YouSaid · the spoken record

George YEO

lines on the record: 109
first: 2004-09-24
most recent: 2010-09-24
sittings or episodes: 7
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

“Human beings as individuals and in groups are competitive by nature, and we must expect that some will do better than others at any point in time. Indeed, by learning from the successes and mistakes of front- runners, human communities often leapfrog over one another, and this is a historical process. Competition, however, should be conducted in a civilized way and within an overall global framework and value system that recognizes our global humanity and destiny.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“Two years ago, Singapore signed an agreement with the World Bank to establish an urban hub for the dissemination of knowledge about liveable cities. A basic requirement for healthy urban development is good water management, which has become a major challenge in various parts of the world. We should do much more to learn from one another’s experiences, especially in the face of growing weather volatility. Last Friday, Slovenia convened a 19 10-55264 Green Group meeting involving a small group of countries to discuss the subject of water management, which we hope will be given more attention in the future. Despite the concerns about the global economy, never before have the prospects of bringing development into every continent been so promising. This is not to say that outcomes will be equalized.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“Because of the specific challenges that we had to overcome in our own development, Singapore has been promoting the sharing of urban developmental experiences as a practical way to help countries develop in areas such as public administration, low-cost housing, water management, transportation planning and better logistics. Developing countries that are urbanizing rapidly — and they have to do so in order to develop — should not have to repeat the mistakes of those who have gone before them. All of us have a vested interest in the growth of liveable cities in the third world. For example, carbon emissions cannot be reduced without healthy urbanization. We hope that fostering liveable cities will become a major objective of the G-20 countries. The best form of aid we can provide is knowledge and training.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“An important way to help communities acquire more knowledge and use information better is to foster the growth of liveable cities. To develop, countries have to urbanize, and in the coming decades large parts of the world will be urbanized on every continent. China during Mao Zedong’s time was 20 per cent urban. Today, it is almost half urban. In 20 years’ time it will reach the same level of urbanization as Taiwan or countries like Korea and Japan, which are over 90 per cent urban. Urbanization as an organic process of development can be healthy or unhealthy. Cities can be energy-efficient, knowledge-intensive centres of production, education and sustainable living, or they can be hellholes festering with poor education, unemployment, inequality, crime and pollution.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“In this new age, those who are wedded to dogma and ideology become stuck in the past. Therefore, when we talk about development, the key is education. We must make sure that basic conditions are met, that children are fed and healthy and that no group is discriminated against on the basis of ethnicity, religion or gender. The knowledge needed for development is already available in the world, and delivery systems can be readily put into place. Unfortunately, there are many obstacles impeding the flow of knowledge. Protectionism is a major obstacle. It slows the spread of education and knowledge. Throughout history, every time a new trade route is established, knowledge flows along it, enabling the relatively backward to catch up. Our inability to move the Doha Development Agenda forward is particularly injurious to LDCs.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“As smart phones fall in price — which they are bound to do — social networking infrastructures like Facebook, which already has half a billion users in the world, will radically change the world we live in. Without being planned for or financed by any national Government, Facebook is arguably the most important social infrastructure in the world today. It is an astonishing phenomenon. Yet, it is only one wave of many more waves to come. Whether we like it or not, the revolution in technology — not only information technology but also in genetics, material science and other fields — will cause the creative destruction that many politicians dread. Communities and Governments that work with technological change will surge ahead, while those fighting change will be left behind.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“With education, individuals are able to acquire the information and knowledge they need to add value to the world. Aid that helps a people to build up its internal strength is valuable. Aid that creates dependency is harmful. With education, a citizenry is more able to insist on democratic safeguards against the abuse of power and corruption. Taking full advantage of globalization and information technology, we can now spread education into remote corners of the world. One of the most important developments in the world today is the widespread availability of cheap mobile phones, often with built-in cameras. Mobile phones have altered traditional power relationships everywhere where they are available. No longer can individuals be kept ignorant and exploited for long, because they have alternatives.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“It is good that both Korea as the current Chair of the G-20 and France as the incoming Chair are pushing development on the agenda. Let us be clear at the outset that development is not principally about aid. Whether a people is able to lift itself from the depths of poverty depends more on internal than external factors. Good governance is, of course, paramount. Investing in the inherent potential of citizens and creating a favourable environment for that potential to be realized are central to good governance. We would like to commend President 10-55264 18 Deiss on his decision to make “Reaffirming the central role of the United Nations in global governance” the theme of this General Assembly. It is most timely. A critical element in good governance is education.