YouSaid · the spoken record

Lloyd Axworthy

lines on the record: 125
first: 1996-09-24
most recent: 2000-09-24
sittings or episodes: 5
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“With human security as our guide, let us make it our focus as we renew our commitment to the purposes of the United Nations and to a better future for Grace and for all the people that we represent. This goal is a responsibility that I have been honoured to share with many of those present here over the past five years. It is a goal that we must all continue to strive towards — whatever our position in life, whatever our title — in order to ensure that this system we have built does not surrender to the cynics who offer no alternatives, or to the game players who paralyse the transcendent purposes of the United Nations for simple transitory diplomatic points. Only in so doing will we truly live up to the promise contained in the Charter: to serve the majesty of the people and to make this Organization work for them.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“In today's world, the security of States and the security of people are indivisible. Providing for that security is a necessary precondition for success in other important endeavours, such as advancing economic aid and trade development. In this new century, too many people like Grace are still subject to the worst of the past century: to the scourge of war, to human rights abuses and to too few prospects for social progress and a better standard of living. Yet the hopes contained in the United Nations Charter still have meaning for them, and indeed relevance for all of us. Fulfilling its aspirations is our enduring goal and fundamental 5 responsibility.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Her plea for us to do so is the essence of the Organization's vocation. Indeed, it is one of our basic responsibilities. For me, that young woman's simple appeal makes it clear that we have no option but to be ready, to be willing, and to be able to forge a United Nations for the twenty-first century. In view of the daunting challenges ahead, any attempt to retreat, to shut out the world or to turn away from international engagement would be to follow a dangerous path that is neither practical nor desirable. The truth is that we share a common humanity. The reality is that we are linked by the forces of history into a common destiny. The fact is that the answers to our problems lie in strengthening, not diminishing, global cooperation and global solutions.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“(spoke in English) I am pleased that so many ministers and senior officials from the Organization will join us in Winnipeg this weekend. I encourage those not already represented to attend. The aim of the conference is twofold: to formulate a comprehensive, global action plan and to forge the necessary political will to implement it. Together, we hope it will help children traumatized by war, and ultimately eliminate their involvement and victimization in conflict. Earlier this week in Winnipeg, as we opened the conference, a young Ugandan girl named Grace spoke to me, at a meeting of young people affected by war, about her experience as a child soldier. Her story was one of victimization and chilling brutality. Her belief that the international community could help her and others like her was touching and inspiring.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Since then, action has been taken too reduce their suffering, most notably with the appointment of Olara Otunnu as the Secretary-General's Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict and, more recently, with the historic agreement last January on the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. This week, with Graça Machel as honorary Chairperson, Canada is hosting in Winnipeg the International Conference on War-Affected Children. This meeting, the first of its kind, brings together more than 130 Governments, 60 non-governmental organizations and private sector groups, international organizations and young people from every region of the world.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“To build a world that values human security we must start with concern and action for those who will inherit it. It is fitting, therefore, that in this year of fresh resolve the future of our children is a key element of the agenda, particularly through the special session on children that is to be held next year. Nowhere is the safety and well-being of children more at risk than in conflict situations. Children should have no part in war. Yet today they are among its main victims, counting in the millions. (spoke in French) Four years ago, Graça Machel brought attention to the horrific plight of war-affected children.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The private sector must also take its responsibility for the communities on which it depends for its business. Ethical business is good business. The many companies that have joined the Secretary- General's Global Compact with Business recognize that profit made on the backs of exploited and abused children — by gun-running, drug dealing or conflict diamonds — is no longer acceptable. In the globalized economy, the world's people are the ultimate shareholders. If they do not profit, no one will. We must therefore work on all of these fronts and with all of these new players to build a future where human security is universally respected and protected. In the meantime, there are steps that we can take to protect the most vulnerable.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Thirteen years ago, the Brundtland Commission's report, “Our Common Future”, took two seemingly contradictory ideas — economic development and the protection of the environment — and out of that contradiction forged a synthesis called sustainable development. That new concept fundamentally changed the way in which the world thinks about those issues, and its work informs our thinking to this very day. It is Canada's hope that this new commission can diffuse the anxiety that surrounds 4 the issues of intervention and sovereignty by building a similar bridge between our current notions of these concepts, and in so doing help to define the way ahead for Governments and the United Nations to tackle the most challenging international dilemma of the twenty- first century. However, the responsibility no longer stops just with Governments.