YouSaid · the spoken record

Keating

lines on the record: 583
first: 1993-06-27
most recent: 2018-09-13
sittings or episodes: 64
sources: un-security-council

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

“We believe that any proposals for defining the geographical scope of future demilitarized safe areas, if they are to meet with consensus in this Council, must envisage sufficiently large areas for the population to lead a normal life, and the overall framework for such future demilitarized safe areas should reinforce and certainly not undermine the areas envisaged in the Contact Group peace plan.”
1994-11-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3462 (1994) · source
“In this context, we would have to say that we believe that any updating, as called for in operative paragraph 5 of this resolution, will, we believe, require some radical new thinking rather than simple updating. We believe that the Contact Group peace plan has significantly changed the underlying parameters against which the concept of safe areas should be reviewed. The Security Council has of course approved and endorsed that plan, and it does so again in the resolution we have adopted today.”
1994-11-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3462 (1994) · source
“We voted in favour of this resolution, but my purpose in speaking is to say that we do have some reservations about certain aspects of it. We believe that this resolution would have benefited from further reflection and further negotiation. We recall that it was made available to Council members as a whole only yesterday morning. Our reservations stem from the fact that we believe that the safe areas have been restrictively interpreted on a number of occasions, contrary to the spirit and intention of resolutions 824 (1993) and 836 (1993). We also have reservations about many of the conclusions of the Secretary-General's reports of 10 March, 16 March and 9 May 1994. We expressed those reservations firmly in informal consultations when they were discussed.”
1994-11-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3462 (1994) · source
“We are seeing attacks by missile across an international border, involving random missile attacks into civilian areas. We believe that this creates a qualitatively different situation on the ground. It is therefore appropriate that today's resolution clarifies resolution 836 (1993) and makes it clear that deterrent action may be taken against the so-called Krajina Serb forces in response to the unacceptable attacks that they have launched. We believe that it applies to attacks in and around the safe area. We note that the Government of Croatia and the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina have called for this action by the international community. We think that the important thing today - and I want to underline this - is not that this resolution has been adopted, but that action pursuant to it be taken, and be taken quickly.”
1994-11-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3461 (1994) · source
“We remember only too well how difficult it was, back in April this year, in similar circumstances, when the safe area of Gorazde was under attack. At that time, it was not until the tanks were actually in the streets of the city that the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) were galvanized into deterrent action by the use of air power, which had been promised in resolution 836 (1993). We believe that that situation must not be repeated, and we are therefore very pleased that this resolution has been adopted today by consensus. New Zealand believes that the situation in Bihac represents a major and very dangerous escalation of the conflict. We are seeing air attacks across an international border by planes from the so-called Krajina Serbs.”
1994-11-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3461 (1994) · source
“We also recognize the role played by the Trusteeship Council in promoting the progressive self-government of Palau and all the former Trust Territories. The adoption of today's resolution is, as others have said, doubly significant. It marks not only the end of Palau's former dependent political status but also the completion of the work entrusted to the Trusteeship Council under Chapters XII and XIII of the Charter. This brings to a successful conclusion a very important phase in United Nations history and is testimony to the ideals set out in the Charter half a century ago.”
1994-11-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3455 (1994) · source
“The people of Palau have made a critical decision, and the Compact of Free Association with the United States entered into force on 1 October. We welcome Palau's emergence into full nationhood and we wish the Palauans every success as they proceed with the task of pursuing the economic and social well-being and advancement of their country. We now look forward to working with them as full partners in the South Pacific Forum, and we offer them our support and cooperation in addressing our common regional and global concerns. We hope that the day will soon come when we can also welcome them here into the United Nations. We commend the United States also for its role as Administering Authority in fostering the development of Palau's political institutions to this point.”
1994-11-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3455 (1994) · source
“New Zealand warmly welcomes today's decision by the Security Council to terminate the Trusteeship Agreement in respect of Palau. We congratulate Palau most warmly on this historic occasion. This is a development which we and the other nations of the South Pacific have looked forward to for some time, and we greet it with much pleasure and satisfaction. With this final formal step, all four constituent Governments of the former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands - the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and the Republic of Palau - have now freely exercised their right to self-determination and moved beyond the status of Trust Territories into independence or self-government.”
