Holy See, 2013

At the outset, on behalf of the Holy See, I have

the honour to congratulate Ambassador John Ashe on

his election to the presidency of the General Assembly

at its sixty-eighth session. I am also pleased to convey

to the President and to other participating delegations

the warmest greetings from His Holiness Pope Francis,

who assures the Assembly of his kind thoughts and

prayers that the session will be crowned with success.

In the first days of his pontificate, Pope Francis

inspired enthusiasm and hope for a new horizon based

on a culture of togetherness that should form the basis

of all personal, societal and international relations.

That culture specifically recognizes the value of others:

the individual, social groups and States. It is founded

on human dignity and transcendence. It acts to reaffirm

faith, which is perceived with fear in certain segments

of contemporary society and wrongly accused of

leading to intolerance — when in fact it promotes

understanding and unity among peoples and peace.

It is my hope that this session of the General

Assembly will be inspired by the same spirit of

universal solidarity that was demonstrated during the

international day for prayer convened by the Pope on

7 September, which brought together religious leaders

of all faiths. May the session follow that path and inspire

a new dynamism such that all nations will take action

to resolve the ongoing conflicts and heal the wounds of

humankind.

The choice of the theme for this session — “The

post-2015 development agenda: setting the stage” — is

a timely one. The process of the implementation of the

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), including

the progress made and the limitations and difficulties

encountered, has demonstrated the importance of

establishing common goals for all members of the

international community that will bring them together,

galvanize them and assess their efforts — including

the United Nations and its specialized entities, regional

organizations and States. In that regard, it is important

that at this session the Assembly revisit the fundamental

concepts that make up the heart of the United Nations,

as they remain relevant to setting new goals for the

post-2015 agenda.

In the context of comprehensive human

development, the foregoing should be guided by

promoting the family, based on the union of a man and

a woman and the protection of the rights of the family

as the basic social nucleus and the foundation of all

stable and sustainable development. Those goals should

also promote a dignified life for all humankind, from

the oldest to the youngest child still at home, as well

as those living in the most difficult social situations or

most isolated areas.

As the deadline set to achieve the Millennium

Development Goals approaches, it is easy to see that

they have not been universally achieved. That is due, in

part, to limitations and lack of clarity, including along

ethical lines, and especially due to the difficulty in

creating an efficient consensus on the implementation

of Goal 8, in view of the resources necessary to achieve

the seven others.

In terms of that Goal, the decisions made following

the 2008 crisis aimed to find an equitable way to

manage the international financial sector and reform

the international financial institutions. Nevertheless,

it is regrettable to note that discussions on measures

to control the global economy took place among small,

limited groups of States, such as the Group of 20

(G-20); they did not include the poorest or least

populated States. While that was justified from a

practical point of view, such an approach does not

legitimize its decisions, which could have important

consequences for other States Members of the United

Nations that are neither direct nor indirect participants

in the G-20.

In order to guarantee the future implementation of

common goals for the post-2015 agenda, international

legal mechanisms must urgently be devised to ensure the

participation of all States in drafting and implementing

sweeping shared economic decisions. At the same time,

it will be insufficient to create financial or business

structures that are recognized as fair and equitable by

all States if we do not assess the results of the goals in

the long term, with the aim of guaranteeing that the

lives of those in need are clearly improving.

The future development goals of the post-2015

agenda should therefore identify monitoring and

adjustment mechanisms to deal with economic trends

and promote the elimination of hunger worldwide, the

gradual disappearance of slums, universal access to

drinking water and improved sanitation for all, among

other things.

That framework would be incomplete without

considering an external development factor that is

essential to the implementation of the MDGs, namely,

peace. While it is true that injustice and excessive

social and economic inequalities among peoples and

nations represent a constant threat to peace and lead

to war, it is also true that war, terrorism, organized

crime and other forms of armed violence at the national

and international levels represent the most significant

obstacles to development. Therefore, the matter of the

post-2015 development agenda should today be viewed

in the context of the serious conflicts under way — first

and foremost the conflict in Syria.

In facing such wars and massacres, it is crucial

that the international community choose the path of

development, with greater determination and courage.

If peace is considered the sine qua non of comprehensive

human development, it is important to return to certain

basic principles that the international community

solemnly swore to follow nearly 70 years ago.