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The commission will be led by two co- chairpersons — one from the developing and one from the developed world — with the participation of a wide range of representatives of Governments and non- governmental organizations from all regions and under the overall guidance of an advisory board composed of ministers, former ministers and distinguished practitioners from the academic, humanitarian and legal fields. The commission will undertake its work during this Millennium Assembly year, and will present its recommendations in 12 months' time. I ask those present here in the Assembly Hall to join in this enterprise, difficult as it may be, so that we can seek to reconcile these concepts to find the space that we can all share. It is difficult, but it is not impossible. We have done it before.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“It is the people's agenda. Indeed, “We the peoples” are the opening words of the Charter. Those who would seek to hide behind that document to justify inaction need only to read its preamble to reacquaint themselves with its original intent. Secretary-General Annan has challenged us to rethink what it means to be responsible, sovereign States. Canada has responded by creating an independent international commission on intervention and State sovereignty. Its purpose is to contribute to building a broader understanding of the issue, and to foster a global political consensus on how to move forward.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Reading the editorial page of The New York Times on Tuesday, 12 September, we realize that some would have us believe that the United Nations Charter was written only to protect States and State interests: “intervening in civil conflicts takes the United Nations a step too far”. I disagree. I say that in the face of egregious human suffering it is a step in the right direction. Nothing so threatens the United Nations very future as this apparent contradiction between principle and power; between people's security and Governments' interests; between, in short, humanitarian intervention and State sovereignty. Last fall I stood before this body and argued that the United Nations Charter was written for people. Our collective agenda here is not the nation States' agenda, or the ministers' agenda, or the diplomats' agenda.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The question of intervention in these instances, including, as a last resort, the use of military force, is fraught with difficulty and controversy. Many would sweep it under the rug as too divisive, too difficult, too damaging to the status quo. But Rwanda, Cambodia, Srebrenica and Kosovo remind us that it is important to focus on this question. It would be easy to pretend that the humanitarian tragedies associated with these places are a thing of the past. It would be easy, but it would be wrong. There is no certainty that similar atrocities will not happen again. Indeed, the opposite is more likely. The spiral into extremes of human suffering cannot always be constrained.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Today I appeal to every Government here that has not done so to sign the Rome Statute by December and to ratify it on an urgent basis, so that the world's people can finally have the justice they deserve. Canada seeks to systematically put in place the building blocks for a new type of international system, one that is inspired and guided by the United Nations Charter, but that is also prepared to deal with the underside and underworld of globalization. Of course, prevention is the best form of intervention. But when preventive measures fail; when the quiet diplomatic efforts and the targeted sanctions do not work; when the fact-finders find facts too horrendous to imagine; then there must be recourse to more robust action.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“(spoke in English) By far the most difficult challenge in protecting civilians in armed conflict is in situations where abuse is most severe: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, massive and systematic violations of human rights and humanitarian law which cause widespread suffering, loss of life and abuse. We need a new form of deterrence against such forms of behaviour. The establishment of an 3 International Criminal Court (ICC), which makes impunity illegal and which holds individuals directly accountable for their actions, is that deterrent. And if its power to deter the abuse of people fails, the Statute provides both a basis and a structure to take concrete legal action to redress injustice. The Court's Statute provides us with a unique opportunity to fix one of the worst failings in the international system.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The Council has recognized that dealing with these issues is critical to building effective peace-support operations, and has embodied this recognition in recent resolutions. Today, we are providing members a checklist, a checklist of responsible action in the Security Council. (spoke in French) The Brahimi report also proposes a plan of action. It is a comprehensive strategy for strengthening the United Nations capacity to help people. Canada supports the panel's findings. We will be its strongest advocate and can be counted upon to work tirelessly to build the political support required to implement both the spirit and the letter of its recommendations.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Today, most wars are fought within failed States. In these wars, it is the victimization of civilians that is the motive, the means and the manifestation of a conflict. If the Council is to acquit itself of its responsibility to these people, their protection must be at the core of its work, not at its periphery. This is the agenda that Canada has brought to the Security Council over the past two years. It has not been an easy task, but I would like to acknowledge that the Security Council is meeting the new challenges. In recent months, the Council's work has increasingly focused on the protection of civilians, with action in the areas of AIDS, physical protection, war-affected children and sanctions reform.