QUESTIONS RELATED TO STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND ROLE OF SECURITY COUNCIL IN INTERNATIONAL PEACEKEEPING ADDRESSED DURING ASSEMBLY DISCUSSION

Press Release
GA/9629

QUESTIONS RELATED TO STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND ROLE OF SECURITY COUNCIL IN INTERNATIONAL PEACEKEEPING ADDRESSED DURING ASSEMBLY DISCUSSION

When did a humanitarian problem become a matter of international concern and when did a specific situation trigger United Nations involvement? the representative of Brazil asked the general assembly this morning as it continued its consideration of the report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization,

"How do we define which measures are justifiably employed in these circumstances"? he continued. While situations like Kosovo and East Timor should not be allowed to happen again, the question was how were they to be avoided. Noting that there was agreement on "rights beyond borders", he asked, "how do we deal with the dilemmas of outside intervention and the issues it raises concerning the limits of sovereignty and the use of force"? While sovereignty was the cornerstone of the relationship between States and would remain so, it was not an absolute concept.

He stressed that a universal approach to humanitarian problems must be attained through a consensual and concerted understanding among States, otherwise selectivity would prevail over the Charter's most fundamental value -- universal participation in building global solutions for the problems of the commonwealth of peoples.

Also, addressing that issue, the representative of the Russian Federation said that a universally acceptable interpretation of humanitarian crises based on international law and the Charter must be developed. Consistent consolidation of an integrated approach to preventive action that included political, socio-economic and humanitarian efforts was justified, he emphasized. In bringing the Kosovo crisis back into the legal United Nations framework under the Security Council, as well as the planned deployment and expansion of peacekeeping operations to Africa, the Organization had clearly demonstrated that its central peacekeeping role was irreplaceable. Strict control by the Council over peacekeeping operations remained a formative principle of international peacekeeping, he stressed.

The representative of Iraq said the Charter did not provide for the right to interfere. Such a right could provide a strong motive for misuse. What was now required was the need to activate and set the machinery for non-interference. A world that was controlled by one

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9629 29th Meeting (AM) 7 October 1999

wanton power would not be useful in the maintenance of peace and security, particularly for those in the Third World. Questions with regard to the issues he had raised thus had implications on both the legal and political aspects of the Charter's principles.

The representative of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia said the Assembly was not fully utilized and was often marginalized. The Security Council was an executive body, while the deliberative one was the Assembly. In that context, the Assembly was doing almost nothing. The representatives of Member States were therefore put in a situation of following whatever the Council was doing, in spite of the role of the Assembly. If that regrettable situation continued, the need for the Assembly's involvement in the maintenance of international peace and security would diminish, he warned.

The representative of Egypt said Article 24 of Charter on the functions and powers of the Council, the concept of international peace and Security, the scope of the internal affairs of the State, the relationship of the Council and the Assembly, the links between Chapter 6 of the Charter, on pacific settlement of disputes, and Chapter 7, on actions with respect to threats to peace, breaches of peace and acts of aggression were all important issues that now required scrutiny by Member States. Egypt therefore called on the Secretary-General and the President of the Assembly to appoint a special committee to deal with those issues and submit proposals to the forthcoming session of the Assembly.

Statements were also made this morning by the representatives of Liechtenstein, Namibia, Ukraine, Argentina, Iran, Austria, Republic of Korea, South Africa and Libya.

The Assembly will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its consideration of follow-up to the World Social Summit.

Assembly Work Programme

The General Assembly met this morning to continue its consideration of the Secretary-General’s report on the work of the Organization. (For background see Press Release GA/9628 of 6 October).

Statements

SERGEY LAVROV (Russian Federation) said the serious challenges this year of the Kosovo and Iraq crises had confirmed that the international community had no other tool but the United Nations to assure joint efficient regulation of international relations. To that end, strengthening of the Organization was one of the key elements of the initiative of the Russian Federation President. The objective of that initiative was to determine parameters for establishing a stable and prosperous world without violence and wars, and to find collective responses to the most complicated challenges. One of those challenges was presented by severe humanitarian crises that arose out of armed conflicts.

He said the experience of Kosovo had already started teaching the international community lessons. It should learn them well so that there would not be a repetition of errors. He suggested that a clear and universally acceptable interpretation of humanitarian crises based on international law and the United Nations Charter be developed. Consistent consolidation of an integrated approach to preventive action that included not only political, but also socio-economic and humanitarian efforts was justified, he emphasized. He noted that in bringing the Kosovo crisis back into the legal United Nations framework, under the Security Council, as well as the planned deployment and expansion of peacekeeping operations in Africa, the United Nations had clearly demonstrated that its central peacekeeping role was irreplaceable.