1994-11-10 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3455 (1994) · source
“Rather, we believe that now is the time to redouble efforts in the search for a political settlement and not to signal a return to general warfare. For this reason New Zealand abstained in the vote on General Assembly resolution 49/10 and we would do likewise on any draft resolution presented to the Council which had the same effect.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“Unfortunately, this cannot be said of the provision in the General Assembly resolution that encourages the Security Council to exempt the Governments of Bosnia and Herzegovina and of the Federation from the arms embargo imposed on the former Yugoslavia in 1991. We believe that for the Council to take such a step would be to move away from collective action. As others have said, there may come a time when there is no alternative. However, if that time were to come, it would mean that the United Nations as such, in terms of the collective security provisions of the Charter, no longer had a role in Bosnia and Herzegovina. New Zealand does not believe that that time has come, nor would it be welcome if it did, because it would mean, in our view, an abandonment of peacemaking and a recourse to the verdict of war.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“There is indeed a depressing familiarity about their continued refusal to acknowledge that their political future cannot be determined in isolation from that of other communities in Bosnia. The Bosniacs and the Croats have acknowledged this through their establishment of a Federation and their endorsement of the peace plan put on the table by the Contact Group. The Bosnian Serbs must do likewise. The international community now has a range of measures at its disposal - diplomatic, legal, economic and military - to persuade the Bosnian Serbs to change course. These measures all have two characteristics in common: they are collective, and they are sanctioned by the United Nations. That means they carry the full weight of the international community.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“The General Assembly resolution, in its reiteration of provisions from last year, reminds us how much still has to be achieved: first, the restoration and reconstruction of Sarajevo; secondly, the opening of Tuzla airport; thirdly, full implementation of the "safe areas"; fourthly, redress of the consequences of "ethnic cleansing"; and, fifthly, return of refugees and displaced persons. But more fundamentally, the General Assembly has rightly condemned the refusal of the Bosnian Serbs to negotiate within a framework which takes as its starting- point the territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is at this level that we are no further forward. In clinging to outmoded and repugnant concepts of ethnic purity, the Bosnian Serbs are condemning themselves to a state of banishment.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“There is evidence here also that international pressure is having some positive impact. Finally, legal pressure has also been applied. The Yugoslavia war crimes Tribunal is now established, and its first prosecution has begun. We believe these developments have come about because of the determination and commitment of the international community. We believe they have resulted in a significant improvement in both the material and the political situation of the beleaguered citizenry of Bosnia. They have achieved much. But we would be the first to acknowledge that they still fall far short of what has to be done.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“Another form of pressure, which we have strongly supported, is the use of air power of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), as authorized by the United Nations. We note that this has also had some positive results. It has stopped the worst of the bombardment of Sarajevo and attacks on other safe areas. The member nations of the Contact Group have committed themselves to a peace plan for Bosnia which has been accepted by all parties except the Bosnian Serbs. This has been a very important element of political pressure. Responding to the Security Council pressures imposed on them, the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) have closed their border with Bosnia so as to isolate the recalcitrant Bosnian Serbs, and a modicum of the measures imposed on Belgrade have been suspended in consequence.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“This is a course of action which New Zealand has already, on a number of occasions, strongly supported in this Chamber. The failure of the Bosnian Serbs to comply with Security Council resolutions still constitutes the major challenge to the Security Council in the present situation. The General Assembly resolution suggests various ways in which pressure could be brought to bear so that non-compliance comes to an end. The question of what sort of pressure should be brought to bear, and how, is crucial. In the past year we have seen a number of important developments take place in response to pressure from the international community. The Bosniac and Croat communities in the Republic have resolved their political differences and have formed a federation. That has been one effective element of pressure.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“The resolution highlights the arrogance of the Bosnian Serbs in refusing to accept the proposed territorial settlement. The resolution rightly underlines the fact that this refusal to accept the settlement is linked to the many violations of human rights which have occurred in Bosnia: a horrifying catalogue of rape, murder and dispossession, of the seizure of land and other property, of the killing of hundreds of thousands of people - all of which has come to be known as "ethnic cleansing". The resolution also points to a way ahead in its call for mutual recognition between the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the former Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) within their internationally recognized borders, and in its further call for compliance with all relevant Security Council resolutions.