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“But surely, our responsibility to defend our citizens begins not with the development of new weapons systems, but by dismantling old ones: by ratifying the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT); by joining the 104 States parties to the Ottawa Treaty on landmines; by implementing the international non-proliferation norms and disarmament obligations embodied in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT); by developing comprehensive action plans to stop the proliferation of small arms and missile technology. The collective action of States working for the long-term security of their people is clearly the preferable path. But where States are unable, or unwilling, to protect their citizens, the United Nations, and in particular the Security Council, has a special responsibility to act.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Our generation built the nuclear arsenals that are outmoded and rotting; we produced the chemical weapons that poison people; and today we still make and distribute the small arms that are found everywhere: in the hands of children, the arsenals of drug dealers and the garrisons of guerrilla fighters. But we have also had a certain foresight to begin building a system of international obligations and principles to contain such behaviour. We now have to validate and implement these instruments. Above all, we must do nothing to damage them. Certainly, Governments must prepare for the defence of their people. Responsible defence is an element of responsible government.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“But if we have truly come to the understanding that security means more than protecting borders, we must now act to turn last week's good intentions into effective action. This means taking responsibility to adapt our institutions, broaden participation in their functioning, and increase transparency and accountability to make a tangible difference for the people we represent. It also means responsible, accountable global behaviour, sharing and protecting the common space that sustains life. Aggressive pursuit of the global arms control and disarmament agenda is the ultimate responsible act.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“2 It is a vision that serves the world's people, and one that resonates with them, even though it may aggravate some of their Governments. He has challenged us to follow his lead, to adopt a people-centred approach to international relations, to move this Organization from the sidelines to the forefront of change. This is not a new agenda for Canada. Indeed, over the past five years, promoting human security has been the focus of our own approach to our changing world. And it has been encouraging to see the shift in attitude toward a more realistic sense of what it means to be secure in the world as an individual. Our leaders endorsed this new vision in their Summit Declaration.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Clearly, globalization has brought unprecedented benefits and possibilities. But it also clearly brings new risks to people in all our countries. Many of those new risks cross State lines, while most violent conflict now occurs within States' borders. In both cases, the impact is felt directly by ordinary people. Yet the debate within the United Nations remains driven — and too often circumscribed — by rigid notions of sovereignty and narrow conceptions of national interest. And action by the United Nations remains hampered by inflexible institutional structures that have become increasingly inward-looking, driven by their own interests rather than by those they were designed to serve. The Secretary-General has, with a courage rarely seen in public life, given us a vision of a way forward.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The United Nations is the only organization that embodies universal values; that offers a global forum to address common problems; and that is on the front line around the world fighting for people. (spoke in English) There was another message from the Summit about whether the United Nations is keeping up with the times; about whether we, the Member States — custodians of the Organization and guardians of the Charter — have the political will to support renewal and modernization. When the lights turned off last Friday night here in New York, did other lights go on around the world — in our Chancery offices, Parliamentary assemblies and Cabinet meeting rooms — to illuminate the way forward? Are we all, each in our own way, asking how we can change our ways to better help the United Nations manage a new global agenda?”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“I would like to begin by congratulating you, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly. Your experience and wisdom will doubtless guide us in carrying out the important work ahead. As we all know, that work is to immediately and resolutely transform the high hopes of the Millennium Summit into a better reality for the peoples for whom the United Nations was founded. (spoke in French) This means assuming responsibility for our actions and our inaction. It also means that Governments must be ready to assume their responsibility for their citizens. Last week our leaders delivered here a message of hope and determination. Their words clearly showed that we all need the United Nations.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Practical cooperation between countries can address specific problems and the participation of members of civil society and non- governmental organizations is also imperative. But security for all of us begins and ends with a strong, effective United Nations focused on this goal. We the peoples should resolve to work together to achieve this end.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“And it is freedom from fear for all peoples — which is at the heart of the Secretary-General's report and his recommendations — that provides the United Nations with a clear, defining role at the century's close. Our collective efforts towards that end will give concrete expression to the hopes and dreams of the generation that first made “we the peoples” the basis for this Organization. Next year's Millennium Assembly and summit offer an opportunity to articulate a vision of the United Nations that places the safety of people at the centre of its agenda. The United Nations cannot do it all. The challenges to advancing human safety are complex. Regional organizations play an important role.