Strict control by the Security Council over peacekeeping operations remained a formative principle of international peacekeeping, he stated. Cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations was necessary and should be based on reasonable division of labour. However, it should not result in dilution of the central role of the Organization. In addition to the fight against terrorism, the United Nations must lead the fight against drug trafficking and organized crime, he continued. But, the financial crisis that the United Nations was facing must be overcome before it would be possible to reform and strengthen the Organization.

GELSON FONSECA (Brazil) said while situations like Kosovo and East Timor should not be allowed to happen again, the question was how were they to be avoided. What criteria would determine when a humanitarian problem could no longer be solved by preventive measures alone. When did a humanitarian problem become a matter of international concern, when did a specific situation trigger United Nations involvement and, "how do we define which measures are justifiably employed in these circumstances"? he asked. The basic parameters to answer those questions were not yet clear.

Citing certain basic principles which might offer guidance, he said that international humanitarian law stated that humanitarian action required the impartiality of the provider and the consent of the recipient. Humanitarian tragedies were complex phenomena which required the involvement of the entire United Nations system -- Security Council intervention must always be a last recourse. While prevention and reaction were complementary and equally important, prevention was still the best strategy, he stressed.

"How do we deal with the dilemmas of outside intervention and the issues it raises concerning the limits of sovereignty and the use of force"? he asked, noting that there was agreement on "rights beyond borders". While sovereignty was the cornerstone of the relationship between States and would remain so, it was not an absolute concept. A universal approach to humanitarian problems must be attained through a consensual and concerted understanding among States, otherwise selectivity would prevail over the Charter's most fundamental value -- universal participation in building global solutions for the problems of the commonwealth of peoples.

CLAUDIA FRITSCHE (Liechtenstein) considered the theme of prevention a centrepiece of the Report of the Secretary-General. Preventive action in any given area required a conceptual framework and a certain common mindset of the international community. That could only be achieved as a result of a sustained and continued process. The United Nations had in the past years steadily developed its early- warning capacities, which constituted one key element of effective prevention. What had been insufficient was the other key ingredient -- political willingness to act. The case to be made in favour of prevention was overwhelming, as it could save hundreds of thousands of lives and billions of dollars at the same time.

It was obvious that the reluctance and objections which often resulted in a lack of political will were particularly strong when it came to conflict prevention. Especially at a time when internal armed conflicts constituted the overwhelming majority, preventive approaches could be and had been perceived as a threat to the sovereignty of States. However, the classic notion of the term could no longer cope with the changed realities of the world, therefore, while sovereignty of States remained a cornerstone of the United Nations, it had to be interpreted and applied in a more flexible manner.

She expressed her concern about a possible erosion of the role of the Security Council assigned to it under the Charter. There could be no credible United Nations without a credible Security Council, therefore the reform of the Council must focus on the core question, which was veto.

SELMA NDEYAPO ASHIPALA-MUSAVYI (Namibia) said better poverty eradication policies required improved risk assessment and early warning strategies by national governments and United Nations development agencies. The declining economic conditions and the grim statistics in Africa needed to be seriously addressed if the continent was to grow out of its poverty. If African economies were to be integrated into the world economy and benefit from globalization, implementation of recommendations in the Secretary-General's report on the causes of conflict and durable solutions to promote sustainable development in that continent was imperative. Early warning was the best way to realize preventive diplomacy so that tragedies in different parts of the world could be averted. Prevention could only succeed with the strong support of Member States and the provision of adequate resources. The United Nations also needed to apply a uniform standard to peacekeeping operations in all regions.

Selective peacekeeping could only guarantee partial maintenance of international security, she said. Funding was also critical. Namibia supported the move towards greater cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in the fields of preventive diplomacy, peacekeeping and confidence-building measures. The tendency to undertake peace enforcement without a specific mandate from the Security Council should be discouraged as it undermined the credibility of that body and diminished its role in the maintenance of international peace and security. Namibia reiterated its position that before sanctions were imposed, their scope and purpose should be defined and their duration clearly specified in resolutions. Resolving problems arising from the application of sanctions, rested with the United Nations under whose names the measures were imposed, she added.