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“The basic stance of the Group is to support the work of the G-20 and hold it accountable to the general membership of the United Nations. Permanent Representatives within the 3G Group meet regularly in New York, including before and after G-20 meetings, to present views and make suggestions, which are circulated to everyone at the United Nations. Depending on the subjects discussed, we invite individual members of the G-20 to join us at our meetings. For example, in preparation for the coming G-20 Summit in Seoul, the 3G Group had several meetings with senior Korean officials, including their G-20 “Sherpa”, to convey some of our views and concerns. A major concern of the countries of the Group is development. In this regard, we have prepared inputs to be submitted to the G-20 working group on development.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“The G-20 countries must take into account, in their deliberations, the interest of all countries, not only of their own. The G-20, which together accounts for 80 per cent of international trade, has to play a leadership role in breaking the current impasse in the Doha negotiations. In particular, we must ensure that the needs of developing countries, especially the needs of the least developed countries (LDCs), are met. Freeing up agricultural trade, for example, will make a huge difference to their welfare. With those concerns in mind, a loose grouping of countries calling itself the Global Governance Group, or 3G, was established more than a year ago. Its objectives were spelled out in a document circulated to the Members of the United Nations on 1 March.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“If, for lack of political will, the G-20 is unable to avert the crisis of a second dip, crisis will in the end force it to act, and by then it will be at much greater human cost to all of us. For precisely that reason, we must not allow interest in the Doha Development Agenda to flag. When the Doha Round was launched in November 2001, a key consideration was development. For many of us who were in Doha during the negotiations, the Millennium Development Goals were uppermost in our minds. I remember Tanzanian trade minister Iddi Simba insisting, on behalf of the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries, that the word “development” be explicitly incorporated into the name of the new round. It has been 10 years since the Millennium Development Goals were launched. While some countries have done well, many others have not.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“Going forward, the G-20 has to go beyond the reform of international financial institutions and better coordination of fiscal, monetary and exchange rate policies. Without fundamental restructuring of the real economy, we may experience a double dip. Without fundamental restructuring, increased liquidity in the global system will end up creating new asset bubbles, some of which we already see forming in Asia. For this restructuring to take place, the international trading system must be kept open. Only then can markets make adjustments and prices find their right levels. In fighting protectionism in all its forms, the leadership of the G-20 is critical.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“Exchange rate adjustments can facilitate structural adjustment, provided that the deeper economic problems are also tackled. With the world becoming multipolar, global macroeconomic coordination has become more complicated. Recognizing the inability of the Group of Seven or the Group of Eight to achieve such coordination, the Group of 20 (G-20) was formed two years ago when the global economy stared into an abyss after the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Without the G-20 acting in concert, the economic crisis could well have led to a global depression. The G-20 — the members of which collectively account for some 85 per cent of total global gross domestic product — is therefore a vital grouping in the community of nations.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“The repricing of production factors such as real estate and labour is politically sensitive in any country, and Governments get blamed for it. Adjusting relative factor costs through the exchange rate is usually easier to achieve, although currency devaluation can create 17 10-55264 other problems such as inflation. The argument over fair exchange rates in the world today reflects competing domestic pressures to ease the pain of restructuring in different countries. Thus the United States wants China to revalue the yuan renminbi, while China protests that it is being blamed for the economic weaknesses of other countries. Of course, if the whole world were to use the same currency, the only way countries would be able to adjust would be through improved productivity and repricing.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“Although the global economic situation has improved considerably, it is still fragile. Much of the relief has come from the massive liquidity that has been pumped into the global financial system by national Governments. That bought us time to restructure our economies and correct the underlying imbalances that led to the crisis in the first place. Whether the restructuring is happening fast enough is, however, still an open question. The economist Joseph Schumpeter viewed economic downturns as the system renewing itself, a process he described as creative destruction. In theory, that sounds good. In practice, it is difficult for political leaders to stand idly by when companies go bust and jobs are lost. Everyone likes the creative part. Destruction, however, can mean losing an election, which politicians invariably try to avoid.”