The United Nations was created, at that time, “to

save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”

and “to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the

institution of methods, that armed force shall not be

used, save in the common interest”. The right to wage

war, which authorized the political and autonomous

use of military force, was replaced by providing the

Security Council with the power to authorize the use of

force which, under the Charter of the United Nations,

includes only one exception, namely, legitimate self-

defence, the conditions and limitations of which are

described in Article 51 of the Charter.

In that context, it is possible to consider that

following the tragedies of the First World War and the

Second World War, States created an international set

of norms that provide legal instruments that establish

the law based on the highest sense of justice. Indeed,

international law is no longer synonymous with the

laws of the international community, that is, laws based

on the traditions and customs of various States. Based

on the Charter of the United Nations, States sought

to reaffirm that international law was a legal system

whose fundamental objective, even if it is not the

only one, was to control the use of violence between

States, and in which the limitation of the use of force

to cases and under the conditions stipulated in the

Charter itself represents a fundamental constitutional

norm. Therefore, the limitation of the use of force is the

primary and essential principle in terms of the ultimate

goal of any legal system aimed at the protection of

individuals and their fundamental rights.

It is tragic that today, in spite of the valuable

United Nations legal principles, the implementation

mechanisms and procedures have not managed to

prevent serious civil and regional conflicts or protect

people. The African continent has many real or potential

situations of conflict, with dozens of armed groups that

sow death and suffering throughout the population.

In that regard, I would particularly like to refer to the

situation in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic

of the Congo and in the Central African Republic.

The Middle East continues to be a subject of

great concern, and in some countries of the American

continent drug trafficking has reached the level where

traffickers can wage war against States. There are

also significant hotbeds of tension in many regions of

Asia. In many of those conflicts, there have been or are

still United Nations peacekeeping operations working

in coordination with regional organizations. In that

regard, a tradition of great merit has been established,

which dates back to the origins of the Organization

itself. However, history has also shown that, when

the necessary means are insufficient or the prevailing

national and international interests weigh too heavily,

United Nations intervention cannot be realized or, if it

is undertaken, has only limited success.

Despite those difficulties, the whole experience

of peacekeeping and peacebuilding developed by the

United Nations should be seen as positive, including

those operations that have had weak immediate

results, because it is itself a concrete expression of the

two key principles of natural law, namely, the rights

intrinsically linked to human dignity. The first requires

that we do everything reasonably possible to avoid war,

given the evils and injustice that war leads to; and the

second affirms the permanent validity of moral law

during armed conflict. In that regard, acts deliberately

contrary to individual’s rights and those universal

principles are crimes, which in the most serious cases

can be described as crimes against humanity.

It is clear that, in the lives of people, armed conflicts

have led to deep divisions and serious harm that require

many years to heal. Today the example of greatest

concern to the entire world is the serious conflict that

has developed in Syria, which has already led to 110,000

dead, 4 million internally displaced persons and more

than 2 million refugees in neighbouring countries,

including in Lebanon and Jordan. It risks becoming

an international conflict at any moment. In addition to

the terrible loss of life, the conflict is destroying some

of the richest heritage of history, culture and human

coexistence, strongly linked to the three monotheistic

religions and the whole European culture heritage. In

recalling the long history during which, together, the

different parts of society built that heritage and sewed

the fabric of human relationships, I would like to note

the deep concern of the Holy See for the fate of the

Christian communities and other minorities, who should

not be forced in any way into exile, but rather should be

given a leading role in the future configuration of their

country, given their contribution to the common good.

The most recent report of the Independent

International Commission of Inquiry, established by the

Human Rights Council, demonstrates that massacres

and other serious violations of human rights have been

committed by the parties to the conflict. The same

experts vehemently affirmed that there was no possible

military solution. In that context, the Holy See would

like to reaffirm that any action that might aggravate or

even extend the conflict and increase the unspeakable

suffering of innocent people should be avoided.

In his recent letter to the Group of 20 leaders

meeting in Saint Petersburg, the Holy Father, recalling

the responsibility of the international community

with regard to Syria, described as regrettable the

fact that too many partisan interests had prevailed

since the Syrian conflict began and had prevented

the finding of a solution to the pointless massacre we

are witnessing. In recalling his words, I would like to

urge the leaders of States not to remain indifferent in

the face of the tragedies that have been afflicting the

Syrian people for far too long. To each and every one

of the leaders, in repeating the Pope’s words, I would

like to make a heartfelt appeal that they find ways to

overcome their differences and give up any useless

attempt at a military solution. On the contrary, there

should be a new commitment to seek, with courage and

determination, a peaceful solution through dialogue

and negotiation between the interested parties with the

firm support of the international community. Moreover,

all the Governments of the world have the moral duty

to give priority to any initiative that would promote the

provision of humanitarian assistance to those who are

suffering on account of the conflict within and outside

the country.