VOLODYMYR YEL'CHENKO (Ukraine) said the initial reaction to the responses proposed by the Secretary-General had confirmed the controversial character of restoring peace and security to the global community. It had also revealed that Member States were not ready to agree on relevant answers. However, Ukraine had noted there had been global unanimity on three issues. The first was that there was no viable alternative to the international security system based on the Charter, regardless of any apparent weaknesses. Second, the United Nations must maintain a monopoly on authorizing the use of international force, since it threatened the foundations of the Charter's requirements, and finally, no recent development should be seen as a precedent for the unauthorized use of external force under the pretext of humanitarian assistance.

While Ukraine agreed with the concept of the culture of prevention, it continued to maintain respect for the principles of sovereign equality, political independence, territorial integrity and non-interference in matters within domestic jurisdiction, he stressed. Also, Ukraine felt it was imperative that the international community take more concrete and efficient steps to assist African States in developing their unlimited potential for economic and social development, and in responding to their challenges.

ANA MARIA MOGLIA (Argentina) said this year there had been an increase in armed intra-State conflicts which had had alarming effects on civilian populations. Natural disasters had also become more costly in human and economic terms. Global problems required sustainable responses from the international community. The capabilities to help victims must be enhanced. The success of strategies would depend on their ability to meet the needs of all communities. Argentina shared the Secretary-General's concern with the unequal attention given to certain catastrophes. The United Nations response to humanitarian crises should be considered by the working group on the agenda for peace and a report should be submitted to the current assembly session for consideration. She agreed that the Organization must move from a culture of reaction to one of prevention. In resolving the issue of armed conflict, the greatest challenge was to promote peace-building after conflict. In that process, preventive diplomacy, deployment and disarmament were critical components. They would also prevent non- violent conflicts from turning into wars. It was also necessary to focus on the deep-seated causes of conflicts, such as poverty and the violation of human rights.

She said the Security Council must take on a new sensitivity that could only occur with a deep-seated knowledge of the realities of the States that were vulnerable to conflict. Her country encouraged the practice of open debates within the Council on topics related to peace- building. Issues such as civilians and children in armed conflict, the situation in Africa and small arms had been taken up in that format in the Council. The success of such debates indicated the interest of the international community in such matters. The Security Council had to work in a more transparent manner. Advances in development could not be done without the cooperation of the Bretton Woods institutions. The relatively new legal mechanisms such as international criminal tribunals and the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court were necessary and sole guarantees of the Charter.

NASTE CALOVSKI (The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) said that a look at the Charter of the United Nations could help to achieve the democratization of international relations, as well as the reaffirmation of the purposes and principles of the Charter and international Law. Although adopted 55 years ago, the purposes and principles of the Charter did not need to change. However, a new or modern interpretation or a more adequate authoritative interpretation could be useful. The body to do that task was, of course, the International Court of Justice and after that, the general assembly.

The Report of the Secretary-General had concentrated on the principle of the sovereignty of States, the duty to observe human rights and the membership of the Security Council. It was important not to be overly dogmatic or legalistic about the principles of the sovereignty of State or non-interference in internal affairs when faced with the need to prevent massive violation of human rights. In those circumstances, humaneness must prevail and action should be based on accepted legal grounds.

He supported the theme of prevention as presented in the Report. In parts of the world where conflicts were possible, sending a preventive mission of the United Nations was a much better policy than sending missions after the tragedy.

Turning to the United Nations, he said that the potential of the general assembly was not fully utilized since it was often avoided or marginalized. The Security Council was an executive body, while the deliberative body was the general assembly. In that context, the general assembly was doing almost nothing. The representatives of Member States, which were not members of the Security Council were put in a situation of having to follow what the Security Council was doing. If that regrettable situation continued, the need of the general assembly to be involved in the maintenance of international peace and security would diminish. To prevent further marginalization of the general assembly, it was necessary that it deliberate topics of peace and security all year round.

HADI NEJAD-HOSSEINIAN (Iran) said the crisis in Kosovo had helped revive the discussion on how to deal with humanitarian catastrophes. On the one hand, there had been consensus on the need for immediate action to stop the grave crime of ethnic cleansing, while on the other, there had been disagreement on who had the right to act. Iran had agreed that the Security Council was primarily responsible for deciding on how the international community should react. His country also believed that the general assembly could take over that role, if there was no consensus in the Security Council. He added that lack of consensus in the Security Council did not entitle any small group of countries to engage unilaterally in dealing with conflicts, particularly when it involved gross violations of sovereignty of other States.