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“This support springs from the sympathy we feel for a newly independent nation whose right to freedom and security was stolen at birth. New Zealand has expressed its support in many ways: by support in the Security Council for Bosnia; by support for the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR); by support for a robust use of air power to protect safe areas; and, perhaps most importantly, by sending a contingent of our armed forces to Bosnia to join the United Nations peace-keeping operation. We have also accepted refugees from Bosnia and have contributed to the relief operations being mounted in the former Yugoslavia by United Nations and other agencies and by non-governmental organizations. There is a great deal therefore in General Assembly resolution 49/10 which we can and do support.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“My delegation is very grateful to the delegation of Pakistan for requesting this meeting. It gives the Security Council the opportunity to consider the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the light of General Assembly resolution 49/10, which was adopted by the Assembly last week. In the view of my 10 delegation, that resolution constitutes a comprehensive approach to the problems confronting Bosnia and Herzegovina. Given the many decisions the Council has taken in respect of that situation, it is appropriate and desirable that the voice of the General Assembly as expressed through that resolution be discussed in this forum, and that further decisions of the Council be informed by the Assembly's views. Throughout its term on the Security Council, New Zealand has given strong support to the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“My delegation therefore urges Rwanda to take the opportunity to support this Tribunal, to investigate and punish these people and also as an instrument of national reconciliation.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“Ordinary people the world over will not understand if the Government of Rwanda turns its back on the efforts of the United Nations to ensure that the trial and punishment of the perpetrators of genocide take place. We believe that the guarantee of a fair and impartial trial would go some way to encouraging the millions of Rwandese now in refugee camps in neighbouring countries to return to their homeland. It has been with deep apprehension that my delegation has witnessed the situation in those refugee camps, where the old power structures of the former government have been restored. These are the people responsible for genocide, and they are now controlling Rwandese refugees outside the country.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“It has been made absolutely clear in the statute that there can be no pardons or commutations of sentences unless the Tribunal so decides; it is therefore not open for pressure to be brought to bear to secure the pardon of persons convicted and imprisoned elsewhere. We therefore believe that no one can say that the Security Council has not tried genuinely to accommodate Rwanda's reasonable concerns. We hope that, in the light of the changes that have been made and the concessions that have been offered, Rwanda will in turn offer its cooperation to the Tribunal, because, looking to the future, we believe that the international community will judge Rwanda by its practical willingness to cooperate with the United Nations over the trial and punishment of the perpetrators of genocide.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“For the killing that went on Rwanda this year, though not unconnected with the fighting between the forces of the two parties, was largely incidental to it. Furthermore, the Tribunal will be specific to Rwanda. In this regard, the Council has included a specific reference to the possibility of imprisonment in Rwanda. The temporal jurisdiction of the Tribunal has been expanded backwards, from April, as originally proposed, to January 1994, so as to include acts of planning for the genocide that occurred in April. Proceedings will be held in Rwanda when possible, and the number of judges and trial chambers of the Tribunal can be expanded if need be. These are further important changes that have been introduced.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“We also have to record that New Zealand could not support any proposals that would change the international character of the Tribunal or introduce any suggestion that the Tribunal could be subordinated to Rwandan political intervention. New Zealand has worked hard with Rwanda for more than six weeks now, ever since the beginning of this initiative, in an endeavour to accommodate its concerns. Many important changes have been made to the framework of the Tribunal. We did not simply produce an add-on to the former-Yugoslavia Tribunal; the Council recognized that there are important differences between the two situations. Moreover, the focus of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is not on war crimes, but on genocide, as Rwanda had requested.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“The objective in Rwanda must be to establish a just and fair society based on respect for life and fundamental human rights. The cycle of violence between the two communities in Rwanda must come to an end. And for that cycle to end there is a need for an international tribunal to deal with the principal perpetrators, a tribunal that will be demonstrably impartial. Only then will it be possible for all Rwandese, including those outside the country, to see that there is a guarantee that justice will be delivered fairly - that justice will, in fact, be done. It may be that the lesser perpetrators will have to be dealt with by the Rwandan courts. This is likely because of the numbers involved. We can only say that our expectation is that in the domestic courts weight must be given to the Arusha human rights commitments.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“As a State party to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, New Zealand could never support an international tribunal that could impose the death penalty. For over three decades the United Nations has been trying progressively to eliminate the death penalty. It would be entirely unacceptable - and a dreadful step backwards - to introduce it here. Indeed, it would also go against the spirit of the Arusha Agreement, which the Government of Rwanda has said it will honour and which commit all parties in Rwanda to accept international human rights standards. We do not believe that following the principle of "an eye for an eye" is the path to establishing a civilized society, no matter how horrendous the crimes the individuals concerned may have committed.