomes much of what is proposed. However, the

lack of consensus on arms control and non-

proliferation issues is regrettable.

I should also like to add at the outset that the

Holy See understands the references to both the Cairo

International Conference on Population and

Development and the outcome of the Fourth World

Conference on Women, held in Beijing, and to

reproductive health found in paragraphs 57 (g), 58 and

58 (c) in the sense that it set out in its reservations and

statements of interpretation at those Conferences, that

is, as applying to a holistic concept of health that does

not consider abortion or access to abortion as a

dimension of those terms. These caveats aside, the

document is a basis for implementation and ongoing

discussions on United Nations reform.

Due to the human tragedies of genocide, war

crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity,

the "responsibility to protect", as reflected in the

outcome document, has, for humanitarian reasons,

gained more acceptance. Its definitive legal

formulation could greatly contribute to the enrichment

not only of international law but also of sincere

solidarity among nations. To identify carefully and

honestly the causes of such man-made disasters is

indispensable to creating more timely prevention

measures. Protection of those in distress and assistance

to them go hand in hand with lucid analysis and public

awareness of the causes of humanitarian crises.

The silence of the outcome document regarding

disarmament and non-proliferation is worrying.

Nuclear armament is simply devastating for people and

for the environment; it destroys people's lives and the

substratum of every decent economy. We therefore

must insist upon nuclear non-proliferation. Likewise,

we must insist on complete nuclear disarmament and a

strengthened International Atomic Energy Agency

verification and safeguards system. No effort should be

spared to discourage not only the production of nuclear

weapons but also any trade or exchange in such

materials.

Of course, a secure world will not just be free of

the menace of war: it will be one where sustainable

human development is also assured, through sound

global governance. But, while global governance has a

logic of its own, it lacks its own ethics, something

which the world's nations must supply. We live in an

interdependent but fragile society and, in many places,

people's best interests are not served well. I should like

to mention here but three specific areas of ethical

challenge in this regard: solidarity with the poor, the

promotion of the common good, and a sustainable

environment.

Small gains made in this last area remain under

risk from, among other things, climate change, new

diseases, the irresponsible destruction of forests, water

pollution, depletion of fish stocks, the destruction of

global commons such as the oceans, and so on. It is

estimated that 15 out of 24 essential services provided

by ecosystems are being used unsustainably. The

enormity of today's environmental challenge obliges us

to rethink our notions of interdependence, global

cooperation and our common responsibility for the

stewardship of the planet. Differences on how to

address challenges should not stop agreement on the

identification of specific environmental threats and

common measures to tackle them.

Another core principle needs to be set out in the

form of the proper devolution of power to local levels

to ensure greater effectiveness and accountability,

known also as subsidiarity. The application of this

principle would foster a genuine respect for the rights

of nations and for the significance of culture, balancing

particularism and universalism. Global governance also

has to address the democracy deficit in order to assure

globalization without marginalization.

In this context, the United Nations becomes the

projection of the hope for peace and well-being in the

world. To fulfil this high calling, which is proper to the

Organization's nature and function, will require clear

characteristics of leadership, the courage of the

Organization and those who are part of it and a

common vision for its leaders, collaborators and

interlocutors at every level, so that they may succeed in

finding the right road to achieve the goals in view.

30

On the subject of the Human Rights Council, a

reform that improves upon the present arrangements is

to be welcomed. International law and its institutions

are vital for the application and enforcement of human

rights. Likewise, we should not lose sight of the

importance that the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights attaches to the incorporation of its principles

into national law and to education in fostering a rights-

respecting culture. Promotion and enforcement of

human rights at the national level and constant

attention to education will continue to be indispensable

to allow those rights to flourish in the new system.

The international community, the happy

possessor of the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights since 1948, appears, however, in the meantime

to have forgotten that not only essential human rights

but also human duties underpin the Declaration. These

duties establish the framework in which our rights are

contained, so that the latter are not simply exercised

upon a whim. The reference to duties in the Universal

Declaration reminds us that rights usually entail

responsibilities; and that if we expect our own rights to

be respected, we must respect the rights of others.

Indeed, the Declaration's recognition of the

interdependence of rights and duties was one of the key

features that enabled it to win consensus from nations

East and West, North and South. Today, when

globalization has rendered us more interdependent than

ever, a greater sense of universal human duties would

benefit the cause of peace, because awareness of our

mutual responsibility acknowledges duties as being

essential to a social order which does not depend upon

the will or the power of any individual or group.

The question has resurfaced of how there can be

universal rights in view of the diversity among

cultures. Some maintain that all rights are culturally

relative; others claim that universal rights are just

instruments of a given cultural imperialism; and some

believe the gulf between those two positions cannot be

bridged. My delegation, however, shares the faith of

the principal framers of the Universal Declaration, that

certain values are so fundamental that they can find

support in the moral and philosophical traditions of

cultures. For that reason, such universal principles or

basic human rights are undeniable. In their essential

core they have to be universally recognized and must

be operative erga omnes. To reject the idea that basic

rights are relative, however, does not require one to

reject a legitimate pluralism in their implementation.

Quite the contrary, for pluralism is the only way to

move beyond the sterile relativism-imperialism debate.

The Holy See, on the basis of its own long

experience in seeing how a common core of principles

can take root and flourish in vastly different cultures,

affirms the wisdom of the drafters of the Universal

Declaration in this respect. The framework they

fashioned is flexible enough to allow for differences in

emphasis and implementation, but not so malleable as

to permit any basic human right to be completely

eclipsed or unnecessarily subordinated for the sake of

other rights. Regrettably, the legitimately pluralist

approach to basic rights is sometimes forgotten, but it

must be retrieved if we are to avoid a top-down,

homogenizing vision of human rights.

In the wake of recent acts of terrible violence,

calls have come from various quarters to promote

greater understanding among religions, cultures and

civilizations. The Holy See supports the initiatives in

the field of interfaith cooperation and dialogue among

civilizations, especially where, in the spirit of their

reference to and reliance on God, they form

consciences, foster common moral values and promote

intercultural understanding and proactive

commitments. Those tasks require continued

evaluation with regard to motivation, policies, laws and

institutions. It is the mission of civil and religious

leaders to be a source of inspiration, support and

guidance for all people of good will who strive towards

sustainable peace.

The Holy See also understands that there is a

particular type of interreligious dialogue in which

religious representatives and their constituents engage

in discussion on the theological and spiritual tenets of

their respective religions and exchange positive

experiences with a view to promoting mutual

understanding and respect among all. That type of

dialogue does not appear to be part of the United

Nations Charter and is therefore better left to religious

experts and appropriate representatives of religions.

Nevertheless, the United Nations can make a valid and

important contribution to interfaith cooperation for

peace and development.

In concluding, I should like to add a word of

acknowledgement of the important contribution that

the United Nations staff makes to the Organization in

its efforts to promote harmony and solidarity among

peoples. Likewise, I should like to express once again

to you, Sir, the best wishes and support of my

delegation as you look ahead to an important and

fruitful presidency of the General Assembly.