He said since there was no viable alternative to the United Nations in the maintenance of international peace and security, strengthening of the Organization and increasing the efficiency of the general assembly should remain on the agenda for decades to come. His Government felt that the general assembly, as the sole democratic, universal and transparent body of the United Nations, was the proper forum to carry out an in-depth analysis of the implications of the concepts introduced in the report. In addition, he said poverty eradication -- among other issues -- and its importance on the mitigation of those hazards should be integral in developing preventive strategies for natural disasters. Prevention of natural disasters, would reduce the financial costs of natural disasters, which had increased from $52 billion during the sixties to almost $480 billion during this decade. GERHARD PFANZELTER (Austria) said that the prevention of armed conflict as well as other priority tasks of the United Nations, such as development or human rights, were interdependent. Most of today's conflicts arose when the concerns of groups and individuals for physical safety and well-being, or political and economic participation and cultural or religious expression were threatened or denied. What was needed today was a broad approach embracing all policy instruments: from early warning and preventive diplomacy to a targeted use of the instruments of development cooperation which addressed the root causes of conflict.

The Secretary-General's report called upon the international community to refine traditional instruments of conflict prevention, such as the establishment of small political presence in the areas concerned and preventive disarmament, he continued. However, countries were sometimes not prepared to recognize the necessity for early action, lacking the will to engage politically, financially or otherwise in the early phase of a conflict. That unfortunate combination between the insistence on non-interference by the country concerned and the reluctance of the international community to commit politically, and to provide sufficient collective resources, could have terrible consequences, in particular for the civilian population. Therefore the political will for a strategy of prevention was needed from both the country concerned and the international community.

He stressed the particular responsibility of the Security Council for international peace and security. It must not be seen to be driven by subjective interests of members rather than by an objective assessment of real requirements.

SAEED HASAN (Iraq) said reference made to Iraq in the Secretary- General's report was flagrantly untrue. The party that had reported on the Iraqi issue had given a false report on the situation there. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agents had participated in the investigation of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM). In order to conduct his investigations, UNSCOM head Richard Butler had received directions from United States Secretary of State Madeline Albright. He noted that the Secretary-General had stated to the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) in June that the accusations were somewhat true that the dispatch of inspectors to UNSCOM was an effort to engage in spying activities for the United States. Those inspectors had been sent without Security Council approval. Also, in November and December of this year, Mr. Butler had presented misleading reports to the Security Council on Iraq's lack of cooperation with the team of investigators. That body had received those reports with displeasure. Subsequent reports given to the Secretary-General on the matter had been biased and without facts.

He said the use of force by the United States and the United Kingdom at a time when the Security Council was debating the issue of Iraq was a stark breach of the Charter. He noted that a formal meeting had been held where the majority of Security Council members had criticized that action. Members of the Non-Aligned Movement had also expressed their displeasure, demonstrating that a global majority had denounced the act of aggression. Iraq had hoped the Secretary-General's report would reflect the disagreement of the international community on the use of force against Iraq. The report had reflected that view with regards to Kosovo.

He said his country associated itself with Member States, particularly with the States of the South, on issues of humanitarian intervention and territorial sovereignty. It must be noted that the Charter did not provide for the right to interfere. With that right, there could be a strong motive for misuse. What was now required, was the need to activate the machinery for non-interference. A world that was controlled by one wanton power would not be effective in the maintenance of peace and security, particularly for those in the third world. Questions with regards to the above had implications on both the legal and political aspects of the principles of the Charter, he concluded.

AHMED ABOUL GHEIT (Egypt) said that the failure to respond in a timely manner to the crisis in Kosovo had been was the result of impediments to the decision-making process of the Security Council. However, giving new prerogatives to that body would not fill the gaps in the international legal system. He could not agree with the suggestion that practical considerations could at times take precedence over the Charter. Any shortcomings in that instrument should be addressed through the proper legal channels and the measures stipulated in the Charter itself. Whatever the objectives, adherence to the law was a sacred obligation, he continued, Deviation from the norm would not be tolerated by the less powerful if it meant that the more powerful were dragging the international community into the law of the jungle once again. Notwithstanding, perpetuators of humanitarian violations must be punished. While the protection of humanity was still a sacred objective of all civilizations, he stressed the responsibility of States to protect society and preserve values and principles.