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“44) The clear intention was to exterminate an entire section of the population of Rwanda. It is therefore all the more a matter for regret that the resolution adopted today was not adopted by consensus. We particularly regret it because during our term here on the Security Council New Zealand has pursued action that has sought to create a consistency between the international community's response to tragedy in Africa and its response to tragedy elsewhere in the world. We recall that the Government of Rwanda requested the Tribunal. That is a fact. We are disappointed that it has not supported this resolution. We understand that this is principally because of its desire that those convicted of genocide should be executed.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“The magnitude of the crimes could not go unpunished. Between 500,000 and 1 million people may have been slain in Rwanda in a little over three months. After witnessing the genocide in Rwanda, on a scale reminiscent of that which occurred during the Second World War, we believe that the response could be no less than it was in Nuremburg or Tokyo decades ago or in respect of war crimes in the former Yugoslavia last year. Let me recall that the preliminary report of the Commission of Experts made it absolutely clear that the genocide unleashed after the events of 6 April was the implementation of an operation "planned months in advance of its actual execution" and carried out in a quite "concerted, planned, systematic and methodical way". (S/1994/1125, annex, para.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“The Council is therefore acting within the framework of international law when it uses its authority under the Charter to respond, as it has done, to the recommendation of the Commission of Experts that was established under resolution 935 (1994). The Council has acted quickly, but it has also acted responsibly. It has listened to all concerned and taken into account as far as possible the concerns that this Tribunal should respond to the specific needs of the situation in Rwanda. New Zealand was pleased, after consideration of the report of the Commission of Experts, to take the lead with the United States- we were the two original sponsors - in proposing a draft resolution to establish a Tribunal that could lead to the trial and punishment of those individuals who were responsible for the genocide.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“The decision which we have just taken is a very important one. It is also of great significance to Rwanda. But it is of even more fundamental importance to the international community as a whole. It is a decision which the Security Council is taking on behalf of all the Members of the Organization. Genocide is the most heinous of international crimes. Article VII of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide envisages action under the Charter to suppress genocide, and article VI of the Convention envisages the establishment of international tribunals to try persons charged with genocide.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3453 (1994) · source
“We urge the members of the Council, in the months to come, to continue to work on this issue, as has been agreed in today's decision. For in the end the Council is judged not by the quality of the fine speeches in this Chamber, but by the quality of the policy decisions it takes. We remain deeply concerned that the information base on which the Council takes decisions and adjusts them in the light of rapidly changing circumstances in the field is far too fragile for safety.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“"New Zealand has proposed in the Security Council that a committee or an ad hoc working group should be established to fill this gap, and enhance the accountability of the Organization to its politically responsible representatives." (Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-ninth Session, Plenary Meetings, 7th meeting, p. 27) In the days that have passed since then, we have only become more convinced that our original proposal for an institutionalized approach to the oversight of peace- keeping operations would, because of the information flows that would occur, significantly enhance the quality of Security Council policy decisions. In _ the Argentine/New Zealand initiative, however, this proposal was refined to a more modest regular series of meetings at the technical level to enhance information flows.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“Government departments, the days are long gone when a public service mandarin could run a department or major operation without detailed political oversight. This is not a promotion of micro-management, nor am I implying any criticism of the Secretariat staff. But as any politician holding executive office in today's democracies knows, the classic recipe for a failed project is for those who are politically accountable to lose track of implementation or to lose the game plan. "We saw that all too clearly in the past year in Somalia. Ironically, the Security Council had, in resolution 814 (1993), already foreseen the need in the case of the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM II) for detailed political accountability and provided for a committee to follow the operation closely. But the committee was never established.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“He argued that it was essential in the United Nations, just as it is in domestic political systems, to learn from the lessons of modern public-sector management. A cardinal reality of successful modern political management was transparent political accountability. He pointed out that improving the United Nations capacity for undertaking peace-keeping and its collective security responsibilities must be predicated on clear accountability. He went on to say: "The management of peace-keeping operations is allocated to the Secretariat. This is necessary and appropriate in the same way any Government delegates responsibility for a complex operation to its public service. "However, and I speak as a politician and as a Minister responsible for ...”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“But we acknowledge that some of these further steps will have to come in the future. I am thinking here about the elements of our initiative which have been postponed for future consideration: first, the need to systematize also the Council's practice of consulting countries with regional or other specific interests, and, secondly, the Council's own internal requirements for information and internal transparency. In this latter respect, the Council's practice, in our view, is nothing short of primitive, given the policy responsibilities which it performs. My Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Right Honourable Don McKinnon, expressed our grave reservations on this matter when he spoke in the General Assembly on 27 September last.