We would also note that, during the Syrian crisis,

the bodies and agencies of the United Nations system

have sought to deploy all available means to protect

civilians. Member States have, for far too long, shown

a lack of the courage needed to give priority to the

international resolution of the conflict. The Secretary-

General recently spoke of the collective failure of the

international community’s ability to prevent and avoid

the atrocities committed in Syria. Along those lines, I

would like to recall the concept of the responsibility

to protect, which the Secretary-General also referred

to, and I would also like to underscore the importance

of that responsibility for the Holy See. The adoption

of a political and legal concept of the responsibility

to protect during the 2005 World Summit, held from

14 to 16 September 2005, was a great step forward

by the international community. Unfortunately,

the responsibility to protect has sometimes been

erroneously understood to be a justification for the

use of arms, but in reality it means something quite

different. It is a profound and urgent spirit of solidarity

that calls upon everyone, starting with heads of State, to

understand their responsibilities with regard to serious

humanitarian crises wherever they occur and to commit

to ensuring that all emergency measures are put in

place — diplomatic and economic measures and those

related to public opinion, as well as the mechanisms

stipulated by the Charter of the United Nations — to

arrive at an effective solution. To provide continuity

to the ongoing debate on the responsibility to protect,

it would be a good idea to consider ways to explicitly

include that concept in the mandate of the Security

Council, under Article 24 of the Charter, and possibly

under Article 39.

In that context, the Syrian tragedy is both a

challenge and an opportunity for the United Nations

to breathe new life into all its bodies, mechanisms and

procedures in a specific, creative and positive manner.

In that regard, we must welcome the unanimous

adoption by the Security Council of resolution 2118

(2013), on 27 September. My delegation hopes that

the agreement that was reached on that document will

provide a definite impetus to the Geneva process, so as

to make it finally possible to restore stability and bring

about reconciliation in the country.

A peaceful and lasting solution to the conflict

in Syria would set a significant precedent for the

upcoming century and would indicate the path to be

taken in addressing other conflicts that the international

community has not yet been able to resolve. It would

greatly facilitate the inclusion of the principle of the

responsibility to protect in the Charter of the United

Nations. And, more generally from the point of view

of economic and social development, it would be the

most clear demonstration of the will to undertake,

with honesty and effectiveness, a path of sustainable

development post-2015.

Pope Francis, through his prophetic words and

actions on 7 September, launched a huge global

movement of prayer for peace, the results of which

were immediately clear in the public’s spontaneous and

sincere support for that goal. The scope of that effort

went beyond differences of religion, culture, nationality

or geographical origin, and exerted a strong influence

on world leaders. Accompanying the Holy Father and

under his leadership, the competent authorities of the

Holy See also took diplomatic action aimed at stopping

the violence and promoting dialogue between the parties

involved in the conflict, thereby putting into practice

one of the main goals of their international presence.

Along with the Pope and in line with the theme for this

session, we would like to reiterate here at the general

debate that war is the specific refusal to commit to the

achievement of the major social and economic goals that

the international community has set for itself. Indeed,

there can be no economic development without peace.

Armed conflict never leads to peace, which is crucial

for that development.

The Holy See believes, in line with the theological

and ethical teaching of the Catholic Church, that

because of the evils and injustices that any war entails,

we must do everything possible to avoid it. This is also

why the Church strongly urges everyone to pray and

act so that divine goodness frees us from the ancient

bondage of war.

My delegation, recalling those ethical principles

that inspire and animate the international activity

of the Holy See, has no ambition other than to make

a contribution of a moral nature to this session of the

General Assembly, while at the same time expressing

its recognition for the work done by various bodies and

United Nations agencies to relieve the suffering caused

by the Syrian crisis and other conflict situations. We

encourage them to continue their humanitarian work.

My delegation also strongly appeals to all Member

States to exercise responsibility. Peace will come about,

and the objectives of comprehensive human development

for each inhabitant of the Earth, especially for the

weakest and those who have no voice or representation,

will be achieved if, and only if, every State is capable of

fully assuming its own responsibilities for the common

good of all.