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The conclusion of an effective United Nations transnational organized crime convention and its protocols would be a start to providing that protection. Taken together, those efforts would be a strong beginning to orienting the Assembly to meet the real security needs of people today. I must be very blunt: improvement in human security is a necessary condition for success in the other important actions that we take to advance human, economic, aid and trade development. Farmers cannot work fields strewn with mines. Children cannot learn when they are abused and brutalized by war. Investors will not send money to regions racked by conflict. Societies cannot flourish when resources are pillaged to fuel violence and people are victimized by terror. Ultimately, freedom from fear is intimately connected to the freedom from want.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“We should now ensure that the obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons are respected, and we should implement the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and reduce the risk that nuclear weapons pose to our collective security. Human security is also the impetus behind efforts to address the problem of small arms, which kill in conflict zones as well as on neighbourhood streets. This is a global challenge that requires a global solution. We should therefore convene a conference on the illicit traffic in small arms, with a comprehensive agenda. (spoke in English) Transnational crime, including the illicit drug trade, terrorism and human smuggling, is a closely related challenge. It has a direct impact on the safety of all our people.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“We agree with the Secretary-General that more must be done to protect humanitarian workers who risk their lives to help the victims of war. That is why Canada will be seeking an additional protocol to the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel to provide legal protection to all personnel working in situations of armed conflict, including a broader range of non-governmental organizations and locally employed personnel. Finally, the Assembly can direct its efforts towards making the safety of people the emphasis in a wider range of global endeavours. (spoke in French) The greatest threat to human safety remains the possibility of annihilation by nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction. Yet the non-proliferation regime that we have painstakingly built over the past 50 years remains fragile.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Court was a qualitative step forward. It will help to end the culture of impunity and protect all people against the most egregious violations of humanitarian law. The Assembly's priority now should be to bring the Court to life. This means continued cooperation from us all in building the technical underpinnings of this Court. It also means ensuring prompt and widespread ratification of the Court's Statute. Strengthened standards and strategies are needed elsewhere. For example, negotiating the strongest possible optional protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, which should be accompanied by a comprehensive action plan, will help to confront one of the most heinous aspects of modern warfare and other conflict.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The civilian side of peace operations — the police and the judges, the civil servants and the human rights experts — is also of growing importance, but insufficient capacity for rapid deployment is a problem here too. Clearly the “White Helmets” are as critical to building peace as the Blue Helmets, and they deserve no less of our attention. Those of us who are able might start by 17 improving our respective national capacity to make contributions to be put at the service of the United Nations. This is something my Government has begun and is working to improve. Globally binding humanitarian and human rights standards for behaviour and practical mechanisms to hold transgressors accountable would also advance the security of people subjected to the horrors of armed conflict.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“To protect civilians in armed conflict, the Assembly has the means to enable the United Nations to act more quickly; the moral authority to establish universal standards that hold us all accountable; and the legitimacy to direct efforts into new areas of global endeavour. The ability to respond rapidly when the security of civilians is threatened is essential. Giving the United Nations a rapid response capability — particularly through the creation of a United Nations headquarters for rapid deployment — would be an important step. How much more effective could the United Nations have been in East Timor or in Kosovo if such a capability had existed?”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The issues raised by the Secretary-General in his report on the protection of civilians in armed conflict are issues that plague all peoples. The Secretary-General's proposals in fact go beyond the purview of just the Security Council; the onus for taking action lies with all Member States. For that reason, I strongly urge that the General Assembly should begin consideration of this report and move quickly to establish mechanisms to give effect to its recommendations, including a system of reporting to review implementation. Towards this end, Canada looks forward to working with the Secretary- General and fellow Member States to establish a “friends of civilians in armed conflict” group to help guide these efforts.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is time to tackle the new war economy in which a direct relationship exists between certain businesses, mercenaries and warlords, a relationship that perpetuates misery, conflict and the victimization of innocent people. A human security agenda highlights the urgent need to face clearly the issue of the Council's representation and its decision-making processes, especially the inappropriate use and persistent threat of the veto where it can compromise, complicate and slow down determined, urgent international action to protect people. The Council needs to come to grips with these challenges if it is to maintain its credibility in the eyes of the people it serves. Membership in the Council is a trust, and Council members need to demonstrate their capacity to maintain that trust.