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“Now that the Security Council has resumed its rightful role, it must bring its culture into line with the letter and the spirit of the Charter. It may be that compliance with the Charter actually does involve a shift in the balance of power which has prevailed for 50 years and the diminution of assumed prerogatives. That is why it is so important that consensus was achieved on the decision adopted today, and why we congratulate most warmly all concerned for the vision which is being demonstrated. As the Security Council in the mid-1990s struggles to discover its proper path, we have to accept that the path will be evolutionary. That is why New Zealand warmly accepted this positive decision adopted today. It is only one step along the road we would have liked to travel.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“That Article says only that they may participate, without vote, in the discussion. Article 32, which deals with States that are parties to disputes says only that they may participate. So clearly the Charter envisaged a much higher level of participation by troop-contributing countries in Council decisions. That is why it is not sufficient to say that the interests of troop-contributing countries can be accommodated simply by inviting them to speak in public debates of the sort we are currently having, important though such opportunities are. As will be appreciated from what I have said, the purpose of our initiative was to restore a balance, which we believed was provided for in the Charter but which had been lost over the years when the Security Council was inactive and largely a political debating chamber.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“But putting aside the technical issue, there can be no doubt about the spirit of Article 44. Certainly in this day of - stand-by-forces arrangements, at this point in time when the vast majority of troops under United Nations command are from countries outside the Security Council, operations in particular such as the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) and the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM) must be seen as coming exactly within the spirit of Article 44. When we look closely at Article 44, we see that the Charter founders expected that troop-contributing countries would participate in decisions taken by the Council - I repeat: participate in decisions. This is quite different from the formulation used in Article 31. As members know, Article 31 deals with participation by States whose interests are specially affected.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“Various arguments have been raised, but at the end of the day they seemed to boil down pretty much to one point: that to accept the Argentine/New Zealand proposal would result in a shift of power within the Organization away from the Secretariat and the Security Council and in favour of the wider membership of the United Nations. Certainly, it was never our intention in taking this initiative to change the power relationships prescribed in the Charter; far from it. Our intention was rather to give proper effect to the provisions of the Charter and the power relationships envisaged in it. In this respect, Article 44 is a very important provision. We are aware that some have technical arguments against its relevance or applicability. We believe those arguments are unsound, and quite wrong in law.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“We made it clear also that this had to be viewed as a procedural matter regulated solely by paragraph 2 of Article 27 of the Charter - that is, a decision on which only the affirmative votes of nine members were required. We are pleased, as I said, that we have been able to reach consensus on this matter, because it is of fundamental importance to the future work of the Security Council. We do have to record, however, our disappointment that this innovation was resisted so strongly, including initially by the Secretary-General.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“Some, like the sanctions committees, already conduct consultations with Member States that are not on the Security Council, even allowing them to participate in their meetings. It seemed to us that this sort of precedent should be applied to consultation with troop-contributing countries. But in the face of firm opposition to the establishment of a specific institution for the purpose of consultation, New Zealand and Argentina in September submitted a formal request for a meeting of the Security Council to discuss the matter. We indicated a willingness to look at options less than a formal institution provided that there was a Clear decision that consultation would become the norm, that it would be systematized and institutionalized even if it could not be within the framework of a new institution.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“The decision which the Security Council has just adopted in the presidential statement which you, Madam President, read, to establish a system of institutionalized consultation with troop- contributing countries is, we believe, of historic significance. For more than a year now New Zealand has been advocating both inside and outside the Council the importance of such consultations. We are very grateful that it has been possible for colleagues on the Council to reach a consensus on this matter. As with all decisions by consensus, this has involved compromise. The original New Zealand proposal was for the establishment of a Council committee. Article 29 of the Charter provides for the establishment of subsidiary organs. We already have a number of subsidiary organs.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“And that takes us the full circle; it sums up why it is time for the United Nations military component to go. Somalia has been brought back from the precipice. It has been given another chance. The future is in their hands, but we cannot force them to grasp it.