2010-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 65 (2010)
“The formal establishment of the G-20 as a new international institution last week marks a momentous new beginning. History shows that power shifts never occur smoothly. Without a good system of global governance, we can be sure that the power shift in this century will also be a troubled one. Putting that system in place requires the collective effort of all of us. We should not be lulled by the temporary easing of the global economic crisis into thinking that the worst is behind us and that we can return to our old ways.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“We in ASEAN certainly hope that the inclusion of the ASEAN Chair will become the norm at future G-20 leaders meetings. It is right that the United Nations 43 09-52598 Secretary-General was included from the very beginning. A balance has to be struck between effectiveness and inclusiveness. If a meeting is too big, it becomes unwieldy and unworkable. If too small, it lacks representation and legitimacy. As most Members of the United Nations are not in the G-20, it is important for us to have a say on the role the G-20 should play as an agent of change in global governance. While we should support the G-20 process, we should do so in a way that ensures that our own interests as smaller States are taken into account. A great power shift is taking place in the world.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“The views of small States, which comprise the majority of Members of the United Nations, must not be ignored. The meetings should be transparent. There must be wide consultations so that those not included in specific meetings can still table their views. Depending on the subject, those consultations can take place at the United Nations or at one of the other international organizations. Mindful of the need to widen participation, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown invited regional representatives, such as the Chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Chair of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development and the Chairperson of the African Union Commission, to the G-20 leaders meeting in London in April 2009. President Obama followed this precedent in Pittsburgh.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“The old G-8 lacked representation, and the G-8 Plus was not acceptable because it put the additional participants at a disadvantage. As for the International Monetary Fund, it was never designed to tackle a crisis of such scale. In any case, the Bretton Woods institutions themselves need reform, which indeed is a major subject on the G-20 agenda. For the G-20 process to be effective and legitimate, however, it is not enough for leaders to confer and make general exhortations. Ministers and experts must also meet and go into details. They should not be confined to the same G-20 countries every time. We need variable geometry in membership. For different subjects, there could be different groups of participants, including both G-20 and non-G-20 countries.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“If the biggest economies do not persist in that effort — and persisting means pain for domestic constituencies in many countries — the respite we are now enjoying will lead to an even bigger crisis, this time possibly involving foreign exchange markets as well. In the coming months and years, it is important for the G-20 process to develop greater legitimacy, especially as it begins to deal with a broader set of issues. That the establishment of the G-20 leaders meeting was not blessed by the United Nations or other existing international organizations should not hold us back from giving it full support. Although the G-20 process is not ideal, it is the most important driver of change that we have right now. The United Nations itself is too intricate and not structured to deal with issues such as a major financial crisis.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“The G-20 has now been designated the premier forum for international economic cooperation, replacing the Group of Eight (G-8). This G-20 process and the swift, decisive actions that it brought about have helped avert an economic depression in the last year. The emergency measures taken by various Governments in response to the financial tsunami have bought us precious time to restructure and rebalance the global economy. In Pittsburgh, the G-20 leaders acknowledged that a sense of normalcy should not lead to complacency. We welcome their pledge to adopt policies needed for strong, sustained and balanced growth.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“For that reason, we must redouble efforts to conclude negotiations for an international agreement at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference at the end of this year. It is good that caring for the environment is increasingly becoming a moral norm in the world, especially among the young. We must not fail them. The strong political commitment expressed by many leaders at the Summit on Climate Change, chaired by the Secretary-General himself here last week, gives us reason for hope. The present economic crisis is a major challenge to global governance. In November last year, then United States President George W. Bush convened the first summit of the Group of 20 (G-20). The second meeting of leaders was held in London in April and the third has just concluded in Pittsburgh under President Barack Obama’s chairmanship.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“At all regional and international 09-52598 42 forums, we must take a clear collective stand against protectionism. Climate change is a long-term challenge for humanity which needs to be addressed with some urgency. While we cannot be sure how much increased carbon dioxide emissions will affect the global climate in the coming decades and centuries, it would be irresponsible for us in this generation not to start acting now. The increased weather volatility we have been experiencing in recent years could be a warning of longer-term trends already under way. An international agreement on climate change which aligns our interests and efforts is absolutely necessary to preserve this planet for future generations.