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“These tests must be very demanding: the basis must be the existence of fundamental breaches of international humanitarian and human rights law. The human dimension makes it imperative that the Council adapt the blunt instrument of sanctions into a targeted tool so that they hurt where they are supposed to hurt. The Council needs also to show the resolve to implement sanctions once they are in place. This is Canada's objective as chairman of the Council's Angola sanctions Committee established pursuant to resolution 864 (1993) — to develop tougher measures to constrain the trade in arms and diamonds, thereby making it more difficult for UNITA to wage war.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“In this world, the protection of civilians must be central to the Council's work. It must provide the subtext for our future collective action and the impetus behind our efforts to prevent conflict, keep the peace, enforce sanctions and support the collective will of the United Nations. The way ahead is not without obstacles. There are legitimate questions about the purposes, limits and standards for Council engagement for humanitarian ends, which itself also present difficult contradictions with regard to the principle of non-interference. Clear and consistent criteria are needed against which the necessity or otherwise of humanitarian intervention — including enforcement — can be judged and applied.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Of course, State sovereignty remains a fundamental tenet of peace and security; but it is not absolute, and it is not a shield behind which the most egregious violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms can be hidden. It is time, therefore, for we the peoples represented in this Assembly to reassess our influence and make our voices heard. (spoke in English) There is a new road map to lead the way. Last week the Secretary-General tabled a report on the protection of civilians in armed conflict (S/1999/957) in which he captures many of today's challenges and sets out 40 recommendations for action. The heaviest burden falls on the Security Council. The search for global peace increasingly turns on issues of personal safety. Modern conflict takes a huge, disproportionate toll on civilians.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“So we the peoples have not given up in the face of the confusion, turmoil and misery which beset our world; and we still search through the corridors of this building for words of cooperation and acts of consensus. (spoke in French) But it is not easy, because many forget that it is we the peoples, all the world's people, whom we are here to serve, not just their particular national interests. Too many protect their prerogatives, engage in exclusive power politics or refuse to pay their bills, thereby paralysing the institution and rendering it incapable of meeting the challenges to our collective well-being. 16 It is difficult to promote an agenda for the security of people when some stand opposed, on the basis of a desire to protect at all costs the sovereignty of the State.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“We could point with some satisfaction to the fact that, through the combined efforts of people working together across borders, there is an emerging sense of accomplishment in responding to these new threats to human security. As of today, 86 nations have ratified the Convention on antipersonnel mines, ushering in a legal regime and a plan of action that will save the lives of thousands. Working together last year, 120 nations voted in favour of an International Criminal Court, which will establish individual accountability for crimes against humanity. In the field of conflict, the United Nations is now attempting to rebuild the broken fields of Kosovo after an unprecedented intervention for humanitarian reasons. And in East Timor, peacekeepers are bringing order to that long-troubled land.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Or when we are all subject to the darker side of globalization, where international commerce brings new but poorly distributed wealth, where helpless children are recruited into armies or sold on the internet for exploitive purposes, where environmental degradation inflicts a high cost on the smallest countries, which can least afford it? Our world on the eve of the millennium is increasingly shaped by these and a variety of other direct threats to people. If we the peoples were to have the chance to rethink the Preamble to the Charter, we might well say that we are determined to save existing generations from the grave new risks to their personal and family security. It is true that there is another perspective, one that gives a glimmer of hope.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“How would we the people assess the handiwork of the United Nations to date and judge the world scene today when we have seen in the last year alone the brutal ethnic cleansing of Kosovo, the slaughter and maiming of innocents in Sierra Leone, Angola, both Congos and Sudan and the cruel suppression of the independence agreement in East Timor? Or when we see kidnapping and terrorism plaguing virtually every region, the growing, powerful influence of the drug-traffickers and criminals, the return of the slave merchants and the emergence of modern warlords who brutalize and exploit communities for economic gain?”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Let us recall these lines from the United Nations Charter: “We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, ... to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, ... to establish conditions under which justice ... can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, ... have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims”. These are noble words and compelling goals. But do they still ring true, or is there a need for new meaning and new commitment?”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Allow me first to congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly. Canadians are proud to have accompanied you and your people on their journey to join the community of nations. On behalf of Canada, allow me also to welcome the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga as new Members of the United Nations. Mr. President, your election is a tribute to your wisdom and your dedication to the goals of the United Nations. I am convinced that you will guide us well in carrying out the work that we are gathered here to do on behalf of all of the world's people. Indeed, it is we the people for whom the United Nations was founded and its purposes forged. We the people, not we the nation States, or the ministers, or the ambassadors, or the Secretariat.