Speech by the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the 68th session of the UN General Assembly
Mr Chairman,Mr. Deputy UN Secretary-General,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
International relations become more and more complex and multidimensional, but the development of events in the world – faster and faster, and less predictable. In these conditions, the task of coordination of collective responses to key problems of the modern time is topical as never before. Only a truly universal organisation like the UN has the power to solve this. Incidentally, these collective efforts may bring results only if they reflect the entire spectrum of views of the global community to global challenges and threats, the entire historical experience and all the cultural and civilizational diversity of the modern world.
Such an approach is an axiom for the majority of member countries of the United Nations. However, there is another trend, within the framework of which joint actions primarily mean consent from the point of view of one group of countries. Such views appear in various areas – in issues of international security, settlement of conflict situations, functioning of the global economy, in the selection of development models and landmarks of values.
Many problems of the modern world have found a reflection in the tragic situation in Syria and in the ambiguous development of events in the Middle East and North Africa. From the very beginning of the turbulence in this region, Russia has consistently appealed for the development of a single approach by the global community, which would combine support for the Arab people on their path to transformation and an understanding that these processes will objectively have a long-term, sometimes painful nature. And it is very important not to disturb it by rough outside interference. We highlighted the need to act prudently, taking into account that these are complex phenomena, related to a difficult search for compromises between different ethnic and religious groups making up the mosaic of the Arab communities. We have always advocated the choice of a path of evolution in the development and peaceful resolution of crises through a national dialogue and settlement.
Another point of view appeared in the attempts to determine which leaders of the MENA region are legitimate, and which are not, to impose the opinion about which party should be supported in internal state conflicts, to dictate ready-to-use recipes of democratic reorganisation from outside.
The aspiration to simplify the picture of the events in the Arab world as a fight for democracy against tyranny or good against evil has blurred the problems related to the emerging wave of long standing extremism currently seizing other regions as well. Terrorist attacks in Kenya demonstrated the sharpness of this threat again. It is well-known that the most battle-seasoned units of the opposition are jihadists, among which there are many radicals from all over the world. The goals they pursue have nothing to do with democracy, they are based on intolerance, directed at the destruction of laic countries, and the creation of caliphates. It is hard to call far-sighted a policy within the framework of which the same groups of extremists are provided with armed confrontation (like in Mali) or otherwise – with support (like in Syria).
The use of chemical weapons is unacceptable. However, it does not mean that anybody can usurp the right to accuse and sentence. All the incidents related to the use of chemical weapons by anybody in Syria, must be professionally and open-mindedly investigated, and then considered by the UN Security Council exclusively based on facts rather than speculations and guesses. This was the agreement of the leaders of the eight leading countries of the world at the G8 summit in Lough Erne in June.
It has become a popular idea of late that the threat of power or its use, which are directly forbidden by the UN Charter, are almost the most effective method to solve international problems, including settlement of internal conflicts in countries. Some people attempted to extrapolate such an approach to the Syrian situation as well. And this despite the fact that the experience of forceful intervention demonstrated its ineffectiveness, senselessness and harmfulness. This is an extremely dangerous path, leading to the eruption of the foundations of modern world order, and the disruption of regimes of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Hearing statements about the right to use force to ensure one’s own interests in the Middle East region under the pretext of “preserving demand for leadership” in international affairs made us feel anxious. The entire history of the last period confirms that no country, however large and strong, is able to deal alone with the scale of challenges humanity faces today.
The need for leadership is required as never before, of course. But today it can be collective leadership based only on coordinated actions of the leading members of the global community with respect for the opinions of partners and norms of international law.
The growing understanding of this reality opened up a path for the achievement of the Russian-American agreements to establish international control and further destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons. We welcome the decision of Damascus to accede to the Chemical Weapons Convention and to implement proper obligations immediately. We are confident that decisions of the OPCW Executive Council and the UN Security Council will contribute to the creation of the required framework for the elimination of chemical arsenals in Syria.
We envisage that progress in the matter of chemical disarmament will give an impulse to the implementation of available agreements regarding the convocation of a Conference on the creation of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. There will be several uneasy moments involved in ensuring the participation at the Conference of all countries of the region – we know that. But we must not keep referring to it all the time. This is a case when true leadership and will should be demonstrated for the common benefit.
People continue to die, civilians are suffering in Syria every day. Religious minorities, including Christian communities, become victims in this conflict, which acquires an interreligious nature more and more. Today we have in fact the only possibility to put an end to all of this – to drive the process of political settlement of the Syrian crisis away from dead-lock. We continue to work energetically in the interests of faster convention of a peace conference for the implementation of the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012. We hope that the Syrian opposition will follow the Syrian government and constructively respond to the Russian-American initiative.
The Syrian crisis must not shadow the need to resolve the Palestinian problem. We expect Israeli and Palestinian leaders to be at their height of responsibility for the future of their people during the current critical stage, when the parties have renewed direct negotiations after a long break. Paying tribute to the American efforts in the area of Middle East settlement, we consider it necessary to activate the actions of the Quartet, which is an internationally recognized mechanism of contribution to the peace process in the region on the basis of known UN decisions, Madrid principles and the Arab Peace Initiative. We consider it important to ensure close involvement of the Arab countries inthe activity of the Quartet.
Negotiation approaches are also required in respect of other situations, including Iran’s Nuclear Programme, and the nuclear problem of the Korean Peninsula. As the Russian President Vladimir Putin noted in a recent article in the New York Times, we need to stop using the language of force, to return to the path of civilised political and diplomatic settlement of conflicts.
This would allow us to sanitise the international atmosphere and contribute to the building-up of collective efforts to counteract global challenges like terrorism and the drug business. Russia intends to give priority attention to these tasks during its presidency of the G8 in 2014.
Today, when the rigid framework of the bipolar system is a thing of the past, the mark of our time is the strengthening of democratic bases not only within countries, but also in international relations. In particular, this means that acknowledging the right of people to determine their fate independently, to choose optimal forms of social and political order and social and economic systems must become an invariable norm of everyone’s behaviour. In the human rights area we also need to refuse the complex of exclusiveness and superiority of our own customs and be guided by universal criteria formalised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At the same time we need to respect traditional values, which are common for all the religions of the world.
It is evident that true partnership is hardly achievable without the foundations of economic cooperation. The overwhelming majority of countries interact within the WTO, so within this they already exist in conditions of a common economic space. This creates the prerequisites for the work in favour of harmonization of integration processes in different regions of the world, rather than trying to artificially oppose them to one another, by creating new dividing lines. Our country uses this as a basis in its joint work with our partners to create the Eurasian Economic Union.
Russia attaches great importance to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and the formation,on the basis of them,of the Global agenda in the field of development after 2015. The main priorities are the eradication of poverty, support of economic growth through extension of possibilities for investment, and the creation of new jobs. Other vital problems include the strengthening of infrastructure in the field of energy and transport, the combatting of infectious diseases, and road traffic safety.
Interstate cooperation must be based on effective mechanisms and a sufficient basis of resources. In this context, we support further strengthening of the coordinating role and potential of the UN Economic and Social Council. In the period of its presidency of the G20 Russia consistently drew and still draws a line leading towards the development of interaction of the G20 with the UN. We consider the resolution of the General Assembly dedicated to relations between the UN and the G20, a realistic programme of prospective cooperation.
I am convinced that by combining our efforts on the basis of true respect and consideration of everybody’sinterests, we will be able to achieve those high goals, which are proclaimed in the UN Charter.