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“The greatest challenge confronting us today is that of ensuring effective global governance. We do not want a global Government but we do need better coordination, cooperation and enforcement in many areas. The reform of the United Nations, including the United Nations Security Council, is going to take time. Incremental rather than dramatic change is a more practical approach. In terms of world trade, the World Trade Organization, while far from perfect, can still function well with effective political leadership. Once that leadership is supplied, the Doha Round of negotiations can be concluded within the next few years. We are fortunate to have in Pascal Lamy a strong Director- General at the helm. But this is a dangerous period because domestic politics in many countries favour greater protectionism.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“Without continuing market confidence in the United States dollar, not just the United States economy, but the entire global economy will be put at risk. Looking ahead, however, it is not going to be a bipolar world but a multi-polar world. Europe and Japan will remain heavyweights. India, Russia, Brazil and others will become more significant players. A multi-polar world means a messier world with a diversity of political systems, values and worldviews. Non-State actors like civil society organizations must increasingly be engaged. At the same time, we are all members of the same human family sharing the same planet. Looking ahead, we will need more effective global governance across a wide range of issues from protection of human rights and international financial regulation to efforts to combat pandemics, climate change and terrorism.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“To correct this imbalance, Asians have to consume more and save less as a proportion of income, while Americans have to consume less and save more. Otherwise, a global Keynesian paradox of thrift will cause the global economy to operate below capacity. Rebalancing the global economy is, however, not a simple matter at all, and is not only about economics: it is also deeply political. The rise of Asia is altering the global power structure. Nothing expresses this more than the complex relationship that now ties the United States and China together. China, with its reserves of over $2 trillion, is heavily invested in the United States dollar, making it a major stakeholder in the United States economy.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“Withdrawing liquidity without destabilizing economies and asset markets in the coming months and years will be a tricky business. And thirdly, the emergency measures which have been taken reduce the need for painful restructuring. Yet without major restructuring of regulatory systems and businesses, the imbalances which created the conditions for the crisis in the first place can only get worse. While excesses in the financial sector were the trigger of the crisis, the deeper underlying cause was the global imbalance between producers and consumers and between saving and consumption. For too long, the world depended on the United States consumers keeping global demand high and on lending those consumers the money to keep the game going.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“These are emergency measures which are needed to get the global economy through a critical phase. They have stabilized the financial sector and prevented the real economy from being too badly affected. However, as when steroids are administered to reduce inflammation, there is a price to be paid for this temporary relief. First, the expectation that Governments will step in when things go badly wrong creates a huge moral hazard. Once Governments set a bottom limit to the consequences of risk-taking, more risks will be taken in the future. Secondly, the huge increase in global liquidity has slowed down or reversed the fall in inflated asset prices. Worldwide stock markets have benefited from easy money. In Asia, property markets are booming again even though the real economy is still struggling.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“Whether this growth can be sustained is, however, a different question. 41 09-52598 It would be a mistake to think that the global economic crisis will soon be over. The crisis came about because of excesses and imbalances which have to be put right. Looking back, we know that the excesses were the result of inadequate regulation of banks and quasi-banking institutions. Over the years, clever minds turned non-banks into de facto ones which were not regulated as conventional banks. This unregulated financial sector grew to dwarf the regulated sector. To forestall collapse when the bubble burst, Governments and regulators stepped in taking over financial institutions, guaranteeing liabilities, increasing public spending and pumping liquidity into the economy.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“When we met here last year, financial institutions such as Lehman Brothers and American International Group (AIG) were falling like tenpins. For weeks, credit froze as perceptions of risk shot up. The global financial system went into seizure. National Governments took emergency measures to rescue banks and keep credit lines open. The United States Treasury and the United States Federal Reserve, in particular, reacted with extraordinary boldness. For a period of time, it seemed as if everyone was flying blind. After a year, the situation no longer looks as bleak today. In fact, after a sharp contraction of the advanced economies in the first half of this year, there are signs of a recovery. Some of the leading indicators are flashing positive again and the next two quarters will probably register good growth globally.”