He said sovereignty in the face of globalization was a matter that should be dealt with in a comprehensive legal framework. He reaffirmed the necessity of ridding the world of the double standards that existed in the area of human rights. Locations, the prevalence of individual political considerations, or the preferences of certain groups of States had no place in humanitarian interventions. Article 24 of the Charter on the functions and powers of the Security Council, the concept of international peace and security, the scope of the internal affairs of the State, the relationship of the Council and the Assembly, the links between Chapter 6 of the Charter, on pacific settlement of disputes, and Chapter 7, on actions with respect to threats to peace, breaches of peace, acts of aggression and the distinction between them and the will of States, were all important issues that now required scrutiny by Member States. Egypt therefore called on the Secretary-General and the President of the Assembly to appoint a special committee to deal with those ideas and submit proposals to the forthcoming session. The ideas of the Secretary-General on State sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of internal affairs in respect of human rights considerations were issues that should be discussed by the task force/working group on the agenda for peace.

LEE SEE-YOUNG (Republic of Korea) said that the international community had not been consistent over the past several years in responding to the different conflicts in various parts of the world, thus calling international norms into question and occasionally undermining the authority of the United Nations. The international community had gradually begun to regard human security as one of the major elements in international affairs and to accord more attention to the concept of humanitarian intervention. Although humanitarian intervention might legitimately be called for in certain conflict situations, it must follow the universal principles of the United Nations Charter. He hoped that serious debate at the United Nations would help the international community to formulate universally acceptable norms for humanitarian intervention that struck a balance between sovereignty and human rights.

He said, the distribution of the benefits of globalization was unequal, which could have unintended negative consequences. The international community should consequently redouble its effort to eradicate poverty to create a climate in which respect for basic human rights could flourish.

He said that the international community must be more resolute on the issue of crimes against humanity and must do away with the practice of letting violators of humanitarian laws go unpunished. In that context, he looked forward to an early launch of the International Criminal Court. Turning to humanitarian assistance, he called upon the international community to devise appropriate ways to lessen the financial burden of neighbouring countries that accepted large flows of refugees.

DUMISANI S. KUMALO (South Africa) recalled that when his country had practised the racial discrimination policy of apartheid, it had responded to challenges by other Member States by arguing that the issue was an internal matter. Shamefully, many Member States had agreed. Following the massacre of 69 people demonstrating against apartheid at Sharpeville in 1960, the United Nations had been forced to deal with apartheid. The Organization's contribution, and that of Member States, to the ultimate defeat of apartheid was well known. For South Africa, however, the question remained: would early humanitarian intervention have made a difference in the struggle against apartheid?

He stressed the need to ensure that the system of international relations was democratized, starting with the correct restructuring of the United Nations, including the long-standing issue of Security Council reform. Six years was too long a time for Member States to talk unendingly and still fail to agree on a basic understanding of what must be done. When forceful interventions were deemed necessary, the Council -- as defender of the common interest -- should be able to rise to the challenge. However, at this time, the Council was not representative of the world.

Only through meaningful reforms would the Security Council be able to act in a consistent, democratic, legitimate and transparent manner, he said. United Nations commitment to humanitarian action should be universal if it was to be legitimate. A key factor in that regard was prompt and early preventive action to ensure that most potential or actual crises were dealt with by peaceful means. The United Nations should opt for resolving conflicts before the necessity for peacekeepers arose. The situation should not be allowed to continue where Africa and other developing regions did not have adequate and appropriate levels of representation on the body charged with primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, he added.

He said South Africa remained extremely concerned at the deteriorating financial situation of the United Nations. The lack of financial means and the equally serious lack of moral and political will in that regard continued to severely limit the Organization's capacity to prevent and end conflicts, to sustainably reconstruct post-conflict societies and to meet the real challenges posed by the globalization process. It was imperative, therefore, that all Member States pay their assessed contributions in full, on time and without preconditions.

GUMA AMER (Lybia) emphasized the difficulty in maintaining international peace and security. The legitimacy of intervention was a great concern and therefore it was important to reaffirm the theme of non-interference in internal affairs. The Charter of the United Nations was the sole and legal basis for achieving peace and security, therefore any other actions constituted a violation of the principles of the Charter. It indicated what initiatives were necessary to face humanitarian crises and other channels should be opposed by the international community.

He welcomed the fact that many conflicts in particular in Africa, had been settled by negotiation and dialogue. One of the main concerns of the African continent was the eradication of poverty, which could be achieved only if debt was eliminated. The fight against malaria and AIDS also needed attention. He welcomed the efforts of the Secretary- General and of the United Nations agencies to modernize airports and the road system, since what was important was concrete action not speeches and words. He welcomed Member States that called for the eliminating of the embargo against his country. In that regard, it was important to consolidate the rule of international law within the United Nations.

* *** *