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“A particularly warm appreciation is due to the Government of the United States for its decision to offer its military forces to rescue the UNOSOM I mission. What has been achieved by the international community in Somalia, the hundreds of thousands who were saved from famine, would not have been possible without that American involvement. That should never be forgotten. To the troops of the Unified Task Force (UNITAF), UNOSOM I and UNOSOM II we must also convey our warmest thanks and admiration. We honour all those who were wounded or killed in Somalia. We still find it beyond belief that so many cowardly and irrational attacks would be made upon international personnel whose only interest in Somalia was to save Somali women and children from starvation.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“The Secretary-General bravely set out the framework for the decision leading to the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM JI). We thank him for his vision, for his courage and for his determination in persuading the Security Council to act. When we look at the Secretariat staff who have worked on Somalia - and they are far too numerous to name - my delegation is filled with admiration for the dedication, courage and professionalism that we have seen, in the Department of Peace-Keeping Operations, in the Department of Political Affairs and on the part of the successive Special Representatives of the Secretary- General, their deputies and all their staff who have served in Somalia. We say "Thank you" to you all. Finally, there are the military operations themselves.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“And those with influence on the parties and factions in Somalia must use that influence to promote peace and inclusive national reconciliation. They must refrain from supporting divisive trends in the country. Finally, we believe there is a need today, at this turning-point in United Nations history, to recognize and thank some very special people. We honour first those who went to Somalia at the outset of the crisis, civilian aid workers from the United Nations agencies and volunteers from the community of non-governmental organizations. They went at great risk, without military security, and far too many of these generous people lost their lives. We recognize also those in the international media and others who brought the Somalia crisis so graphically to our attention. Their contribution was also of major significance.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“The security situation, humanitarian relief requirements, the situation of the humanitarian workers, the impacts on neighbouring countries: all these need to be the subject of ongoing vigilance. And in the draft resolution the Council asks the Secretary-General, in the light of developments, not only to keep the Security Council informed, but also to reflect creatively about the role the United Nations could continue to play. In this vein, it is also essential that we underline that the last thing Somalia needs at this critical time is more weaponry. Yet the arms trade continues. This draft resolution insists that the arms embargo must be respected, and we call on all concerned to shoulder their responsibilities in this regard.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“Fifthly, it notes the interest of humanitarian agencies and non-governmental organizations in cooperating with the United Nations after the withdrawal of UNOSOM in transitional arrangements. We are very much aware that after the withdrawal of UNOSOM much of the responsibility for these matters will shift away from the Security Council. But New Zealand considers that because of the extraordinary situation in Somalia and because of the responsibilities which the Security Council has assumed for the past two years, those responsibilities do not cease. We have proposed therefore, and are pleased that this is reflected in operative paragraph 13, that the situation should continue to be monitored closely.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“Furthermore, in these regions aid agencies and non-governmental organizations say they can now operate relatively well. In some areas this relative stability is very much due to the efforts of UNOSOM and UNITAF. But, quite naturally, some concerns remain. My delegation has therefore urged that this draft resolution must also address the future. We are pleased that it does this. First, it emphasizes the absolute importance the Security Council attaches to the safety and security of United Nations, non-governmental organization and humanitarian personnel. Secondly, it emphasizes the need to sustain a facilitating or mediating role for the United Nations in the future. Thirdly, it underlines the importance of ongoing humanitarian assistance. Fourthly, it recognizes the impacts on neighbouring countries.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“They were warned that only a genuinely inclusive approach to national reconciliation would produce the kind of security environment in which the international community could continue to operate in Somalia and help the Somali people. We underline this message again today. But what happens if the faction leaders ignore our warnings and the worst occurs? Well, first of all, there have been some important changes in Somalia since 1990. Some good harvests mean that the indigenous capacity for the supply of food has been significantly restored. Starvation need not loom as an immediate problem. Secondly, many parts of the country have stabilized, with local administration working to quite good effect. These tendencies to regional solutions will undoubtedly intensify.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source
“They are set out in our report in document S/1994/1245. The United Nations is not going to abandon Somalia. Nor should it. The Somali leaders all saw value in an ongoing United Nations political presence to facilitate and assist with ongoing efforts towards national reconciliation. That should certainly continue. Humanitarian assistance and development and reconstruction assistance must all be part of the ongoing mission of the United Nations. The justice programme, involving the re-establishment of a responsible police force and working court structure, is also worthy of continued support. However, the Security Council mission had to warn the Somali factions that all this would be in jeopardy if attacks on United Nations and non-governmental organization personnel were to recur, as in the past.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3447 (1994) · source