2009-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 64 (2009)
“Among those, the most important is, of course, the United Nations. We still need global leadership, but it has to be by a new concert of big Powers going beyond the United States, Europe and Japan. It has to be a new kind of leadership exercised in a transparent manner through both hard and soft power, and preferably through regional and international institutions. Writing about the Beijing Olympics in The Wall Street Journal on 26 August, Tony Blair said: “The truth is that nothing in the twenty-first century will work well without China’s full engagement”. The same can be said of Russia, India and Brazil. While the United States will long remain dominant, a more inclusive global arrangement will make this a better and safer world for all of us.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“Without continuing peace in Asia, we will not be able to realize the promise of this century. The thoughtful manner in which the United States is managing its strategic relationship with a rising China and India is of decisive importance. It is rare in history for new Powers to emerge without conflict. China and India are becoming responsible stakeholders in the global system. That many of the sons and daughters of Chinese and Indian leaders choose to study in American universities gives us reason to be cautiously optimistic about the future of Asia. We cannot stop rivalry among the big Powers, but we can limit the harm that rivalry does to smaller countries. In fact, smaller countries can turn the emerging multipolarity to advantage if we combine our strengths in regional and international institutions.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“That is an important insight which can help the work of international and regional institutions in promoting national development. If we set as our objective the promotion of democracy, the reaction among many countries will instinctively be negative. However, if we set as our objective the promotion of effective government, our task will be much easier. Let each country, after having achieved a certain level of development, then evolve the form of democracy best suited to its culture and history. In a recent speech, President of the World Bank Robert Zoellick hit it on the head when he emphasized that the strategic centre of gravity is to build legitimacy through good and effective governance. However, for development to take place, there must be peace.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“Here again, the right policies, introduced less than 20 years ago, have made a profound difference. Indeed, across all of Asia, from the Bering Straits to the Gulf, an ancient continent, encompassing more than half the world’s population, is stirring again. Although highly diverse, the countries of Asia are being reconnected by a new East-West trade in a new age of globalization. To be sure, not all are doing well. Among those that are, and they are many, a recent report by the Commission on Growth and Development, chaired by Nobel laureate Michael Spence, identified effective government as a critical factor. In a surprising departure from Western conventional wisdom, the 08-53135 12 report did not see democracy as either a necessary or a sufficient condition, at least not in the initial phase of economic take-off.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“At the closing of the Olympic Games in Beijing, the President of the International Olympic Committee, Jacques Rogge, described China’s hosting of the Games as truly exceptional. Indeed, from beginning to end, the organization was superb — from the spectacular opening ceremony to the hospitality extended to individual delegations. Everyone was impressed, and rightly so. That was a Chinese dream come true, and the world doffed its hat to the achievement of the Chinese people. Thirty years ago, all that would have been inconceivable, even to the Chinese themselves. What has changed? Good governance and the right policies in place have unleashed the natural talents of over a billion people. India, with a different history and political system, is also making remarkable progress.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“ASEAN on its own did not have the capabilities to help Myanmar in a major way, but ASEAN working together with the United Nations and other international agencies was able to make a huge difference. With globalization, there has been a mushrooming of regional institutions around the world. Some have come to play useful roles in fostering regional peace and development. The United Nations and other international agencies can multiply their effectiveness by working closely with such regional institutions. While international and regional institutions can provide a more conducive environment, the key to a country’s development is its own good governance. Because every country has its own unique history, there is no universal model of development applicable to all countries. Every country must find its own road to the future.