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“26 In sum, the Council we need for the next century must be more responsible, more accountable and less impenetrable. We hope that members will support Canada in advancing these aspirations.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“It cannot be allowed to focus on solving the problems of one region and be indifferent to those of others. The way the Council does its work must be more open and more transparent. For example, Member States involved in and affected by matters before the Council must be allowed to exercise their Charter rights. Far from constraining the Council?s efficiency, this will improve the decisions it takes and render its actions more effective. The trend for permanent members increasingly to assume more control over the agenda, thereby marginalizing elected members, runs counter to the democratic principles which so inform our political institutions at the close of the twentieth century. The distinctions between permanent and elected members need to be narrowed rather than widened.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“(spoke in English) Let me now speak of the Security Council. The Security Council remains at the centre of what the United Nations is all about: protecting against conflict and human risk. However, the Council?s legitimacy is increasingly being questioned. To remain credible, the Council must re-examine traditional interpretations of its mandate. The Council needs to broaden its horizons in addressing emerging threats which impact on our security. Thematic debates on these issues, in which all Member States can participate, are a good step. The addition of peace- building to the Council?s range of responses to threats to peace and security is also welcome. But the Council must also be more willing and more consistent in both how and when it becomes involved. The Council belongs to all Member States.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“Not all nuclear-weapon States have begun to fulfil their obligations under Article VI of the Non-proliferation Treaty, and we call upon them to fulfil their responsibilities. As we all recognize, this period of globalization multiplies the challenges. It is Canada?s conviction that a dynamic, responsive and flexible United Nations system is the best way, perhaps the only way, to meet these challenges. (spoke in French) To fulfil its leadership responsibilities, the United Nations must be assured of reliable and adequate funding. We cannot revitalize the United Nations so long as Member States, particularly the most wealthy and fortunate among them, contribute less to a system from which they demand more. Renewal can be achieved only if Member States pay their assessed dues, present and past due, on time and without conditions.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“But it is important to reiterate that Security Council resolution 1172 (1998) calls upon India and Pakistan to sign the Treaty without conditions, to participate purposefully in the negotiations on a cut-off treaty on fissile materials, to stop the weaponization of their nuclear programmes, to impose strict export controls on nuclear technology and to embrace fully the non-proliferation regime. We urge them to do so. In that spirit, we welcome India?s and Pakistan?s decision to relaunch their dialogue on Kashmir. We also recognize that preventing horizontal proliferation, while crucial, is no more important than preventing vertical proliferation. Nuclear disarmament is the other half of the nuclear bargain. That bargain is a balance of responsibilities and obligations undertaken by nuclear-weapon and non- nuclear-weapon States alike.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“Nuclear testing undermines the basic goals and objectives of the Non- Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test- Ban Treaty. Testing puts all of us, not least the people of the testing countries themselves, at greater risk. Therefore, there can be no condoning these actions. And there must be no rewards. We must not legitimize the claims of would-be nuclear Powers, or confer any new status on proliferators. We listened carefully to the presentations of the Presidents of India and of Pakistan this week and we welcome the indications they gave that they would sign the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“In 1945, Canada, despite the experience of the most destructive war in history, decided to forgo the nuclear option even though, as a participant in the Manhattan Project, we had the technical capability and material capacity to build our own nuclear weapons. In 1968, the Government of Canada confirmed that decision and joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Every subsequent Canadian Government has reaffirmed that commitment, and we have spent much diplomatic effort to persuade others that nuclear weapons are the problem, not the solution. The non-proliferation regime has enhanced everyone?s security. The credibility of that regime has been severely tested over the years, but particularly over the past six months. India?s and Pakistan?s nuclear tests put the entire non-proliferation regime in jeopardy.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)
“That is also why Canada has forgiven virtually all development-related debt owed to us by the least developed countries — almost $1 billion — and why we encourage others who have not already done so to do likewise. I think we all recognize that globalization presents opportunities, but it also exposes all of us, especially the most vulnerable, to greater economic and social insecurity. The international financial turmoil of the past months vividly demonstrates the impact these crises can have on the daily lives of the least fortunate. It means that we need to be sensitive to the social consequences of financial volatility. And when crisis strikes, the United Nations and its specialized agencies have a special responsibility to assist those most severely affected. 25 There is no greater threat to our security than nuclear proliferation.”
1998-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 53 (1998)