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“When Cyclone Nargis hit Myanmar in May, there was for many precious days a stand-off between the Myanmar Government and the international community over the provision of assistance. Western warships bearing relief supplies were viewed with suspicion by a Government that saw not the supplies but a military threat. It was absurd that such suspicions got in the way of soldiers helping cyclone victims in the Irrawaddy Delta. ASEAN had to step in and build a bridge of trust between the Myanmar Government and the international community. A tripartite organization involving the United Nations, ASEAN and the Myanmar Government worked effectively day by day to overcome problems on the ground and ensure that international aid reached the furthest corners of the affected area. That prevented a second wave of deaths from hunger or disease.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“The reform of the United Nations to take into account the changes in the world since the end of the Second World War is an absolute necessity; so, too, is reform of the other Bretton Woods institutions. Either we reform them to forestall crises or we wait for crises to force change upon us. For example, if the present global economic downturn is the once-in-a-century event Alan Greenspan talked about, then bringing China and India into the Group of Eight and making the International Monetary Fund and World Bank more representative of the global economy today become matters of urgency. We can also make international institutions more effective by partnership with regional institutions. Every region has its own distinctive characteristics which must be taken into account.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“However, the realpolitik of big Power rivalry cannot simply be wished away; indeed, it has been part of the human condition for most of our history. However, we can confine that rivalry and, by a combination of pressures, prevent any Power from pushing its claim excessively. International institutions like the United Nations play a civilizing role in such efforts. International institutions cannot stop big Power rivalry, but they can channel it and ensure that the common interests of the human family are not completely disregarded. For that reason, the smaller countries have a strong vested interest in seeing international institutions strengthened.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“The relaxation of tensions across the Taiwan Straits in the past few months serves as a positive example of how intractable problems from the past can be creatively transcended with wisdom, goodwill and patience. Sometimes impatience is its own worst enemy. After 90 years, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire has left some problems still unresolved in parts of its former domain. We cannot expect all the issues thrown up by the end of the cold war and the break-up of the Soviet Union to be quickly overcome. What we know is that, without the United Nations setting acceptable norms of behaviour, there will be many more problems in the world and some of the problems 11 08-53135 we now face will become far worse. Universally agreed human rights are important precisely because they underpin those norms of good behaviour.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“While we supported autonomy for the Kosovar people, we felt it premature to recognize Kosovo’s independence at that point in time. There was strong preference for the issue to be resolved by the United Nations. Russia’s recent recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent States is also unsettling. Some analysts see it as Russia’s response to western support for Kosovo’s independence. While the issue of Kosovo and the disputes in South Ossetia and Abkhazia are different and should not be directly linked, we do have a common concern, which is the role of the United Nations in conferring legitimacy on new States. If this century is to be peaceful, it is crucial that all countries, big and small, abjure violence and adhere to the Charter of the United Nations and to the international rule of law.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“The Forum of Small States, which is an informal grouping of more than half the United Nations membership, takes a realistic view of global politics because that is the only way to secure our own interests. Recent developments in the Balkans and Caucasus do not bode well for the future. After the crimes committed against the Kosovar people in the 1990s, many countries expressed sympathy and supported some form of autonomy for them. However, Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence in February was greeted with a certain discomfort because of the precedent it set for other parts of the world. I remember Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) foreign ministers discussing Kosovo at our retreat in Singapore in February.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“If they could not or would not exercise such leadership on global trade, can we expect them to do so on climate change? The emerging multipolar reality of the twenty- first century is a fact that we have to face squarely. International institutions like the United Nations can only function well when we accept that reality and work with it. As a small country, Singapore accepts that while all countries, big or small, have a single vote each, we do not all carry the same weight. Small countries need the United Nations and other international institutions to protect our interests, and we therefore have every interest in making sure that those institutions are effective. They can work well only if the world’s multipolar reality is taken into account.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“Who takes responsibility for the global system? While on paper the 153 WTO members make decisions by consensus, the reality is that a small group of countries has to take the lead to keep the multilateral trading system moving in the right direction. On no major issue confronting the human family can decisions be taken without the major countries taking the lead. The challenge of climate change, for example, cannot be tackled without the major emitters coming to some broad agreement on the way forward. If the Doha Round, despite being a positive-sum game, is so difficult to conclude, it is hard to be optimistic that a United Nations agreement on climate change can be negotiated quickly without the exercise of strong leadership by the United States, Europe, Russia, China, India, Japan and Brazil.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“When the talks failed in July, it was apparently over the issues of agricultural safeguards for China and India, but even if a compromise over safeguards had been possible, United States cotton subsidies, which were next on the agenda, would still have been a major sticking point. The failure of the Geneva talks comes at a time when the global economy is rapidly slowing down. Many of us worry that the downturn will be severe because of the collapse of huge asset bubbles inflated over many years by loose monetary policies. Protectionist pressures will now build up in many countries. A rise in trade protectionism could reduce global welfare by many billions of dollars. Our collective efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have become much harder. Who takes responsibility for the global trading system?”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“In 1994, the Uruguay Round was finally concluded after United States and European negotiators struck a bargain at Blair House, much to the unhappiness of many countries that felt excluded but went along nonetheless. For the Doha Development Agenda, however, a number of developing country members were determined that this should not happen again. 08-53135 10 Brazil played a leading role in forming the Group of Twenty (G-20) coalition of countries, including India and China. At the Cancún talks in September 2003, the G-20 became a grouping whose position could not be ignored, altering the traditional dynamics of multilateral trade negotiations.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“The collapse of the recent Doha talks is deeply troubling. The Doha Development Round was the first round of talks to be launched after the end of the cold war. Two years after the failed start at Seattle, it was launched again two months after 11 September 2001, when member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO) felt a strong sense of common cause. Since then, however, progress has been painfully difficult. I remember WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy telling me that not enough countries felt a sense of responsibility for the global trading system. The recent setback in Geneva means that it will be some time before the Doha Development Round can be concluded. During the Cold War, the United States and the European Union effectively led the global trading system of the non-communist world.”
2008-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 63 (2008)
“We need many such endeavours in the world today so as to create a greater awareness of our common origins, our growing interdependence and our common future. Without that larger sense, the challenge of global governance will be difficult to overcome. Without all countries feeling a sense of shared responsibility for the Earth’s environment, for example, climate change will become much worse before effective measures are taken, by which time it may be too late for many of us.”
2007-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 62 (2007)
“We must never allow such wanton acts to take place again, whether the injury is to world heritage sites, to the environment or to human beings. Behind such acts is an attitude of hatred and intolerance that must never be condoned. If this century is to be one of peace and development, all of us must internalize a spirit of interfaith understanding and common humanity. Recently, the Indian Government announced its intention to revive the ancient Buddhist university at Nalanda and offered it to Asian countries as a project to promote cultural and religious understanding and exchange. For hundreds of years Nalanda was a great university drawing students from all over Asia to study not just Buddhism but also philosophy, science, mathematics and other subjects. That project deserves our support.”
2007-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 62 (2007)
“For example, the countries of the world have not only a legitimate right but also a responsibility to decry the brutal suppression of demonstrators in Myanmar. Yesterday the Foreign Ministers of ASEAN expressed our revulsion through a Chairman’s statement which also called on the Myanmar Government to abandon its old ways and take a fresh approach towards national reconciliation with all groups in the country. We applauded the initiative of the United Nations Secretary-General to dispatch Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari to Myanmar and urged the Myanmar Government to work with him for the good of the people of the country. Six months before 11 September 2001, the people of the world watched with shock and horror the deliberate destruction of the ancient Buddha statues in Bamiyan by the Taliban.”
2007-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 62 (2007)